|
Also tested a transaction
sent some coins to XMMYazrvenuMYwnVk8s3171pwWmsH3cn2E
|
|
|
|
v1.50 has been uploaded. http://www.xc-official.com/release/wallets/This is a beta release of the REV2 multi-path solution. To use multi-path add a "1" after the amount. Since this is still beta , you must add a "0" if you don't want to use multi-path. sendfrommixer "wallet-label" <X11Coin Address> 0.5 1 <---- adding the "1" enables multipath or sendfrommixer "wallet-label" <X11Coin Address> 0.5 0 <---- adding the "0" disables multipath An updated version will be released mid-week which expands on this feature as well to support more "paths" Remember - this is a Beta release. ATCSECURE |
|
|
|
Team, please setup an official donation adress for the bounty that will be paid to anyone finding the sender adress. I think, we should make it much more than 1 BTC to attract more ppl with the potential to crack it. I guess there are a lot of people willing to donate including me.
Lets get REV1.5 out the door, and then we can do this |
|
|
|
|
the bounty is out there for anybody to claim... 1 BTC
|
|
|
|
ATC.... are we gonna see a Rev 1.5 wallet release today?
Most likely tomorrow night |
|
|
|
|
I'm willing to offer 1 btc for anybody who can find the senders address for the transaction done yesterday
XXcJEFKxziaH8trY6DruHx9ap39rnDJbK7 - Receivers Address
in order to claim the bounty you need to include the proof and it needs to be "beyond a reasonable doubt"
|
|
|
|
WTF is that? as I said, POST THE address's |
|
|
|
SO Chaeplin couldn't prove any thing so he tries to stir up the debate with non-trivial information.
Lets ALL BE CLEAR - PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL SENDERS ADDRESS or STFU!!!!!
Can you deny this ? Is not single entity ? This is your a Xnode address. So that was REV1 code, we are now REV1.5, I posted the transaction details yesterday for testing... get with the program Not interested. "So that was REV1 code," oh hard link exists. I am done. Oh ok, Seeing how I provided all the details to that test, sender, receiver and mixer info.. and then your statement was "oh there would be hard link IF the coins are spent", but that statement in of itself isn't proof of anything, and you don't know were those coins are going to end up... |
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply Chaeplin. I have studied the blockchain and read your post several times and I still cannot see that you provided a direct link.
In which transaction were Wallets B and C used as inputs?
Which address is the output of this transaction?
Please do not only paste code. You need to also establish what the code implies, using normal English.
Alternatively, write in your first language and we will try to find someone to translate it for us.
Sorry to interrupt, just an interesting reading that could help in the near future related with "privacy/annon" technology . (somewhat related with the hard link request) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_testing. The DNA parentage test that follows strict chain of custody can generate legally admissible results that are used for child support, inheritance, social welfare benefits, immigration, or adoption purposes. To satisfy the chain-of-custody legal requirements, all tested parties have to be properly identified and their specimens collected by a third-party professional who is not related to any of the tested parties and has no interest in the outcome of the test.
The quantum of evidence needed is clear and convincing evidence; that is, more evidence than an ordinary case in civil litigation, but much less than beyond a reasonable doubt required to convict a defendant in a criminal case. Chaeplin, stop repeatedly saying the same thing. You are wrong. Read the quoted website above. Learn about chain of custody. You should read this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0How about you clearly POST the senders address..... instead of trying to divert the discussion with dumb-ass statements that are not relevant Post your listaddressgroupings result. XXcJEFKxziaH8trY6DruHx9ap39rnDJbK7 - is the receiver's address from yesterdays transaction.. are you claiming you have found the original senders address or change address? |
|
|
|
SO Chaeplin couldn't prove any thing so he tries to stir up the debate with non-trivial information.
Lets ALL BE CLEAR - PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL SENDERS ADDRESS or STFU!!!!!
Can you deny this ? Is not single entity ? This is your a Xnode address. So that was REV1 code, we are now REV1.5, I posted the transaction details yesterday for testing... get with the program |
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply Chaeplin. I have studied the blockchain and read your post several times and I still cannot see that you provided a direct link.
In which transaction were Wallets B and C used as inputs?
Which address is the output of this transaction?
Please do not only paste code. You need to also establish what the code implies, using normal English.
Alternatively, write in your first language and we will try to find someone to translate it for us.
