Filmed and uploaded <> proof. You need to do it live, and here's why:
- Film drawing #1: Ticket 294 won. Eh, don't like that, will refilm and redraw.
- Film drawing #2: Ticket 166 won. Sure, sounds good, I'll keep that and upload it.
The only thing I can think of is you could predetermine a certain time when the drawing will be done (say, 5:00:00), then click the randomize button at exactly 5:00:00 while showing time.gov in the background as proof of the current time.
I don't have any reason to not trust you with your drawing, but if you want to provide proof of no hanky panky going on, it'd better be real proof!
I understand that if I were buying tickets, or have an influence on the pot. I may do that in the future. For now, when I have no reason to influence the outcome, why would I? Live streams can be REALLY iffy some times. I'd also like to point out, that in that case, why are other Lottery Organizations more successful? Claiming to have an automated drawing system on a huge pot is cool and all, but who really wins? How can anyone verify that you're not in cahoots with one of the entrants, guaranteeing that you'll give them the win if they will give you back half the winnings? That's the sort of argument you have to figure out how to protect yourself from. |
|
|
|
About:
1 every 12 seconds.
5 every minute
50 every 10 minutes
300 every hour
7200 every day
50400 every week
2629728 every year (averaging for leap years)
Or:
Exactly 7588400 so far, in 1028 days of Bitcoin existence, averaging 7383 per day.
There aren't 5 made a minute. Thats if you look at the averages. 50 are made about every 10 minutes. Better have my fun with these before Thymos outlaws them entirely.   |
|
|
|
|
Good question. Since the sendmany is just a single transaction, even though it may involve many addresses, it will be denied if just one of those addresses is invalid (i.e. checksum doesn't match). It will also deny the entire transaction if the client wallet doesn't have enough funds to cover the entire transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
Filmed and uploaded <> proof. You need to do it live, and here's why:
- Film drawing #1: Ticket 294 won. Eh, don't like that, will refilm and redraw.
- Film drawing #2: Ticket 166 won. Sure, sounds good, I'll keep that and upload it.
The only thing I can think of is you could predetermine a certain time when the drawing will be done (say, 5:00:00), then click the randomize button at exactly 5:00:00 while showing time.gov in the background as proof of the current time.
I don't have any reason to not trust you with your drawing, but if you want to provide proof of no hanky panky going on, it'd better be real proof!
|
|
|
|
|
Lower fees when you're sending to several addresses.
|
|
|
|
Wait, did you mean the OP putting the balance on a prepaid card instead of a moneypak?
No. Rule 1) NEVER USE MONEYPAKS TO FUND PAYPAL Rule 2) NEVER USE MONEYPAKS TO FUND PAYPAL Rule 3) When you receive a Moneypak from a buyer use it to fund a prepaid debit card. If at this point you are thinking about using the Money pack to fund your Paypal account see rules #1 & #2. Rule 4) Verify the funds are available on prepaid debit card. Rule 4) Only then release the item you are selling (in this case Bitcoins). Alternate version of Rule 3 for the more paranoid seller) Use Moneypack you receive from buyer to fund a prepaid debit card and then immediately withdraw entire balance as cash at an ATM before transfering goods. Gotcha. I didn't realize you could use a moneypak to fund a prepaid card directly. I thought moneypaks were a paypal-only thing. Shows how much I know. |
|
|
|
I got scammed with the moneypaks into paypal. If the transactions get flagged, they can and will remove the moneypak funds from the paypal account. They will then lock the funds up until someone with a receipt contacts them. If you are going to accept moneypak, you should demand a copy of the receipt. Anyone buying the moneypaks legitimately will have the receipt and it should be trivial to post a private picture/scan of it somewhere.
Great info to know, thanks! I got scammed with the moneypaks into paypal. If the transactions get flagged, they can and will remove the moneypak funds from the paypal account. They will then lock the funds up until someone with a receipt contacts them. If you are going to accept moneypak, you should demand a copy of the receipt. Anyone buying the moneypaks legitimately will have the receipt and it should be trivial to post a private picture/scan of it somewhere.
