<...>
Me refería realmente a la lista incluida en la fuente original de la información (Bitcointreasuries), y no a tu captura. En el post nº 8, la imagen primera se corresponde a un Tweet del 10/10/2020. En dicha lista, no figuraban los 140,000 BTCs de Block.one, y ahora sí. Si es cierto que el dato de Block.one era público desde el año 2019, deberían haberlo incluido en la primera lista (conceptualmente). El incremento entre los 598K BTCs y los 842K BTCs tiene gran parte de explicación en la inclusión de un dato con retraso en la lista más reciente. |
|
|
|
|
The scenario depicted in the OP is pretty surreal: somebody needs help, and is willing to pay 10%, to retrieve funds from his alleged account from an Exchange, which delimits withdrawals per IP (*), in order to acceletate the retrieval process.
When one really wants to get help, they’d normally name the Exchange, so people can look into the TOS and/or provide their own experience. They do not announce a reward upfront with a vague context.
For anyone who feels the call captivating, bear in mind that one-on-one conversations through social media to "aid" in situations like these, will more often than not resort in some sort of scam. It’s way better to keep things out in the open (i.e. forum threads) so as to let others chip in.
(*) Exchange APIs tend to set limits of operations per IP per unit of time, but I doubt any Exchange plays on those terms from the UI.
|
|
|
|
<…>
I can’t see it happening. The initial spirit of Bitcoin, with which to overthrow centralized bank control over our assets and payment methods, has been twisted in favour of a speculative eclosion. Whilst the underlying technology can very well lead to an array of paperless payment implementations, which could eradicate the usage of paper money (*), by means of some Central-Bank-to-be type of stablecoin, Bitcoin’s role has shifted, and it’s precisely it’s increase in value that plays against it’s own fundamental will to be a reigning payment method. (*) May vary per set of countries, depending on the technological status of their population. |
|
|
|
|
El de la imagen en Twitter la capó demasiado, y se dejó los títulos de las columnas para que sepamos lo que estamos viendo (el enlace que luego proporcionas va al site original, de donde se pueden recabar los títulos de las columnas).
Bitcoin ya ha adelantado a esta hora (volatilidad mediante) a P&G. Supongo que veremos a Bitcoin superar la lista completa en algún momento dado. A mi entender, es más amplio y grande en potencial que cualquier compañía de la lista.
|
|
|
|
<...>But there is 'delete' button on my topic/post...
You can’t delete your own OP for a topic that has received additional posts. If you’ve just created the topic, I believe you can still delete it, providing nobody has read nor posted on it yet. Post can be deleted immediately on some boards, but require a 24 hour wait on other boards. That is due to this: I think how I'd prefer to handle it is to prevent deleting posts within 24 hours of posting them, in the problematic sections only. Which sections are problematic?
Going over the thread where the above quote was drawn from, I believe amongst those are Altcoin Ann, Altcoin Tokens, Altcoin Marketplace, Goods, Services. I’ve looked around for a post that covers with certainty the subset of inherent rules that apply to users when they try to delete a post/thread, but haven’t managed to find a complete one so far. |
|
|
|
11º sesión – Minería: La base del Bitcoinhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AecvwV404nUEsta vez lo vi en directo (hacía tiempo que no), con escasas 200 personas viéndolo en vivo. El ponente fue José Parra, quien explicó los orígenes de la criptominería, los motivos de su necesidad, introdujo (que no detalló) algunos algoritmos subyacentes (sha-256, scrypt, x11, ethash, equihash, cryptonight), algoritmos de consenso (pow, pos, pol), modalidades de minería (GPU, ASIC) y sus pros/contras, factores que inciden en la rentabilidad (coste energético, equipo, dificultad de la minería, precio de la criptomoneda, suministro), qué se precisa para minar (equipo), fabricantes de equipos, minería en la nube (99% son estafas), pools de minería y métodos de recompensa. En la parte de Q&A, explicó más detalladamente la situación de la minería en Venezuela. La explicación es correcta y voluntariosa, pero me hubiese gustado que hubiese explicado el caso de uso de una persona común que quiere minar, y hacer un recorrido a vista de pájaro de lo que debe conocer en términos técnicos, y tips sobre la experiencia hands-on. Tampoco es que la hora de para mucho más, pero lo que considero más interesante de los expertos sería su aporte sobre la base de la experiencia práctica (que seguro estará accesible en sus redes sociales por otro lado).
