The scammer sent it by tricking the token process and the blockchain, DarkStar_ can't send it because he probably doesn't have much experience in ERC20 tokens (as they do nothing to benefit Bitcoin).
Blow me! So, that was a smart guy hiding behind his computer. This is what I've tried to say previously but not very well. I therefore, also, don't know why they waste their time doing this when they have so much intelligence, you lost $600 - think of how quickly he could have earnt more than that actually using his skills in some way by hiring them out? Under such conditions, people generally use the top 100 on the cmc list if that helps.
At 35 is dogecoin for example. I will revise the terms and will share it with all. May be I will have only a set of alts that I am comfortable with. Yes that might be a wise idea to only select a set few although the top 100 have enough money thrown into them that they are probably safe enough to use without needing any special circumstances.
No offence, but I like the fact I'm not the only one who fell for this sort of thing if you and DarkStar_ were duped by it. |
|
|
|
My list would be a lot longer than yours OP  . I hate ripple. I talked to someone at work about bitcoin and he says he has $1000 dollars in cryptos. He then says he has some Ripple.
I told him to dump it.
He said that Ripple is good because it's what the banks use!
And then we wonder why the market is not rational. Banks are the ones who expand the money supply to where it is and then they set up shop and rob people at every transaction.
Bitcoin is about taking power back from the banks and the government to the individual.
No hidden inflation tax, no fractional reserve banking. No debt based currency.
It is the exact issue with banks that they control money, they get money from the government and then are allowed to lend it out to get a profit for themselves (and then the government) but having a central bank in control of the currency is the main issues with the most recent financial crisis. If banks buy up ripple, that's just another reason to hate it IMO. |
|
|
|
Answer is somewhere in code, perhaps DarkStar can't send tokens from that address? Not sure.
If DarkStar_ can't then how did that scammer send the tokens to DarkStar_ in the first place? It must be possible. May be the exchanges can stop incoming wrong tokens programmatically. The exchange address is just an eth address. Your regular address is an eth address, they're the same addresses. The scammer sent it by tricking the token process and the blockchain, DarkStar_ can't send it because he probably doesn't have much experience in ERC20 tokens (as they do nothing to benefit Bitcoin). Why they issued new tokens in first place? Perhaps they fucked up something in code first time. I am just guessing. They could perhaps find a safer way to protect people from scammers when they issued new tokens. I am not sure about solidity programming, wasn't it possible for them to lock the old tokens with an exception of sending only to the burned address? That would surely cause a lot more harm than good wouldn't it? I mean the coin is supposed to be decentralised and anyone is able to produce their own token so it's impossible to do unless you use KYC for people making tokens (which isn't going to happen). I am going to fully revise my lending topic. This is a draft idea I am thinking of...
If a coin/token is a top 10 on CMC then collateral can be in an independent address, if it's not then send it to an exchange. Money will sent out once the fund become available in the exchange. Also I will set stop/loss in certain percentage.
Under such conditions, people generally use the top 100 on the cmc list if that helps. At 35 is dogecoin for example. |
|
|
|
Why exactly does this matter? I don't think the ChipMixer signing address was supposed to be funded. My guess is someone send their coins to that address by mistake. They'd have done that after mixing their coins though. I followed one of the chains and it brought me here: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/18HecYpFRs4s54oiLKnXLpfzFUb1VFQMvt - maybe it was a small chip, they liked the service and wanted to donate? |
|
|
|
|
OP, you might be better off listing the assets you and your company has and going into more detail on what your business has (if I were going to lend to you, I'd want to see this information - I won't be able to invest perosnally however as I have money stuck in other areas, just my advice though).
|
|
|
|
hi guys
it seems to have worked, it was syncing all day, now left at 25 weeks behind, so far so good... hopefully also the newest transactions will work OK
Great to hear! Let us know when you get up to 100%. |
|
|
|
0.08BTC isn't that bad of a loss - even 0.15BTC isn't that dramatic.
That's a hell lot of bad feeling, when you realize that you just have been scammed. I guess if I didn't send the coins and the claim was legit, someone on here would've given me a red tag. If I did (like I did) then I'd lose the money but keep my trust clean. I don't think you would get a red tag if you were able to show the evidence plus you can always send the tokens to the address it came from or any other ERC20 address. In the exchanges I don't know how they prevent it. I gave an exchange address to DarkStar_ and it was showing the following message. " Warning! Error encountered during contract execution [Reverted]" https://etherscan.io/tx/0x2a7c3e41ad92cb9d116293fe7b0557fc075a313a9b56a25f8505ab3d952ac0cf So I figured it's because the address was an exchange address. I may ask DarkStar_ to send the tokens to an ERC20 address which I own. I'm not sure it'll make too much of a difference though (the different address)? |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, if ETF is right, the master public key can be derived from the two private keys (or potentially addresses) of the main and child address.
There's no main or child address. The master private and public keys are the "main" keys while any addresses generated are the child keys. The main address as ETF said is the address that is used for recieving and the child address is the change address (nothing to do with master keys) The master public key can't be derived from two addresses or else it would be pretty flawed and we wouldn't be using it anymore. You can, however derive the master private key using one of the child private key and the master public key with little difficulty. It applies to all unhardened keys (ie. those with master public key).
Hardened ones have a ' at the end of the derivation path don't they (or had I got that wrong)? |
|
|
|
|
I lost 0.15BTC in a similar way (when it was at ~$15000).
You can probably still find the topics somewhere.
The collateral was sent to me and I released the 0.15BTC after the coins were sent to an exchange but hadn't come through which was the main mistake.
I guess if I didn't send the coins and the claim was legit, someone on here would've given me a red tag. If I did (like I did) then I'd lose the money but keep my trust clean.