Sorry to interrupt, just an interesting reading that could help in the near future related with "privacy/annon" technology . (somewhat related with the hard link request) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_testing. The DNA parentage test that follows strict chain of custody can generate legally admissible results that are used for child support, inheritance, social welfare benefits, immigration, or adoption purposes. To satisfy the chain-of-custody legal requirements, all tested parties have to be properly identified and their specimens collected by a third-party professional who is not related to any of the tested parties and has no interest in the outcome of the test.
The quantum of evidence needed is clear and convincing evidence; that is, more evidence than an ordinary case in civil litigation, but much less than beyond a reasonable doubt required to convict a defendant in a criminal case. Chaeplin, stop repeatedly saying the same thing. You are wrong. Read the quoted website above. Learn about chain of custody. You should read this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=279249.0How about you clearly POST the senders address..... instead of trying to divert the discussion with dumb-ass statements that are not relevant |
|
|
|
|
SO Chaeplin couldn't prove any thing so he tries to stir up the debate with non-trivial information.
Lets ALL BE CLEAR - PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL SENDERS ADDRESS or STFU!!!!!
|
|
|
|
I've just completed a test on the multi-path system
Receivers Address --->>>>> XXcJEFKxziaH8trY6DruHx9ap39rnDJbK7 - 0.03 XC's
I am going to put a password zip file online with the details
ATSECURE
it's only fair if you already upload detail somewhere with timestamp before anyone post their answer then release the detail next day. if you don't release the detail then chance the answer is correct but if no answer then chaplin can't find the way to track it. The file has been uploaded.. And after 24 hours I will release the location and by Sunday the password if nobody has submitted the address |
|
|
|
I've just completed a test on the multi-path system
Receivers Address --->>>>> XXcJEFKxziaH8trY6DruHx9ap39rnDJbK7 - 0.03 XC's
I am going to put a password zip file online with the details
ATSECURE
Chaeplan - go ahead and run your analysis and let us know what you find or DON'T FIND Popcorn I brought extra for this one.... |
|
|
|
I've just completed a test on the multi-path system
Receivers Address --->>>>> XXcJEFKxziaH8trY6DruHx9ap39rnDJbK7 - 0.03 XC's
I am going to put a password zip file online with the details
ATSECURE
Chaeplan - go ahead and run your analysis and let us know what you find or DON'T FIND |
|
|
|
|
I've just completed a test on the multi-path system
Receivers Address --->>>>> XXcJEFKxziaH8trY6DruHx9ap39rnDJbK7 - 0.03 XC's
I am going to put a password zip file online with the details
ATSECURE
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to provide an update on the release coming tonight or tomorrow.
REV1.5 - will be released - which will support MULTI-PATH mixer to mixer transactions. Testing is underway now and will be released for "a larger" test audience once the team is comfortable with the results and performance.
ATCSECURE
The man hath spoken. Great to hear. Let us know when/if more testers are needed. Hey is this supposed to be REV2 already??  No this is not the full blown REV2 - this is more an early release candidate |
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to provide an update on the release coming tonight or tomorrow.
REV1.5 - will be released - which will support MULTI-PATH mixer to mixer transactions. Testing is underway now and will be released for "a larger" test audience once the team is comfortable with the results and performance.
ATCSECURE
|
|
|
|
Active spamming. user@sv2:~/x11coin> ./who.py 28617
* ====> Working block height 28617 has 10 tx
* ====> Searchng XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb
tx: 7 percent 95 value 2.2
*===> block reached
*===> Searchng 28618 : diff : 1
*===> XV49MnmtTirtZSQ2jtgisvNhNr6DduzCNu 2.19999 link is : XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb <----> XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC
x11coind sendmany 123 '{"XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb": 0.0001, "XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC":0.0001}'
user@sv2:~/x11coin> x11coind sendmany 123 '{"XPpRHV6hWFDnQvNhu7WaRy6h6KfGkmx9Hb": 0.0001, "XFY3XchgfA16dFv9pFVDTpCGg2q7TWUNtC":0.0001}' 0a50c8b4408aec0b6acdae11dbd9d88ce4b67092a55cf634ff3cde9d48089784 What about this? what about it? the only discussion point is the transaction I posted and provided the details for both sides - which anybody can replicate themselves and get the same result that I posted |
|
|
|
all this challenge craps is just nonsense when you don't get the solid answer or question. do real challenge and put answer somewhere with TIME STAMP, perhaps youtube video then reveal the video/answer at specific time. if no video or answer with time stamp this mean the code still crackable and if the answer/video reveal then chance the answer is wrong. I never see real solid challenge or answer, all i see is craps throwing arounds.
I never said THAT THIS code wasn't "crackable".. what I said was that there is no direct transaction link on the block chain from user A to user B.. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