|
|
|
|
<...>
No sé si te refieres a algo como esto: we bitcoiners can encrypt messages with the tools we already have without installing additional software. it needs AES (which all wallets have) and HMAC-SHA function which all deterministic wallets have and a public key which we can fetch from our wallet or from the person we want to send the encrypted message to. i used OP's public key found on their profile (04e31f13f55c8bd626a32bf9ad93744e1cb3a4ec4b5efe1cce89e06687aa7bec7476ca4a343bdaf 9b5db1042966c0a8284a2e293ea7901d5284f4bd29cc6d26a40) QklFMQIHp6o9MrhtkodROnsmHgk2KljsilF+LZN8SWyCcvpwcBV5C0eGV4wY5hU8n8YT/aSIXRdw6XpLHKbSlF/eSo1d0jNi5b3RBU0eGHItHWyoL5frJ29ffkjvPZYvIUk7KI0=
the process is known as ECIES and Electrum already has an easy to use implementation of it to encrypt and decrypt messages.
i realized that the example above can only be decrypted by OP (it needs private key) so here is an example with its private key revealed (on testnet): private key: cR4X2irxZwFrPBY8Jz8SfjGMyAdsnvCSPjWe3GQjubEKK21v44Ye
public key: 037287e275b9b40bf8d528e215ad53f09f14cd0363125bea276e020ec6f851c310
encrypted message: QklFMQNQd6jCL8MF8AIfJQ4Acn5yQ4UEFggIWQWhMP4r2eDbjY3jkfC5Oca6B1VYGb/qvJIWzxDLWyLKzgnAAx2CjEy+V9wvkC/yr8p6QKZ7OB+v+5QDyNKCPpU1dmJMqfQ3iPo=
De buenas a primeras, no me entran ganas de correr a probarlo, y la semana que viene iré escaso de tiempo, pero si nos animamos, podemos probarlo en algún momento dado … |
|
|
|
Similar to above. I hadn’t logged-in for a long time now (well over two years), and upon revisiting Coinbase, after logging-in, the site asks for: a) Accept a very large set of updates policy paragraphs. b) My nationality (first pop-up). c) Revise prefilled data: name, surname, birthdate, address, postal code (second pop-up). d) Provide new information: What will you use Coinbase for, what is your source of income, job status, id -> in accordance to (they state) this: https://help.coinbase.com/en/coinbase/other-topics/legal-policies/why-does-coinbase-ask-for-my-personal-information-when-making-certain-transactions.htmlWhen they state "legally required" on @stompix’s screenshot, it seems that it is mandatory, and they are going to push pop-ups and date limits to ensure people provide the information. If you consider the question "How much crypto do you expect to trade per year?", it hardly looks as if it is "legally required" though, and more of a bonus question the make mandatory for their own interests. It seems as if they are making it mandatory, and perhaps, were I to provide the above information, it may lead to a pop-up with the questions that the OP sees. This gets more and more "bankish" … |
|
|
|
<…>
I’m not sure what specific complementary questions (*) they are asking now (you can include the detail in the OP if you wish), but leaving KYC aside, corporations tend to demand certain information to allow them to perform customer profiling, with which they’ll target communications in a tailored manner. They also play around with concepts such as customer current value vs customer potential value (amongst other things), and this information is what helps them. Eventually, I wouldn’t be surprised if they are required to perform customer risk assessment. Of course, from a customer’s perspective, it’s darn well intrusive, and you normally would try to avoid providing this information. (*) I’m assuming they are not asking for the exact location where you work at. That would be another scenario. It could also be simply part of the multi-stepped KYC: https://help.coinbase.com/en/coinbase/managing-my-account/account-information/identity-verification-faqDistinguishing between KYC minimal requirements, and complementary profiling questions, is not easy for us, and we tend to follow through with the process (as if we normally have much of a choice). |
|
|
|
There was a thread on the same topic in this same section yesterday (see Survey of Millionaires finds 73% own or want to invest in crypto) … I doubt this, maybe the source is not clear, why is it 73%? Where do these numbers come from. How many survey participants?
