With your reputation and influence, if you introduce me to a site to invest in and also assure me that the owner of the site is your boyhood friend, I will invest 100% without hesitation, because I doubt you would be stupid to introduce a scam site on the forum and if I end up being scammed, it will be on you LoyceV because of your huge influence. That's stupid not the smartest thing to do! Did you also invest in [ANN][ICO]HoweyCoins: the only BitcoinTalk-endorsed ICO - GUARANTEED PROFIT? It's literally the only ICO endorsed by theymos! Seriously though: this is exactly why people lose their money on Twitter when someone's account gets hacked again. They just hand it over the the scammers. This is the internet. I wouldn't trust investment advice from professionals. After all, why would they need my money if they're that good? So don't trust random people on the internet. I can easily pay from my own pocket I don't think the campaign manager's profit margins are anywhere near those numbers. I and the CEO are good friend and it's been over a year we are hanging out regularly. Hanging out together in a chat, I assume? |
|
|
|
On the flip side it could also be rather annoying to certain users. Slightly? Don't be modest, it'll be very annoying! I've made over 20,000 posts, that would mean more than 20,000 popups. After a few (thousand) popups, you click it without thinking about it, and you'll still post the topic. End result: I spend a few hours clicking the same popup, and OP will still accidentally post his :P I already dislike the confirmation when I click "delete" on a post, and that happens a lot less than creating a new post. Luckily, my middle-mouse-button does it without asking for confirmation.
I like the Unix approach: think before you do something, and don't ask for confirmation because it gives a false sense of security. Freedom means being able to do dumb shit: echo privkey > /dev/sda:(){ :|:& };:rm -rf /Try at your own risk :D
|
|
|
|
Royce, don’t go broke paying people back who were scammed by them.. It reminds me of the case where someone was scammed $50,000 while using the most trusted escrow on the forum. Nobody tagged the escrow, and he didn't refund the victim. He lied about going on a dinner date with the CEO in person Even if that's true, it doubt it influenced someone's decision to deposit Bitcoin to the scam site. He was only concerned with his own selfish interests; he was paid But he also paid campaigns out of his own pocket, and it seems like he's going the extra mile to pay back victims. he failed to conduct basic research; I regard him as a person who is easily manipulated. This I can agree with. Sometimes being paranoid pays off. That's why I've rejected most of the campaign offers I've received. I'm pretty sure some of them would have turned into a scam. |
|
|
|
The question that remains for me now is the support for the flag. I don't think this is correct: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with Royse777 is at a high risk of losing money The people who lost money, lost it when dealing with a casino website, not by dealing with Royse777 directly. It looks like Royse777 lost money too, while he did pay the people who joined his campaign. |
|
|
|
However, it also essentially stops any business from accepting zero confirmation transactions for small values, since all transactions (even those opted out of RBF) could potentially be replaced using RBF. That's unfortunate, I do like the occasional zero confirmation transaction that's instantly accepted. it will also help the mempool to be less congested as some people will be able to pump the fee and increase the chance for the unconfirmed transaction'to be included into a block. RBF doesn't empty mempool, for every transaction that gets into a block because of the increased fee, there's another transaction that doesn't make it anymore. ~ I'll have no idea which one will actually get mined until one of them is mined? Isn't that the same now? If you use RBF, there are 2 valid signed transactions out there, and it's up to the miner to choose which one to include. The one with the highest fee is most likely to get confirmed, but there are no guarantees. For brick and mortar shops who've been accepting bitcoin already I don't think this is a big deal as most people tend to be honest when dealing locally and face to face. For online retailers it may be an issue if they're selling digital items that customers want to download instantly. As LN becomes more and more common, it'll become a non-issue. I admire your confidence in people's honesty  And even though I agree most people would be honest, I fear this would attract dishonest people who see an opportunity to scam a shop. |
|
|
|
He was charismatic con artist for sure, and I think we saw many like him in altcoin, ICO and gambling space during last few years. And the campaign managers of most of the altcoin and ICO scams got away without a scratch! What's the difference here? Royse777 was offered partial ownership, but it doesn't look like he had anything to say in the "company". He couldn't handle withdrawals and didn't have access to funds. Were should we draw the line? |
|
|
|
Okay, but what happens if you lost the note? The same as any other physical item you lose: it's gone, and someone else may find it. Something like this will certainly draw the attention of governments, because it closely resemble the "printing" of a currency. Now on the other hand, if you designed it more to resemble a "Gift card" .....it will be more acceptable to governments. It's just barter. I can exchange my TV for your bicycle. Or for a drawing you made, for something you printed, or for some magic internet money Satoshi created. Governments can't stop you, they'll just tax you. |
