Their response;
~ Shipping is therefore always at your own risk. Is this a translation error, or did they really say "shipping"? Bitmymoney Support Any chance you speak Dutch? Does it make it easier to discuss this in your native language? If so, you can post in Nederlands (Dutch). |
|
|
|
Are you sure this is a correct list? I was supposed to be in the list 🤣 It's based on the current DT-list, but Trust data is from last Friday. I was gone for a few days, normally I would have posted this on Saturday. You'll be on next week's list  I'm still catching up, "your case" is on my list to thoroughly check. |
|
|
|
Was stupid pay some services for the CEO. He should then give me funds back. I'm still amazed how many people pay things upfront for a job they're taking. I always have one basic rule: if you have to pay to get paid, you're getting scammed. |
|
|
|
Colored coins could play the big role here, because that's what it essentially is; to access sidecoin, just burn bitcoin. Initially, it'd have 0 coins, but overtime most users could transit into the sidechain, and have no dealings with the main chain. I had to look up how Colored Coins work, but burning Bitcoins for it doesn't sound right. I'd much rather use a solution that can be turned back into on-chain Bitcoins (such as LN). |
|
|
|
How is someone supposed to remember the exact number of hashing rounds? I think in both the WarpWallet and your proposed ~1.2 million rounds of hashing implementations, you will need to either document the rounds of hashing, or rely on a third party to help calculate the private key, and I don't think this meets the definition of a brain wallet. With WarpWallet you can (and should!) keep your own offline copy. If you're going for a "weird" number of hashing rounds, I can think of many ways to remember the number. It could be your phone number or full date of birth. Or just something you remember. Worst-case, if you forget the exact number, you can still brute-force it yourself given that you know the pass phrase. |
|
|
|
A Monero-like sidechain that is backed by bitcoins is trivial to make Do you mean a trustless sidechain, or one where you have to trust a certain entity? If it's trustless, I think it's a great idea. Trivial. And trivial of course to link every such machine to a centralized database of taint. But they dont do that, and people should ask themselves why, when we know that hard cash is the preferred method of transaction for criminals, money launderers, terrorists, and all the people they say they want to protect us against. Maybe because they are printing more money all the time and they run out of serial numbers  But seriously, they are removing old paper bills and releasing new ones all the time, and they probably have some database that is not publicly released. Serial numbers have been used to catch murderers, in 1988 already. I can only imagine how big the current database of known tainted bills is. But the main difference is of course that this taint is only used to catch the real bad guy, and not to blame anyone who received the money later on. |
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure people still use them. Even better if they use something they use much heavier encryption (such as WarpWallet).
The idea of simply remembering your money is appealing to me (but I don't dare risk it for a large amount). What I don't understand is why don't they use the hash function millions of times to make their brain wallet even more secure? I'm pretty sure some people do that. And I'm pretty sure some others are searching for it too. But isn't that what WarpWallet was created for? 524,288 times scrypt, followed by 65,536 times pbkdf2. A simple manual "brute-force" tells me that "satoshi" was used to deposit 0.0003 BTC in 2015. It wasn't moved out instantly (only after 7 blocks). If you use a decent password, and your email as salt, it's much more secure than regular brainwallets. My own (very inaccurate) estimate: a million times more secure because of the heavy encryption, and another factor one million because of the email address that makes it impossible to brute-force everyone's wallet at once. Honestly speaking, I have asked Loyce to prepare list of tx ids and launched search on that. The result is surprising! (I mean it is surprising how many wallets were using that method). Each of that values generates address which was used in the past. The first one I checked lost 7.72 BTC in 2014 (back then valued at almost $3k). The scope of realistic brain wallets is very small when compared to all potential private keys. Requiring an adversary to do a million times more work might sound like a lot, but compared to all potential private keys, it really is not. If you're the only one who uses 1,276,816 rounds of hashing, the number of potential wallets that can be found is limited to only your wallets, versus many different wallets that all use only one round. |
|
|
|
I don't trust anything that comes out of the mouths of anyone close to LTC Casino. I consider them a threat to the community and Bitcointalk players irrespective of their decision to start paying OP their win. I can remove my support for the flag prematurely right now if they show us the data and the "proof" they gathered after 3 months of investigation. Since they won't do that, and I doubt they have any case against the player except their own suspicions, nothing is going to change. If they were able to find anything they wouldn't have started paying out OP. I don't trust LTC Casino either. But, OP wrote this: Can someone please help me to remove the flags?
