DM sent to both JimJam123 and Techshare in relation to there invalid bids on Bar 2. Please update your bid's correctly. Current prices Bar 1 - 0.012 BTC
Bar 2 - No Current Bids
Bar 3 - 0.012 BTC Please note Starting bids are 0.01 only bar 2 is left waiting for a starting bid. Then price increments of 0.002 apply to the bars. Bars 1&2 require counter bids of 0.002 per bid from here on in. Thanks guys.
Only 3 hours left |
|
|
|
You guys realize the amount of btc you spend for the amount of hash rate and time your getting on the mini group makes no sense? We could have had more hash power for a longer time if people had moved to the high rollers club. End of the day it's total hash rate than matters it's a big push that we need not small wasteful pushes for a few hours it's days we need. High rollers club is still open and looking if I can't fill it this time I may just go it alone with some of the guys. CK Pool - High Rollers - 0.125 BTC Buy in.
1 ) hiaxis 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
2 ) VRobb 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
3 ) jimjam123 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
4 ) MagicByt3 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
5 ) Katun 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
6 )
7 )
8 )
9 )
10 ) |
|
|
|
 Short time left to bid on these Bitcointalk bar's don't miss your chance to own a slice of exclusivity! |
|
|
|
|
// Copyright (c) 2008 Satoshi Nakamoto
//
// Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
// of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
// in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
// to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
// copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
// furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
// The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
// all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
//
// THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
// IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
// FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT
// SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR
// OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
// FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS
// IN THE SOFTWARE.
The guy is a absolute fraud and I hope the community will rally against his fraudulent claims to the rights of bitcoin the above notice is the statement included in the November 16, 2008 release by the REAL Satoshi Nakamoto..
Craig has NO right's to ANY database used in bitcoin or any of the software.
Craig is a fraud and has NO access to the Satoshi PGP key
Craig HAS Lied to 1000's of people including US Courts.
Craig IS NOT SATOSHI....
Date : November 16, 2008
MD5: 6884e5046285913c1a93ae071bcc763a
SHA1: 410bc2e605e6b3152ba799967020b9a64516243a
|
|
|
|
2 Days / 2 Hours / 22 Minutes / 22 Seconds Left!!
 |
|
|
|
I don't know what better improvements could stratum have, is the Slush v2 proposal worth it?
To be honest, nothing much, and not really... Most of the issues with Stratum are really more about the syntax, and order of messaging, and so on. It's efficient enough for any sized mining, and having it in readable text is always going to be more useful than binary. The gains from binary communications really aren't worth it as stratum just doesn't use much bandwidth at all. There's no meaningful improvement in V2 with anonymity, efficiency, decentralisation, or anything really, but I didn't want to discourage development. However I doubt I'll ever "upgrade" to V2, and don't really see much point for anyone else doing it. The pool-client relationship is here to stay as is. People are tied to a pool, they don't want insane complexity. I know we are straying a little off topic here but what are your thoughts on this paper CK? https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.06545.pdfI don't recall this getting much attention at the time but some of the attacks it can mitigate against are real threats, I wondered why I had not seen the proposals in this document being discussed on the forum at any point and I would love to know your thoughts on the paper. Magic |
|
|
|
Don't forget there are still some places on the High Rollers Group. Where have all the big guns gone? CK Pool - High Rollers - 0.125 BTC Buy in.