It literally states it in the OP: 700+ participants, and the survey was carried out by Devere Group on its customer base. The conclusions were explained by Nigel Green, the CEO for Devere Group. Alas, as I stated yesterday: I’ve been trying to get hold of the survey itself, but it does not seem to be around not on their website. They could anonymize the data and publish their findings in aggregate terms in order to go further than the summarized public declarations. <…>
Since we seemingly cannot see the survey in detail, we can’t asses the claims. Regardless, when one consults their own customer database, we need to be ready for some sort of bias in relation to the general (millionaire) population. |
|
|
|
<…>
Not really, at least not at this stage. As a Coinbase user, you are able to send your crypto from the Exchange to another wallet outside the Exchange, be it your own wallet (Ledger, Trezor, Electrum, etc.), or someone else’s. Paypal on the other hand does not currently let you move your crypto outside it’s ecosystem, and this is one of the key factors. It’s acting as a capped Exchange at best for now. You will, however, be able to pay with crypto to a Paypal accepting merchant, using the platform’s act of prestidigitation, whereby your BTC are turned into FIAT to make the payment. It creates the illusion of paying with Crypto, although it’s not the real thing, is it? |
|
|
|
I've update the lists in the OP as of 20/11/2020. <…>
Rather than a pinned thread though, I’d rather there be a forum built-in feature that would let us sort the threads by merits (total, 30/60 days). That would make the function independent from any user needing to perform the updates, as well as extensible to all forum boards. <…>
Actually, listing that information is pretty easy … once I’ve got all the data in my database properly tied (which is logically what takes quite a while longer ...). |
|
|
|
Update 20/11/2020:The dashboard gives you access to anyone’s complete merit history in the TX tab, surpassing the 120 day limit. Link: BitcoinTalk Merit Dashboard. Updated the Merit Dashboard to reflect the most recent sMerit available data: Total sMerit: 795.778 Total TXs: 425.490 From Users: 22.765 To Users: 36.384 minDate: 2018-01-24 22:12:21 maxDate: 2020-11-20 02:44:07.000 Aggregate awarded sMerit for the last complete week (09/11/2020 .. 15/11/2020) is 4.742 which is down 0,79% from the previous week. In addition, there are 2 new Legendary and 3 new Hero member this week: ChiBitCTy -> Legendary from Sr. Member during Merit System kick-off. teeGUMES -> Legendary from Sr. Member during Merit System kick-off. Rikafip -> Hero Member from New Era Newbie during Merit System kick-off. slackovic -> Hero Member from Full Member during Merit System kick-off. zasad@ -> Hero Member from New Era Newbie during Merit System kick-off. Note:
-Copper Members and non-native ranks (staff, etc) are displayed as real (regular) ranks.