I am personally satisfied by the outcoming of the issue and would massively appreciate if those who have supported my flag would remove it. Based on how Trust flags are supposed to work, I can no longer Support the (red) type 3 Flag that states: LTC Casino did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. Even though it looks like bambolina hasn't fully been paid yet, they forgave the act. That makes the whole statement no longer true. Since I still don't trust LTC Casino, I won't Oppose the Flag but I've withdrawn my Support. Then there's the (yellow) type 1 Newbie warning Flag: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with LTC Casino 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. I believe this is still accurate, so my Support stays. |
|
|
|
I wonder if switching is also possible. From negative to neutral or from neutral to positive, for example. That's not possible without being banned, so I don't think this very nice feature suddenly becomes possible after a ban. |
|
|
|
I am pretty concerned that I have lost some BTC. For what it's worth: downtime has happened before, and ChipMixer always resolved everything in the end. They're in the privacy business, they too want to remain anonymous, and I can imagine that makes updates in cases like this more difficult. Note that this is only speculation from my end, based on what I've seen so far. That post was about the Bitcointalk user ChipMixer not being online, it wasn't about the website itself. |
|
|
|
What about Sir theymos? No one is going to mention Sir theymos? I suppose that if he is not mentioned it will be for the same reason as Satoshi, although he is active, he doesn't write much. Theymos is a tough one: on the one hand I feel like theymos is the least influential person here, because he gives people the freedom to do almost anything they want. But on the other hand theymos influenced me quite a bit into appreciating freedom of expression, even when I don't agree with the opinion. It's part of what made me thick skinned. |
|
|
|
I came across my simple mini key generator tonight, and I'm having another play with it.
The naive version uses random() and outputs about 8000 valid keys per second on a single core of an i7-3960X. I did that for a while a couple of years back (with a python generator), trying to create vanity addresses with mini private key, but I had to search through large output files and the output was far too slow to find anything meaningful. One thing is sure in my opinion - brain wallets belongs to past. I'm pretty sure people still use them. Even better if they use something they use much heavier encryption (such as WarpWallet). The idea of simply remembering your money is appealing to me (but I don't dare risk it for a large amount). |
|
|
|
Do we have any stats how many banned members did such trust changes? A percentage maybe? It's probably a difficult thing to find but I know we have many stats enthusiasts here. LoyceV? That would mean scraping the Trust history of all 304,153 banned users ( that I know of) on a regular basis. I'm not doing that, it's too much. Unless you're talking about the Trust list, in that case I do have the data (but still don't want to check it. If you really want to, it's publicly available (but so not worth your time). As far as I know, it's not possible for a banned user to leave a feedback at all. Correct me if I am wrong, please. To quote the alt of a banned user: I cannot leave any new feedback but I can delete old feedback that I left. |
|
|
|
satoshiWithout satoshi, none of us would have been here.
I disagree. I may be on top of that list (while it lasts), but that doesn't mean I could influence people. I may be able to convince some users in certain ways (such as how to use the Trust system correctly), but in my book being influential means you can influence people in any direction. I don't think I'd be able to get people to use some shitcoin for instance (nor am I willing to find out). I like to think of it as "I can only show you the door, you're the one who has to walk through" (quote taken from Morpheus, but I sure hope you knew that already when you read it).
For me in particular LoyceV would be number 1 That doesn't make me influential. Please go buy pink shoes. I said please! Did you do it? I sure hope not 
|
|
|
|
Update:I won't update the top-navigation-bar yet: it takes too long to complete and I need to bring my laptop tomorrow. I'll start the update tomorrow evening. Until then, you'll have to manually go to an earlier week to navigate through the weeks. Starting point to avoid loading the large index page: Trust list for: icopress (Trust: +18 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 3109 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP). Or use BPIP (which should update soon) or https://loyce.club/profile.html?id=1137579 for navigation.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