1 ) hiaxis 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
2 ) VRobb 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
3 ) jimjam123 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
4 ) MagicByt3 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
5 ) Katun 0.125 BTC - Payment Pending
6 )
7 )
8 )
9 )
10 ) |
|
|
|
Why cry about it? I lost 2 there as well because of M address. Yeah it sucks but move on. Life too damn short to cry about a few LTC. Hell i even still mine there. Everything works like a champ other than M addresses. If he logs in on magical day and sends us LTC great, if not then oh well caulk it up to experience, and not knowing. All the LTC is still in the account so it's either lost (as he can't get in it), the dude is dead thus lost or something like that. If he was scamming you would see that stuff moved out of that account. Plus another poor bastard just got M addressed.  Wrong if you read back people who we're mining to CORRECT addresses had there reward stolen so your statement is 100% false. Nothing to do with M addresses in the slightest also the pool op is ignoring the topic of his own choice he claimed he was hacked and came back with a fresh account he was online as said above and did communicate with members then all of a sudden the pool started stealing rewards from honest and correct miners. So it's is now a criminal matter. And why cry about it? so someone who's spent 10000's on setting up a mine to lose rewards is not something to cry about how do you tell your electric company oh sorry I can't pay this month someone stole my block reward? Not everyone is a small home miner and rewards matter.. If he has no access to the pool wallet and something has gone wrong you would expect him to come and tell the community there was a issue like any good pool op should.. It's people money at the end of the day.. Also there is NO reason M addresses should not be able to accept rewards other than to scam people I use another solo pool where you can solo with M address with NO problems so I see no reason this pool should be different. DO NOT MINE HERE UNLESS YOU LIKE TO SEE YOUR REWARDS GO TO THE POOL DO NOT MINE HERE UNLESS YOUR WILLING TO ACCEPT THERE IS A HIGH RISK YOU MAY NEVER SEE YOU FUNDS... |
|
|
|
|
Did the DE server have some downtime?
My miners flipped over to the solo.ckpool.org address 72 hr's ago for a very short time?
|
|
|
|
|
There seems to be another slightly different variation on this thing going on here these days how it works is they offer users access to low KYC compliant cards such as revolute, wirex and some other providers that allow crypto deposits and offer access to the visa network users buy these accounts from the scammers and once they load funds onto them the scammers spend the funds on the cards by adding the account to a well known provider of anonymous one time use CC number providers.
There have been some cases where a user buys a KYC card from the scammers and the card accepts SWIFT or IBAN transactions into the account once the user starts to use the card the scammer will transfer a fairly large amount into the card then quickly spend it by linking the card to one of these anonymous CC providers the usually these accounts have been setup with stolen KYC data or obtained via identity theft.
If the cards do not support inbound transactions from the Swift or Iban network what the scammer do is wait for the buyer to start depositing there crypto to the account then they just sweep it away to there own account.
I have seen a rise in this type of post on the forum offering these accounts as most of them can be classed as Fraud as a service we should all make sure to report and have them removed if you see them.
|
|
|
|
|
I expect the owner of the pool and the host to have a visit from the authority's soon the pool has been reported for stealing rewards and resources of miners so no doubt the first place they will go is the host find out who pays for the server so lets hope mr loshia pays by his credit card then it will be "knock knock"
Failing that the host will no doubt have logs or emails used when he set the pool up so the net is closing in.
He was given many a chance to come back and sort this issue out which he failed to do now it's down to the authority's..
Shame the pool went this route and started scamming people he made a lot of money out of this so I expect they will take the report seriously.
again..
DO NOT MINE HERE THE POOL IS SCAMMING REWARDS FROM USERS AND THERE SEEMS TO BE NO RESPONSE FROM THE OP IF YOU MINE HERE YOU DO SO AT THE RISK OF GETTING NOTHING FOR YOUR EFFORTS.
|
|
|
|
|
Someone actually deleted my bump on my topic in there also even thought 24 hr's had past I got the PM saying my post was deleted.
I also see other topics being allowed to bump there without having there post's deleted.
So someone is delete happy over there for sure.
