Dude, calm down lol. The person who sent the coins sends him a signed message with the address and that's it. Problem solved.
There are only signed messages proving you are the receiver, nothing for proving you're the sender. I can send coins to you and sign a message with my address. Your address has nothing to do with you sending me coins... Are we talking about the same type of address here?  lol. You will see my address in your transactions. Then I'll sign a message. I proved that I own the address's private key. The only address on the transaction would be my address. (And maybe a change address for the wallet controlling the funds, but that doesn't identify a sender either.) |
|
|
|
Dude, calm down lol. The person who sent the coins sends him a signed message with the address and that's it. Problem solved.
There are only signed messages proving you are the receiver, nothing for proving you're the sender. I can send coins to you and sign a message with my address. Your address has nothing to do with you sending me coins... |
|
|
|
Dude, calm down lol. The person who sent the coins sends him a signed message with the address and that's it. Problem solved.
There are only signed messages proving you are the receiver, nothing for proving you're the sender. |
|
|
|
Except there's no way for people to prove they sent bitcoins to someone...
then how does this all work LOL When someone wants to buy something, they send you their shipping address, then you give them a bitcoin address to pay. The only way to know what was paid for, is to provide a unique address for each payment (or at least person)... At this point, I'm guessing maybe you're just new? Maybe reading these pages will help: Address reuse and From addressSlow down there, cowboy. This would have been a transaction for $4 and you come out of nowhere suggesting its a scam. Then you just become a pain in the ass. Stop trolling. With all due respect, don't comment on my posts if you only have something stupid to say. I'm suggesting it's a scam because there is no way for you to fulfil your end of the bargain when two people claim to have paid for it, but only one actually sent you bitcoins. Edit: unless you're prepared to mail 2*number-of-people-claiming-they-paid coins... |
|
|
|
Except there's no way for people to prove they sent bitcoins to someone...
then how does this all work LOL When someone wants to buy something, they send you their shipping address, then you give them a bitcoin address to pay. The only way to know what was paid for, is to provide a unique address for each payment (or at least person)... At this point, I'm guessing maybe you're just new? Maybe reading these pages will help: Address reuse and From address |
|
|
|
|
Except there's no way for people to prove they sent bitcoins to someone...
|
|
|
|
This kinda has to be a scam, since the poster has no way to know who actually sent the bitcoins...
huh? I made the original linked post...did you even look at it? I read your post "first one to send .01BTC to the address in my sig", but you have no way to know who that is. |
|
|
|
|
This kinda has to be a scam, since the poster has no way to know who actually sent the bitcoins...
|
|
|
|
Peter Todd seems to have an axe to grind with Blockstream, so I'd take it with a grain of salt. I'm not aware of any pool deals Austin is making, though it would make sense for him to be talking to pools about supporting merged-mined sidechains. AFAIK he's not been in touch with wizkid057 on this topic, nor tried to negotiate any pool "deals" through me. Disclosure: While I only represent myself, not the company as a whole, I am personally working with Blockstream. |
|
|
|
this boy is trolling hard..trolling is not agaisnt the rules?
Are you kidding? BitcoinTalk is almost exclusively trolling these days. |
|
|
|
Will this release work with the RockMiner R-Box New 100-110 Gh/s miner?
No, still waiting for more details from them on the changes. |
|
|
|
NEW VERSION 4.10.0, OCTOBER 21 2014Human readable changelog:- minergate: Support for Spondoolies SP30.
- titan: Numerous fixes and improvements from the KnCMiner team.
Full changelog:- Upgraded Windows libjansson from 2.6 to 2.7
- i2c-tools are not required by Titan
- minergate: Fix hashmeter
- minergate: Support minergate-side ntime rolling for SP30 only
- minergate: Autodetect SP30 on /tmp/connection_pipe_sp30
- minergate: Make stats file configurable
- minergate: SP30 only wants max 10 queue requests at a time
- minergate: Use work_completed flag for SP30
- minergate: Only SP10 has a second winner_nonce
- minergate: Simplify multi-winner_nonce handling
- Bugfix: minergate: Correct endian for 2nd winner_nonce
- minergate: Vary max jobs queued
- minergate: Vary number of requests/responses per packet
- minergate: Support --set MGT:protover=N
- Titan: fix compiler warning "maybe-uninitialized"
- Titan: Increase die inactivity timeout to 20 secs
- Titan: Slightly improve some debug messages
- Titan: Use multi-part batched SPI transfers for flushes (saves 2 secs on each flush)
- Titan: Fix buffer overflow
- Titan: Increase queue prefill value up to 20
- Titan: Flag for fast broadcast flushes. Not enabled: DC/DCs trip off easily!