0.08BTC isn't that bad of a loss - even 0.15BTC isn't that dramatic.
|
|
|
|
I was kind of joking. I'm not sure if running a promotion based on losing is the best advertising strategy for a gambling business. I'm pleased to be able to say that the wagering contest has been a successful promotion and we've now decided we will run it again next month. So make use of these special banners and advertise your referral link where gamblers can be found.  ~ Nah a biggest loser thing is what they have in casinos when you gamble large amounts and lose. The food vouchers and such that you get for a buffet when you lose $1000000+ in a night there. If this is going to become a more permenant thing, I'd suggest having a BBCode/html version of the adverts also for anyone who wants to use them in their signature. |
|
|
|
I have to post this... Can't Resist. --- Ok, to be honest I am still pondering the relevance ofbthat to this thread. Does anyone know, apart from it being spammy or are we having a belated anniversary for Michael? Michael who? Michael. (no body answer this let's see how long it takes him to work out the Michael).
I'm guessing it's in response to bill's response or the entire bit of whatever he's called's trolling. |
|
|
|
Eh? Source of the "Chips" is "Fish and Chips", mate. "Fish and Chip Mixer" was too long and "Fish Mixer" sounds well fishy /s
Because I'm Canadian, ChipMixer is Canadian obviously /s
hm, interesting! EDIT: not much fun in Alberta, Canada. ;-) /s Do we have another confirmed alt of DarkStar_? EDIT: source of the "Chips" may be gambling
Eh? Source of the "Chips" is "Fish and Chips", mate. "Fish and Chip Mixer" was too long and "Fish Mixer" sounds well fishy /s And somehow this makes more sense than anything Gyrsur has said so far. Our wallet software: chip based wallet that handles wallet separation and fakes chip creaton When I first read this, I thought it was related to the software you use on the server. On second reading (and after some sleep), I'm starting to think you're going to publish your own privacy focused wallet. As far as I know, no mixer has done that before. We are experimenting with a fork of Electrum wallet, eh. They already told us they will not merge any mixer integration - even as a plugin - but this will allow keeping wallet up to date with all new features and extend them with special handling of chips. Now this sounds interesting. Have you anything functioning well so far? |
|
|
|
I am confused are those 2 slots filled or still available? The title says 2 slots open but spreadsheet says its 58/58  That's for last week. There wre all 58 slots taken then. There is now an avaliablility to apply for a new slot. I am confused are those 2 slots filled or still available? The title says 2 slots open but spreadsheet says its 58/58 I guess he will update it shortly. I don't think he has selected the new members yet. DarkStar what is the deadline to apply in? The update is usually done within 24-48 hours (though it can be longer if darkstar is quite busy and the number of applicants is usually very high). |
|
|
|
In safe mode now and it seems exactly the same... teued to get connections for a bit then blinks then off again.
The whole chain? Well im on a 17mbit connection.. that will be long.
Any other ideas? Oh actually the pc went to standby when i was home without shutting down the core client .. laptop ... altho that happened before.
Thank you
It won't redownload the chain it will run back through it but it will still take quite a long time to do that. If by standby you mean hybernate then that shouldn't be the cause of the issue. I'd suggest waiting between a few hours a day for someone who can work out the exact error in the debug.logs that you have provided as they should be indepth enough for someone who knows more about the source code of bitcoin core. Right that makes sense.....now deciding whether doing that re-download thing (if that is at all a viable option) or doing something else... in that case.. ANY EXPERT around??? thanks for all your help jackg anyway! Give them 24 hours to come here and then try reindexing (deleting the last blk file). It won't download everything again unless it finds an issue but it will have to scan through it all and reindex everything. |
|
|
|
In safe mode now and it seems exactly the same... teued to get connections for a bit then blinks then off again.
The whole chain? Well im on a 17mbit connection.. that will be long.
Any other ideas? Oh actually the pc went to standby when i was home without shutting down the core client .. laptop ... altho that happened before.
Thank you
It won't redownload the chain it will run back through it but it will still take quite a long time to do that. If by standby you mean hybernate then that shouldn't be the cause of the issue. I'd suggest waiting between a few hours a day for someone who can work out the exact error in the debug.logs that you have provided as they should be indepth enough for someone who knows more about the source code of bitcoin core. |
|
|
|
What does it say at the bottom of the screen next to the loading bar?
Is is saying that it is syncronising with blocks or "no block source avaliable" etc...
it seems as "normal" although I see 0 connections, sometimes it goes to 8 then goes away....   So it's sticking on connecting to peers according to that, do you have any new firewalls that could be blocking it (or your ISP) although it's not even loading up the list of peers that they normally have... nothing new really... I tried to use a proxy just earlier but no difference, I can see that there is network traffic, like 3MB... this is very odd.. on another forum someone suggested to delete the latest blk and rev file.. what u think of that? thank you If you do that it'll reindex your entire blockchain. How long did it take to sync, as it'll do all of that again? I'd sooner suggest booting your computer in "safe mode with networking" and run your bitcoin core to see that it definitely isn't a firewall issue. |
|
|
|
What does it say at the bottom of the screen next to the loading bar?
Is is saying that it is syncronising with blocks or "no block source avaliable" etc...
it seems as "normal" although I see 0 connections, sometimes it goes to 8 then goes away.... So it's sticking on connecting to peers according to that, do you have any new firewalls that could be blocking it (or your ISP) although it's not even loading up the list of peers that they normally have... |
|
|
|
|
What does it say at the bottom of the screen next to the loading bar?
Is is saying that it is syncronising with blocks or "no block source avaliable" etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Can you find the session log where the error originally started to occur and the previous session log before it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