What if you put the balance onto a prepaid card? Sounds like the picture wouldn't be much to ask for, that should still keep it viable for buying/selling. What transaction was flagged? Did you try and withdraw it? If so, that is why you were flagged. That might work, but I bet your Paypal accounts maintains a negative balance or is just frozen altogether until you add funding to it again. Not worth the risk IMO. What are you talking about? When you add balance to a prepaid card, you don't go through paypal. If you put money on paypal with a moneypak, paypal expects you to spend it, not withdraw it. Never put money on your PP account if you're just going to withdraw it! Wait, did you mean the OP putting the balance on a prepaid card instead of a moneypak? |
|
|
|
I got scammed with the moneypaks into paypal. If the transactions get flagged, they can and will remove the moneypak funds from the paypal account. They will then lock the funds up until someone with a receipt contacts them. If you are going to accept moneypak, you should demand a copy of the receipt. Anyone buying the moneypaks legitimately will have the receipt and it should be trivial to post a private picture/scan of it somewhere.
Great info to know, thanks! I got scammed with the moneypaks into paypal. If the transactions get flagged, they can and will remove the moneypak funds from the paypal account. They will then lock the funds up until someone with a receipt contacts them. If you are going to accept moneypak, you should demand a copy of the receipt. Anyone buying the moneypaks legitimately will have the receipt and it should be trivial to post a private picture/scan of it somewhere.
What if you put the balance onto a prepaid card? Sounds like the picture wouldn't be much to ask for, that should still keep it viable for buying/selling. What transaction was flagged? Did you try and withdraw it? If so, that is why you were flagged. That might work, but I bet your Paypal accounts maintains a negative balance or is just frozen altogether until you add funding to it again. Not worth the risk IMO. |
|
|
|
So you can't put a sentence together, and feel qualified to tell people, who believe they are free, that they are deluded.
FTFY. |
|
|
|
|
Apparently, astana is the only one who keeps up on the news. Maybe he'll enlighten the rest of us?
|
|
|
|
Fact of the matter is that everyone uses MTGOX on faith. They're an unregulated, unmonitored exchange.
Are they manipulating the market using your deposited bitcoins/USD? Perhaps.
Do they still have all the BTC/USD in their wallets/accounts that they say they do? Probably.
Does anyone know for sure? Nope.
This. If you want absolute security, don't use an exchange. AFAIK, none of them have independent audits verifying integrity, so you must realize the risks when you trade or keep money on any of them. At this point, I'd probably trust crypto exchange more than MtGox though... they seem to strive for transparency and quick response, neither of which MtGox is good at. CE just needs to establish a track record now, and they could do very well. |
|
|
|
|
Ah, thanks for the heads up. How does it work? I thought that as soon as a moneypak was applied to your paypal account, you were golden!
|
|
|
|
|
I'll do a $70 moneypak for 20 BTC.
|
|
|
|
So it'd have to be something more like 6 or 8 blocks in the future, to ensure no one can hold blocks to try and win. But, that's not really ideal... I'd rather be able to tell someone instantly whether they were a winner or not.
Well you just need to work out the math. Essentially you want the "gain" from withholding a block and continuing to look for a block that wins the lottery to be < that gain from just submitting a block. If there is no economic incentive to rig the drawing then likely it won't be rigged. If there is an economic incentive to rig the drawing then it will be rigged. Just thought of something though - a person wouldn't necessarily have to mine x number of blocks in a row in order to "cheat" with this scheme, they just have to find the perfect hash in the future block selected that would match their transaction hash to win the lottery. Eh, I don't like it. Even basing it on both block hashes and transaction hashes, it's still full of holes and messy as all getout. |
|
|
|
Well, with #1, I was thinking that someone could attempt to find the secret. I suppose if it's long enough though, it'd be secure.
Passing is the solution. If you just hashed a secret it would be easy to find. If you only hash the secret and it is number "123" it would be trivial to hash every single number until you find it. By padding you make that impossible. "The winning ticket is: 123 This is some random data to make brute forcing the secret impossible 37849374238947389437438942738943" The entropy of that random sequence at the end makes brute forcing the hash impossible. If the last two chars of the transaction hash + the last two chars of the next block hash = 3f, you win.