|
|
|
I have the impression that it's you who's trying to spread "news" with potential to panic newbies. I get the same feeling. As the others said, 5000BTC is not an amount that can make the markets go wild, especially if it's indeed from miners that try to cash in as good as they can. Bitcoin miners create 6.25 Bitcoin every 10 minutes (give or take). That's 900 Bitcoin per day, and much more than 5000 Bitcoin in a week. Of course some/many of them sell some/much/all of the Bitcoins they create: they have bills to pay! And since most power companies and hardware suppliers don't accept Bitcoin, they'll need to exchange it for something else. That's nothing new. This is however what makes Bitcoin halvings so important: miners "drain" money out of the Bitcoin ecosystem by paying their hardware and electricity suppliers. Each halving means they have less Bitcoin to sell, which means this "drain" gets less every 4 years. |
|
|
|
The feedback has been removed, thanks Timelord2067 for doing (what I believe to be) the right thing. Case closed, topic locked. |
|
|
|
I will PM you the name It turns out there's another possibility: this user was included in the past days, after my latest (weekly) update. He'll show up on the next update (Saturday). since I don't want that person get offended Nothing wrong with that  |
|
|
|
But now the user doesn't have his own trust list, hence nothing is shown. That doesn't matter, users without custom Trust list still show up if someone includes them. However: there's one exception: trust.txt.xz only includes relationships where both the truster and trustee have non-zero post counts. Does the user in question have 0 posts? If not, can you share the username? maybe even these accounts should show who is trusting them. If the missing Trust list is caused by the user missing from theymos' data dump, then it's not something I can change. |
|
|
|
you said you have the private key why not import it into electrum? Because it's stupid bad practice to import a private key holding 50 (or more) Bitcoin into a hot wallet! Don't do that! Electrum can't import pubkeys, so it's not possible to sign safe (offline) with Electrum. Use Bitcoin Core. |
|
|
|
|
Disclaimer: I've been in contact with Royse777 on Telegram in the past days. Part of what I'm typing here, I've said to him already.
To me, it sounds like "Lucy" got the idea to create a casino without having funding for a bankroll and promotion. I've seen people like that, also in real life. Typically, the promises keep piling up and it's always "tomorrow" or "in a few days" to keep you waiting without coming through. People like that can be very convincing, and I've seen many people fall for that for a long time. By the time they've had enough, others get stuck in the same web of lies and it continues to make new victims.
For what it's worth: I believe you (Royse777) didn't have bad intentions. But I also believe you messed up big time by not seeing the red flags. If a campaign can't be paid up-front, and if the campaign manager has to pay for things out of his own pocket, you can bet there's no money in the casino. The moment the campaign couldn't be paid should have been the moment to put the campaign on HOLD. As an experienced campaign manager, you should have seen the red flags. By continuing the promotion with your forum reputation tied to it, I can imagine that made people believe the site could be trusted.
I think you waited too long to pull the plug, and you waited too long to come clean here. I wish you the best though.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks again for your flawless timing!
|
|
|
|
As the .cookie file is always created anew on bitcoind start and removed once bitconid is stopped, I don't know if chgrp would set the group permanently for the file. I wouldn't expect it to, as it's always a new file with new content. Can't you just recreate the hardlink and change group permissions each time bitcoind starts? how can the hard-linking to the other users home extend the file permission from a file it couldn't read in the first place? I was thinking something like this: chgrp btcCookie .cookie
chmod 640 .cookie
ln /home/bitcoin/.bitcoin/.cookie /home/anotheruser/.cookie And "anotheruser" needs to be in group "btcCookie". I usually just edit /etc/group for that. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not familiar with what you're asking, but if all you want is to give a user access to .cookie, why not just chgrp the file and hardlink it into their home directory?
|
|
|
|
I had a $21k balance at one stage with Bitlucy.com. How much did you deposit to this very new site? And why?They did not even offer to pay out the winnings, only my initial deposit. Well, it looks like you were supposed to lose, to fund the bankroll. According to our terms and conditions It's not even their Terms, they took the Terms from another site. |
|
|
|
how did you compile this list? See: CreditsBlockchair Database Dumps has a staggering amount of data, easily accessible (at 10 kB/s) with daily updates. All data presented in this topic comes from Blockchair. |
|
|
|
In the list of founded addresses there is unnecessary line "address" (kind of column header) between addresses "3.." and "bc..", line 31808561. Like you had separated lists and you concatenated them. Thanks! I'll take this to my other topic. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
