|
Why wouldn't Anon be able to get a high rating? No one knows who is involved in Anon (kind of the point), so there's no reason that Anonymous members couldn't get just as high a rating as you or me. And then, when they go on the attack, they just gather everyone together who has a high rating and feedback-bomb the target.
When I say a bunch, I'm thinking hundreds or thousands. That should be plenty to completely ruin someone's reputation, right? I mean, if I have a thousand negative ratings from highly rated members, no one is going to trade with me. And it'll drive my ranking based on whatever scoring method you use into the dirt as well.
|
|
|
|
looks like this idea will kick off a huge number of spam threads,
for the noobs, dont use an open source or any free to use market bot, they are designed so that the person/group who made it can trade against what they built/released.
ie all u noobs get a buy signal and at the same time the bot maker has a different bot/algorithm which is selling
trade safe.. dont be taken in by scams
That's why you use a bot with lots of parameters that can be set by the user. |
|
|
|
Sgt: I'm typing as fast as I can and I get new ones. Yes Anon could do that but you must remember that if Joe Schmo is not really a bad person then he will still be rated highly by others, also Anon would probably not have a high rating, how could they? So their attacks would be coming from low to mid rated users as a whole. Anon could not be expected to maintain any sort of high ratings, who would rate them highly? They themselves could but that doesn't mean anything because they are only a small small part of the web and the web has all the mathematical power. Joe couldn't get a -1000 rating unless the only people who ever rated him was Anon and even then Joe would still be competing with the rest of the bad guys for the worst rating so chances are Joe ain't gonna be the worst guy in the world even though Anon rated him down. Anon can't shift the math in the web unless they get control over large parts of the web. Good luck with that.  Why would Anon not have a high rating? After all, they are just "normal" members of society when they aren't browsing 4chan. They are smart. They're not going to do anything to hurt their rating - or at least, they won't do anything that would hurt their rating while also being anonymous. I don't think it's fair to assume that Anonymous members wouldn't have a high rating. And when a bunch of high (or at least, above average) members gang up on Joe Shmoe to rate him poorly, there's nothing that could be done about it. If you call shenanigans on it, Anon would simply be smarter about how they abuse the system in the future, making it more and more undetectable. I understand your whole scheme of a weighted feedback system now, but it can (and would be) abused, just like any other feedback system out there. |
|
|
|
So you're saying that every time I want to remove a private key from my wallet, it's better that I should dump all of my private keys, then create a new wallet with all the keys except the one that I wanted to remove? Instead of just clicking a button or typing a command to remove the key?
That's absolutely ridiculous.
No, I'm saying that if you have a button that does A and a button that does B then having a button that does "A then B" isn't "incredibly useful". It's merely convenient.  Alright, whatever. I guess our ideas of incredibly useful are different. Personally, I don't want to have to export my entire wallet, cherry-pick addresses out of it that I want to delete, then re-import the rest, just to delete a simple key. It makes sense to create an easier process for this. |
|
|
|
*calculates how long to pay for itself* Meh, I still can't justify it.  |
|
|
|
Honestly, he knows what he is doing and that is trying to get people to "quit" with his faux-doom and gloom. But you guys play into it by replying and letting his posts get more attention. Every time we respond, it gets put to the top. I guess at this moment in time I am guilty of it but just ignore him if you don't believe what he says and move along.
Or how about we go ahead and (here's a novel idea) DISCUSS matters pertaining to Bitcoin on this Bitcoin discussion board we find ourselves on. You and I are both free to post whatever interests us, and ignore what we couldn't care less about. I'm not preaching a religion, I'm discussing 100% on-topic matters relevant to bitcoin mining. Faith is not required here. If you disagree, by all means, chime in! Tell me why! Let's get a discussion going. I have no problem with those who disagree with me. I'd be a lot more willing to discuss things with you if you didn't start threads on the exact same topic EVERY SINGLE TIME you post. I haven't seen a single thread started by you that didn't have to do with the unprofitably of mining. And guess what? I bet you're still mining.  I can't help that your mind doesn't permit you any complexity in your thinking. If you think that simplistically, I can't discuss with you, sorry. We're on two different levels apparently. The fact that you completely ignore all of the evidence I have posted in past threads of yours that mining (and even buying mining equipment) is still very profitable just makes you a troll. A troll that has to resort to personal insults, evidently. |
|
|
|
1) I was a hard working citizen but due to no fault of my own I lost my job and am currently looking for work but unable to find any.
Yeah, man works 40 years laying bricks and not once thinks about making a back-up plan. Then loses job and cries "bricklaying is all I've ever known, how will I pay my rent now?". Hey stupido, you had 40 years to make a back-up plan. Haha, I love that. Totally agree. |
|
|
|
Honestly, he knows what he is doing and that is trying to get people to "quit" with his faux-doom and gloom. But you guys play into it by replying and letting his posts get more attention. Every time we respond, it gets put to the top. I guess at this moment in time I am guilty of it but just ignore him if you don't believe what he says and move along.