|
|
|
|
Data as of 20/11/2020Updated the lists in the OP (and subsequent post) to reflect the forum members that still qualify in each of those lists. Currently, on those lists there are, lacking <= 20% merits to rank-up (activity may not be met though): - 35 Heroes (on their way to Legendries) - 70 Sr. Members (on their way to Heroes) - 53 Full Members (on their way to Sr. Members) - 48 Members (on their way to Full Members) - 199 Jr. Members (on their way to Members) Added this week (15): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
1053119 Halab Active 1738 1148 Y* 813 Hero Member Member =+5 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1053119
1367217 trendcoin Active 2303 938 Y* 807 Hero Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1367217
2722098 seek3r Active 740 350 N 406 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+7 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2722098
2724574 FP91G Active 544 378 N 401 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2724574
1118969 JanEmil Active 3004 1092 Y 400 Sr. Member Member =+15 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1118969
943435 xxjumperxx Active 797 392 Y 209 Full Member New Era Newbie =+1 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=943435
2526732 Becky666 Active 886 616 Y 201 Full Member New Era Newbie =+1 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2526732
2810042 SquirrelJulietGarden Active 310 168 Y 88 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2810042
2559072 StackGambler Active 482 294 Y 81 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2559072
2855320 meser# Active 129 70 Y 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2855320
2859133 Unicap.finance Active 34 34 N 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2859133
2848742 suparigach Active 69 69 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2848742
2693154 theroyalgambler Active 55 55 N 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2693154
2517761 miner29 Active 141 141 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2517761
2507156 Thavash Active 44 44 N 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2507156
(*) this week (6): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
307884 teeGUMES Active 1182 1182 - 1093 Legendary Sr. Member =+11 / =2 / -1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=307884
1130307 slackovic Active 5636 1176 Y* 509 Hero Member Full Member =+1 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1130307
1573369 casperBGD Active 2686 952 Y 258 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1573369
2199760 iamsheikhadil Active 1421 616 Y 105 Full Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =2 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2199760
2859659 duelbits Active 100 70 N 13 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2859659
1839165 badshahg Active 572 476 Y 11 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -1 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1839165
(*) Due to enough merits for the next rank, or being banned.
|
|
|
|
Gracias @womanderful. Tiene toda la pinta de ser lo que indicas. @FullNode, no sé si puedes activar la opción de MCD, pero como indica @womanderful, parece que se usa desde hace tiempo por defecto, al punto de que Kleopatra no logra/quiere descifrarlos sin. Sigo sin tener claro que tu software esté del todo al día (claro que luego miras el manual de Kleopatra, y te encuentras que es del 2013, tanto en Español como en Inglés …). Nota: explicación acerca del MCD-> https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/80098/what-does-modification-detection-code-mdc-in-openpgp-do |
|
|
|
Stumbling myself a fair share on my local board with PGP (no need to see PGP ¿Puedes enviar mensajes cifrados?), so exploring the PGP Newbie avenues myself. Doing so, I’ve encountered the following issue: - I’ve created a new PGP pair, and published my PGP public key (using Kleopatra). - @FullNode published a message on a post, using my PGP public key to create his (not sure though which software he used). - When I try to decrypt the message, I get: El cifrado falló: sin protección de identidad (MDC) ..
Nombre de archivo incrustado: 'text.txt'
Pista:Si este archivo se cifró antes del año 2003 es muy posible que sea ilegítimo. Esto es debido a que la protección de integridad no se usaba ampliamente.
Si usted confía en que el archivo no se manipuló, debería volver a cifrarlo antes de forzar el descifrado.
Destinatario: ddmrddmr (E68F 78F5 AE23 5184)
Pressing "diagnostics" shows: gpg: NOTA: el cifrado CAST5 no aparece en las preferencias del receptor
gpg: cifrado con clave de 3072 bits RSA, ID E68F78F5AE235184, creada el 2020-11-19
"ddmrddmr"
gpg: ATENCIÓN: la intgridad del mensaje no está protegida
gpg: Hint: If this message was created before the year 2003 it is
likely that this message is legitimate. This is because back
then integrity protection was not widely used.
gpg: Use the option '--ignore-mdc-error' to decrypt anyway.
gpg: decryption forced to fail!
The "force cypher" button on Kleopatra does nothing. The quote’s above are in Spanglish, but the basic issue that does not allow for the message to be decrypted, seems to be that my cypher default algorithm on Kleopatra is "AES", while @ FullNode encrypted the message using "CAST5". I would have expected the PGP tools to be able to figure it out on their own, but it seems not, which is also something to ponder (that or my Newbie PGP status). I tries changing from AES to CAST5 on Kleopatra’s configuration, but still got nowhere (when I closed/reopened Kleopatra, it went back to AES anyway). Anyone know how frequent these cypher algorithm clashes occur, and whether it is tool dependent and/or resoluble using Kleopatra on the message decoding side ? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