That certainly works as long as the prize isn't so large that once could withhold blocks and try to force a particular result. Given block rewards are 50BTC that provide a large incentive for someone to not cheat. If the prize is 100 BTC then is no reason to withhold a block attempting to get a larger payout from prize pool (essentially gambling your block against cheating the lottery). On the other hand if the prize was 100,000 BTC then the block reward would be insufficient to prevent cheating. So it'd have to be something more like 6 or 8 blocks in the future, to ensure no one can hold blocks to try and win. But, that's not really ideal... I'd rather be able to tell someone instantly whether they were a winner or not. |
|
|
|
How would people know that I didn't just change the Secret if someone won so that the person wouldn't win?
The published hash of secret. Come up with a random Secret, hash it, and publish Hash(Secret). After you announce a winner & the secret people can hash the secret themselves and compare it to the hashed secret you provided at the beginning of the "game". So there is no risk of you changing the secret. The risk comes from you giving away the secret. "Pst. try transactions until you get one which matches this secret and we will split the prize". Got it. So I certainly wouldn't want to give away the secret or the hashing method of the secret, but the hashed result of the secret allows people to verify that I'm not cheating them... Well two clarifications 1) you DO want to give away the hashing method. You know Bitcoin uses SHA-256 hashes but that doesn't let you cheat. You can't just finds a nonce from a required hash. If you don't give away the exact hashing method then nobody can verify your work 2) You CAN still cheat. You can't cheat by changing the secret after the fact but you CAN cheat by giving someone else (or yourself) the secret so they can only submit a winning ticket. Well, with #1, I was thinking that someone could attempt to find the secret. I suppose if it's long enough though, it'd be secure. Eh, good point on #2. That kind of puts the whole idea back to square 1. What about something like this: If the last two chars of the transaction hash + the last two chars of the next block hash = 3f, you win. |
|
|
|
But look at the martial law training. Don't you dislike that? And surely FEMA re-location camps are also scary?
*shrug* |
|
|
|
How would people know that I didn't just change the Secret if someone won so that the person wouldn't win?
The published hash of secret. Come up with a random Secret, hash it, and publish Hash(Secret). After you announce a winner & the secret people can hash the secret themselves and compare it to the hashed secret you provided at the beginning of the "game". So there is no risk of you changing the secret. The risk comes from you giving away the secret. "Pst. try transactions until you get one which matches this secret and we will split the prize". Got it. So I certainly wouldn't want to give away the secret or the hashing method of the secret, but the hashed result of the secret allows people to verify that I'm not cheating them... |
|
|
|
Can't most of this confirmation delay problem be solved by simply designing a POS system that can handle pre-paid tabs? I'm pretty sure where I'm going within the next 10 minutes, where I'll be spending money, and generally how much (most of the time).
Merchants could allow you to setup an account in advance and provide you a bitcoin address to send any amount. When you're heading to the grocery store, fire off $100 to your account. By the time you get there, the merchant can see plenty of confirmations to let you shop. When you leave, the store sends the change back to your pre-determined bitcoin address and gives you a printed receipt.
Bad idea. 1. People are impulsive. I'd say that probably 50% of the time I go to the store, it's on my way from point A to point B, not a planned trip originating from my house. 2. It'd be inconvenient compared to current credit/debit methods. People will always use the most convenient method, so Bitcoin must be competitive with credit/debit services, not more inconvenient than them. 3. There's no reason 0-confirmation couldn't work for a grocery/department store. I imagine it would be treated the same as outright theft if someone double-spent, so any security cameras would show evidence of who the person was, and they could be arrested and charged if caught. |
|
|
|
I completely disagree that an officer is justified in pulling a gun on you for having dark windshields.
That said I certainly would not shoot in that spot or encourage anyone else to.
All I'm saying ITT is that anyone saying "never" isn't thinking.
It makes sense to me. If the officer can't see that the person in the vehicle isn't pulling a gun on them, they've got to take steps to protect themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