Or how about we go ahead and (here's a novel idea) DISCUSS matters pertaining to Bitcoin on this Bitcoin discussion board we find ourselves on. You and I are both free to post whatever interests us, and ignore what we couldn't care less about. I'm not preaching a religion, I'm discussing 100% on-topic matters relevant to bitcoin mining. Faith is not required here. If you disagree, by all means, chime in! Tell me why! Let's get a discussion going. I have no problem with those who disagree with me. I'd be a lot more willing to discuss things with you if you didn't start threads on the exact same topic EVERY SINGLE TIME you post. I haven't seen a single thread started by you that didn't have to do with the unprofitably of mining. And guess what? I bet you're still mining. |
|
|
|
|
I'm with the majority here - you don't deserve to die, but you aren't entitled to free healthcare.
Fact of life: We all die.
To put involuntary hardship on some people in order to delay the death of others just seems wrong to me.
|
|
|
|
If there is one, you can use the address the 'change' was sent to. For example, say I pay you 1 bitcoin. My transaction will typically look like this:
In:
1 or more transactions that total more than 1 BTC
Out:
1BTC -> you
Rest -> change back to me
You can consider the address the change went to as belonging to the sender. Of course, if the sender was sending bitcoins to more than one place, this won't work.
Any address that the coins are coming from would be owned by the person who sent them though. You could use any address out of that transaction, really. As long as they didn't use sendmany to conduct it, all addresses in the transaction either belong to yourself or to the other party. |
|
|
|
|
Well, that's the difficult part...
How much did this person send, and what address did they send it to? If you can't share that information, then I'm not sure I can help you. It's difficult to explain over the forum without seeing the actual transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, use blockexplorer. It won't show you what address the coins came from in the client GUI.
|
|
|
|
There is a site, bitlotto.com, that pays out a winner to the lottery without even asking for a return address to send the payment to...How do they know which address to send to?
How do I find the address of someone who sent me some coins?
They send it back to the address that they were paid from. So I might pay them from 123456789123456789, then when I win, they'll send me the jackpot back to that same address. That's why they say don't use an online wallet for it - because the jackpot will be given to the online wallet company, not back to you. |
|
|
|
I'm thinking of making it so you can define lots of custom rules.
Like "If X indicator is above this, then do Y". Or "wait until time > Saturday morning, then execute this different behavior".
So you tell the Bot how you want it to act, and you can also simulate it on past market data. Everyone has different amounts to invest and different levels of risk, and they might have beliefs of where the price will go that are not just pure mathematics, so one algorithm wouldn't fit all.
Absolutely. 1 algorithm would just mean that whichever bot was able to initiate the trade first wins. It might even come down to ping times to MtGox/Tradehill. Customizable algorithms, with NO defaults, would be the best route to go. |
|
|
|
|
I'd definitely like to see such a bot in place.
|
|
|
|
I do agree that having you wallet in your sig is akin to just casually asking every passer by if he can spare some change frankly. You don't expect anything but maybe he likes your outfit? Who knows! It's not really panhandling is it?
First off you're keeping an address in your signature, and not a wallet. Second, it's not really comparable. If you ask every passer-by for spare change, you are actually bugging them about it. Leaving an address in your signature is more like sitting on a chair with a small sign next to you saying 'this is my address', and holding a speech (writing a post). I picture it more like a musician playing/singing on the sidewalk with a little tip cup next to him/her. If someone really likes their stuff, they'll throw a tip. Same thing here - if someone really likes your post, they'll throw a tip. Well, maybe, sometimes.  |
|
|
|
I am not sure this a suitable to be on by default. This will cause a great amount of lost bitcoins because unsophisticated users are careless.
+1 This is fine living in a separate branch. Being able to recompile a branch is a nice barrier of entry for the tech. clueless. This SHOULD be included in the default client. Reason being, it is incredibly useful for people who know how to use it, and not all of us know how to use linux or feel like spending hours on Windows attempting to compile the source with all of the dependencies. Discluding a feature like this from anyone who doesn't know how to compile c code would be a terrible thing. I think "I am not sure this a suitable to be on by default" was referring to the "Can i also remove a key from the wallet with this patch?" request. Removing keys from wallets isn't "incredibly useful" if you already have the ability to dump wallets and import those dumped keys into other wallets. So you're saying that every time I want to remove a private key from my wallet, it's better that I should dump all of my private keys, then create a new wallet with all the keys except the one that I wanted to remove? Instead of just clicking a button or typing a command to remove the key? That's absolutely ridiculous. |
|
|
|
I don't really get the point of this thread. Anyone with half a brain can grasp the concept of supply and demand. Of course they're going down, everyone
who's mining for profit have stopped buying the cards at their current prices.
A lot of people aren't in it entirely for money so I wouldn't be all that surprised if the prices stay where they are for a while longer.
I don't really get the point of this thread either. Pretty pointless, just like many other threads created by this particular member. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