|
|
|
|
Thank you LoyceV I feel there should be some new rules regarding trust flags when something like this occurs, while the user in question has been revoked dew to it the users who he has clearly made false accusations against should be cleared after enough opposition votes have been cast. While the flag system is a very useful tool and has it's merits it also has it's downfalls and I think as a community we should look to avert these false flags when there is clear manipulation and lies included in the context of the use of them in this case. I also think a Flag weight should be applied to the opposition. Once the weight reaches a specific level of agreement or opposition actions should be triggered either removing the flag or sealing the flag as a prominent feature on the account in question. The weighting could be by things like standing of member voting for or against the flag Merit of the person voting on the flag Length of time registered on the forum As some examples of thing that could be used to gauge if the flag is valid or non-valid. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
So we all recall the red flags posted on many users accounts in the wake of the Bitcoin SV account on the forum. I would like to formally request these flags be removed as they were in clear breach of the rules around flags moreover they have a negative impact on users who actually have done nothing wrong the flags are complacently incorrect in there nature stating. I refer to the 3 flags posted on my account by the Bitcoin SV troll who I now believe is banned from the forum. The first flag claimed that dew to factors in a topic the troll believes that anyone dealing with me is at high risk of losing money? This claim is complacently false and have no bearing on the post's that I have made in relation to this troll. Second alleges that I violated a casual or implied agreement resulting in damages again this claim is 100% false. I do appreciate the users who added there opposition to these flags but the fact of the matter is the flags are still able to be viewed on my account and they do have a detrimental effect even with full opposition to new members who many not understand the system it looks very bad. I work very hard in the community here and have been a good member over the years with no issues i feel the blatant misuse of the system deserves some attention from the mods. Please look into the matter as I feel it's a taint on my account for no reason other than some Bitcoin SV troll misusing the system to tarnish users who are in good standing. I feel that after a flag has been opposed X=amount of times the flag should be removed from the account it's unfair to leave "inactive" flags on a users account when misuse of the system is clear and as such I request that the following flags be removed at the earlier opportunity. Thank you for your time. ** Flags below for reference ** Bitcoin SV alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with MagicByt3 is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions.
Support: Bitcoin SV
Opposition: owlcatz, LFC_Bitcoin, nutildah, ibminer, DireWolfM14, MagicByt3, Lauda, Timelord2067, BitcoinFX, examplens, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace
Insufficient support.
Bitcoin SV alleges: MagicByt3 violated a casual or implied agreement, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. MagicByt3 did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around December 2019. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.
Support: Bitcoin SV
Opposition: owlcatz, LFC_Bitcoin, nutildah, ibminer, DireWolfM14, MagicByt3, Lauda, Timelord2067, BitcoinFX, examplens, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, blurryeyed, SockyMcSockFace
Insufficient support.
Bitcoin SV alleges: MagicByt3 violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. MagicByt3 did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around December 2019. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance.
Support: Bitcoin SV
Opposition: owlcatz, LFC_Bitcoin, nutildah, ibminer, DireWolfM14, MagicByt3, Lauda, Timelord2067, BitcoinFX, examplens, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, blurryeyed, SockyMcSockFace
Insufficient support.
|
|
|
|
This one is absolutely hilarious ... complete bunkum and twaddle from CSW, mixing facts with fiction again, clearly demonstrating a total misunderstanding of anything Bitcoin or even digital cash ... - https://twitter.com/C0inAlchemist/status/1227229901922742274He continues to backtrack on what he says and twists the historical narrative to fit with his BSV agenda. "... tokens ... !?!" ... "hashing is not cryptographic" ... "digital signature algorithms are not cryptographic" ... WTF! GTFO - SWIM  Put on my clown suede shoes And I boarded the plane.. Touched down in the land of the BSV In the middle of the shit show rain.. Yeah, I got a second class ticket But I'm as fake as a boy can be.... **Chorus** Because you know I ain't satoshi.... You know iv'e never had the keys to the stash. I like to talk so much shit Perjury charge is on the wayyyy.  |
|
|
|
* Note : LN is moving to 12 places to the right of the decimal, inflating the bitcoin supply in their offchain network even more.
Anything below the 8 decimal places won't be "on-chain" it will stay on the channel as defined in dust_limit_satoshis. until enough transactions are made to make it up to the 1 Satoshi value it would not be accepted on the main chain even thought lightning can support below main net dust limit. |
|
|
|
|
How about a signature campaign or some advertising of the pool?
Big respect to you CK for keeping it rolling for the community but it's a two way thing we should be getting out there spreading the word I for one won't mine on other pools never have I think a lot of us would be more than happy to try get some more people to the pool and signatures may help some what obviously on a voluntary system to show the support for your efforts CK.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
 Is that section showing some signs of burning looks like it's very dark looking could be a short somewhere there by the looks of it who ever put that stuff on the boards look terrible. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