- Titan: Monitor die health, reconfigure it if no shares in 10 seconds
- Titan: Make log level of some messages lower, to not clobber the screen
- Titan: Work assignment and flushing is per-die, not per-ASIC
- Titan: Set flush flag after re-configuring the die
- Titan: Refactoring: intermediate variables for first_proc and repr
- Titan: Flush cores one-by-one right before reconfiguring them
- Titan: Define for the broadcast core address
- Titan: Re-configuring dies through API command "procset"
- Titan: Use correct version of knc_titan_setup_core
- Titan: configure_one_die func for configuring single die
- Titan: fill all non-found ASIC structs with the same (invalid) data
- Titan: Core init parameters (nonce range) independent of number of found dies
|
|
|
|
I'm just glad the pool works! Now if only Bitmain would fix the S4 so I can point it here and get the hash I'm suppose to be getting, it'd be a good day.
Do you have other hashpower pointed here? Maybe run a stratum proxy and point your hashpower through it ... and once the proxy difficulty gets up to 1024, point your S4(s) to it. M Thanks for the suggestion. I've got the S-4s pointed to CK until this gets resolved. I've still got my dragons pointed here. I was spoiled early on, so these current payouts really aren't a big deal if I miss a couple. I'd suggest asking Bitmain to switch to BFGMiner, which can request a (starting) difficulty from Eligius among many other benefits. They sent a S1 for development a long time ago, but never followed up with documentation or future products. I can only guess they believe there might be a lack of demand - in which case their customers need to be more vocal in expressing the need to them. |
|
|
|
An irony here is that many in the community think you are both Juke-Jr and wizkid057. Hm, I guess it's possible  I've never actually met wizkid057 in meatspace. On the other hand, only trolls seem to seriously believe that, so he's probably real. |
|
|
|
Hi Guys But, what about the idea. Just shut up already |
|
|
|
He's been spamming #kncminer for a few weeks now... Also, no sign he is mining Bitcoins, so this is totally off-topic here  |
|
|
|
From the "shoddily made flow chart", this algorithm looks like essentially a more complex and simpler (in different ways) version of scrypt, just with very high memory requirements.
It is probably just as weak to ASICs, though I can't say for sure without more information.
Do actual specifications exist for the algorithm?
Also, is anyone interested in doing a BFGMiner port I can merge?
This algo mines via hdd capacity. Only way an asic would be useful is during the plotting process, but that's not a mining process. It doesn't have to be a HD, it could just as well be (a lot of) RAM. This is essentially the same way scrypt works, except scrypt altcoins aren't using as much capacity. It's possible to do RAMDisk, but that's not a very cost effective way of mining. You would need a bunch of TB worth of RAM to mining with as oppose to cheaply doing it with HDDs. You try it out and give the results if it is worth it. Yes, you can do the same thing with scrypt... |
|
|
|
From the "shoddily made flow chart", this algorithm looks like essentially a more complex and simpler (in different ways) version of scrypt, just with very high memory requirements.
It is probably just as weak to ASICs, though I can't say for sure without more information.
Do actual specifications exist for the algorithm?
Also, is anyone interested in doing a BFGMiner port I can merge?
This algo mines via hdd capacity. Only way an asic would be useful is during the plotting process, but that's not a mining process. It doesn't have to be a HD, it could just as well be (a lot of) RAM. This is essentially the same way scrypt works, except scrypt altcoins aren't using as much capacity. |
|
|
|
|
From the "shoddily made flow chart", this algorithm looks like essentially a more complex and simpler (in different ways) version of scrypt, just with very high memory requirements.
It is probably just as weak to ASICs, though I can't say for sure without more information.
Do actual specifications exist for the algorithm?
Also, is anyone interested in doing a BFGMiner port I can merge?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
