|
I'll let you all know when I know more.
|
|
|
|
|
Can't get dollars - angry at bitcoin!
|
|
|
|
This is what made me think that, but I won't pretend I understand what he wants at all. Maybe he don't make a new address each time he transfer the stolen coins. I can deduct that he's controlling at least the first address the coins will reach. Then I can see how many coins have reached that particular address.
Whatever he wants to do it's probably a lot harder than matching subjects to appropriate verbs. |
|
|
|
|
I hope you feel terrible next time you eat.
|
|
|
|
Maybe he don't make a new address each time he transfer the stolen coins. I can deduct that he's controlling at least the first address the coins will reach. Then I can see how many coins have reached that particular address.
So you just want to watch one address? Then watch it at blockchain or blockexplorer. |
|
|
|
|
on the list of things that matter this isn't
|
|
|
|
|
Think about this. The person uses the coin to buy a different coin, you lose the trail completely and you are just watching a random 'coin'. There isn't any good way to do this and that's part of why bitcoin is a money.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe he meant "positively overwhelming success".
|
|
|
|
|
I think we need a sticky that contains warnings, for example: Don't overlook the fact that a game operator can play the game. If that requires you to trust them think about whether or not you trust them.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, our bitcoind was down for about 2 hours today. Thanks Micon for handling some cashins.
That QR code ought not show an address that any client would send to, just an empty QR code, but it should get automatically disabled when the page doesn't receive an address from now on.
Because of what happened today I realized that slow My Account page loads are caused by slow communication with bitcoind, so we're caching them and that page will load much faster in the future. And when bitcoind is down you'll still be able to get a hash (provided it has served one to you since today). Of course a deposit won't be processed until bitcoind is back up, but that should be rare and short, I can't remember the last time it happened and I think I know what caused it today and that won't happen again.
|
|
|
|
1) It lets you send money overseas cheaper than using a bank wire (FIAT > BTC > BTC > FIAT has way better fees and exchange rates than bank wire, Western Union, etc).
not quite. to transfer from cash to BTC is predominantly done using bank transfers or moneygram/ukash and other methods which have fees. unless your cash > btc > cash is done using localbitcoins with someone face to face. which is usually costing you fuel to meet them and their inflated prices to be in their benefit to sell/buy with you. 6) It lets you send huge sums of money overseas quickly and cheaply. If you were in US and you needed to pay $1,000,000 for a shipment from China, using normal methods of wiring money would take two or more weeks, and will cost more than $25,000 for the transaction. With Bitcoin, it takes a few hours, and costs $12,000 or less.
i agree with the speed of transmission BUT try finding a trust vendor to convert cash to BTC at either end for that amount. also considering point 1's reply i gave. meeting a stranger to swap your briefcase of $1million in cash for BTC.. and then the chinese swapping the BTC for 6 million yuan. plus each side wont hand over their brief cases /BTC for $6k each i wont reply about each of the other points but all in all the possibilities are there.. but its not quite everyday practice.. bitcoin needs to grow a bit more for most of these examples to work fluidly also the http://blockchain.info/tx/ed2efa807c4d33a0ca6d15aab5e608ac624a30039965b508063c8baf9d9e8eccis not someone transmitting funds from one person to another.. thats silkroad mixing its funds to hide it from prying eyes.. hopefully blockchain.info will remove the "pirate booty" tag from the 1dky address now its been confirmed to be silkroad I enjoy where this thread headed. The average person won't use bitcoin because the suitcase-of-1M-to-btc-fees are still too high. |
|
|
|
|
Am I interpreting this thread correctly? Two of his other accounts came in here to vouch for him and he used those accounts to scam with instead of bothering to make others?
|
|
|
|
I'd probably make seller accounts cheap. Sellers are what make the site useful, and they take most of the risk. If more revenue is needed, transaction fees would be a better place to get it.
But running a site like Silk Road is incredibly risky even with Tor, so they can charge whatever fees they want without having to worry too much about competition.
Certainly it could be pushed to a point of being too limiting, but I think keeping out scrubs also makes the site more valuable. |
|
|
|
it will weed out scammers.
Not necessarily. If you're paying with either stolen Bitcoins or Bitcoins bought with stolen cards then the price isn't going to act as much of a deterrent to entry. Stolen money is worth the same and the spender has to give up whatever else they could have bought just like people with earned money do. |
|
|
|
|
1% retail currency conversion is too high?
|
|
|
|
|
Considering that the vast majority that will ever be lost are already lost all this proposal does is make the supply increase wildly when these coins are eligible for 're-mining'. Whereas from here everything is smooth. Never gunna happen. The idea of even potentially taking away someone's multi-generational savings is disgusting anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
The angle I like on this is not a PoB system exactly, but a PoB method of transfer to a new crypto-currency. It allows for gradual and voluntary transition to a system with incompatible rules. I think if a better system than bitcoin was devised a PoB bridge could save it years of bootstrapping.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, comprehensive and accurate, nice work.
The only tiny thing I noticed which might just be an artifact of when it was written is that the standard client does have a simple backup procedure now.
This is a document to point people to.
|
|
|
|
|
So... n-lock is no good for this, but couldn't a script be set up that requires part of the hash of a valid future block to redeem an input? I mean theoretically, that sort of non-standard ability is off for virtually all miners right no I'm pretty sure.
edit: I'm not actually very familiar with this, can you reference data from a (future in particular) block in a script?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
