|
I'm fairly certain you need to copy the directories with the blockchain and put them in the folder the wallet.dat is in if it's windows.
Also if it's windows, I suggest running bitcoin-qt with the -datadir=<YOUR_DATA_DIRECTORY> every time you run it (and keep the drive letter the same to make it easier).
|
|
|
|
He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it, I think it is pretty clear Bruno is not interested in repaying the $600 he was trying to get for his account, hence he listed it for sale. The notion that someone should take out a loan they have no interest in repaying should be condemned. The same is true for those who lack the ability to repay a loan. Well that's wrong, Bruno has already paid back suchmoon. but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.
If you can sell an account for $600 but can only borrow $400 against it's reputation, it would be irrational for the buyer to buy the account and subsequently take out a loan he has no intent on repaying. A healthy and transparent market would make it easier for lenders to judge how much it would be safe to trust an account with via a no-collateral loan. [/quote] You should already be able to predict the value for youself and set limits on what you'd lend to specific lenders based on their reputation(I have mine). What if one of the staff gets fired and the business hires someone else to handle whatever the account was handling?
The identities of owners are generally private information (although they are sometimes voluntarily made public for a variety of reasons). If I am understanding you correctly, you believe this should be made public?
If I make an account and make a PLC, LLC or LTD company, I have to list myself as the owner of the company. My account can then be traced back to that company and therefore someone can find all the shareholders/owners/directors of that company. That information is already public knowledge so you may as well link it to the account. And NO, if the primary account holder (the CEO) changes, then it should be stated publicly somewhere - even if just a way to advertise the company as there's another thread with your company's name on it. |
|
|
|
I was also getting this yesterday all day. I restarted my computer, changed my USB port and it worked.
Can you try this out?
Thanks. I followed your suggestion but the problem is still there. Can I find a previous version of Electrum? Previous releases are here: https://download.electrum.org/What operating system are you running and are the relevant drivers installed. I think in linux and mac you have to install your own drivers.
In windows search the start menu for deice manager. Which can be found by right clicking computer and hitting manage.
Edit: do tryninja's suggestion first.
Thanks for the idea. My machine has Windows 7 and as far as i know drivers are ok. I changed the USB port as well. Try this if a previous version doesn't work: 1. Unplug the ledger 2. Find the driver and click uninstall (but uncheck the box to delete it). Restart your computer and plug back in the ledger - it can usually refresh the system to reinstall the appropriate driver. Don't plug back in the ledget until the computer is fully loaded. |
|
|
|
|
What operating system are you running and are the relevant drivers installed. I think in linux and mac you have to install your own drivers.
In windows search the start menu for deice manager. Which can be found by right clicking computer and hitting manage.
Edit: do tryninja's suggestion first.
|
|
|
|
@Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow, has the account gone back to Bruno?
I have made only one post from that account to confirm that I control it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211133#msg40211133And have not used it since, nor will I. It has not gone back to Bruno. Ok that's good. I was considering you controlled it still and then checked back somewhere else and thought it went back to him but wasn't sure. $600 was quite a small amount compared to the value of his account (though it already had negative trust so)... Quite fast to raise it also so that's good. |
|
|
|
This also raises the issue of business accounts. What happens if the business is sold, but the account remains within the business? Maybe that should be announced in reputation.
The whole point of tagging purchased accounts is that the new owner is pretending to be someone they are not. Not just any trust ratings the account has but its whole posting history is someone else's. In the case of a business changing hands, this doesn't apply as the account would still be the official voice of the company. As long as the fact that the business is under new ownership is public then there is no deception. I'm not entirely sure about the business thing. If some of the staff/people with acces to it, remains the same then I don't think anything has changed too much. If the company get sold outright and the entire staff is changed then the account and business arguably should have their trust and history removed. Otherwise it looks a lot like it's one rule for one and one rule for another... Although, the same legal entity do technically own the account - a link to their business probile showing the change of the shareholders would be helpful in fully clarifying all of the information about the account. That won't always work, as the accounts that left the positive trust may not even be active anymore.
Buying an account is like cheating the Activity and Merit systems, which were introduced to restrict the spamming capacity for new users.
Apart from the farmed spam accounts, I can think of arguments for both sides. Therefore I won't tag account sales myself, but I'll present evidence if I find it.
I think it would be nice to see that if an account is inactive for say a year and gets locked by the forum maybe due to it's inactivity, it should be moved down to DT4 so that there isn't a potential for any scams from the account (the history should remain and the trust level should be regained if the ownership of the account can be proven). I have seen a lot of users here that have positive ratings that have gone on to do immense scams and have retained that positive because the user who gave them a positive has not been online since just before they scammed.
@Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow, has the account gone back to Bruno? |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone know of any fast converters from MKV to MP4 on Windows.
I would use cloudconvert but it's a few gigabytes so it's a bit too big.
I also tried VideoLAN but it seems to go through the video fram-by-frame at normal time so that's very slow.
|
|
|
|
@Seuntjies, can I connect to this bot through tor? /Do I just use https://127.0.0.1:9050 with tor open in the background or is this not possible? |
|
|
|
Gleb would never sell his account(s). Never.
Joking aside, the OP is an asshat. No proof.
Errrr Read This: That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259So from my point of view the timeline is this: 1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account. 2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands. 2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so... 3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money. 4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue. 5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again. 6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly. Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not. Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you. |
|
|
|
Nice job, thanks. I found it also posted in one of my threads: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=514242 (post has been edited but last edit was 3 years ago). Message (one line): This is suchmoon 2018-06-17. I control bitcointalk accounts "suchmoon" and (temporarily) "Gleb Gamow". Signature: HM71xTAaD8xyx7ciTaPTmKLBp7Y7Rzm9uQ5MIdhUJh6ZVUPtz2mAEsiyI/4BS5ZQVDnsSnHSWWBw4ur5UjzgxAU= Message verified using bitcoin core v0.16.0 (to add to what InvoKing said) I don't think this is the attitude someone on DT should have.
If your account gets compromised then it's free to scam people out of anything. You might not put value on your own account, but someone else would.
Well, I would obviously post a warning if I ever lose the account and would request it to be banned/removed from DT/red-tagged etc. But I hear what you're saying. Will fix that soon. Yes please do fix that asap. Otherwise, when you report the account being hacked, most will think you're just a newbie who has a issue with you and won't do anything to act on changing your trust. |
|
|
|
That's a good idea invoking to find a staked address (I was going through their trust but couldn't find anything). It would obviously be good if you could sign it Suchmoon however it definitley isn't mandetory (it just allows us to have a bit of a better reference). And means we don't have to depend on typed words for when the account goes back to Gleb - as there is then more proof that the account has left you. Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.
I never put any value on forum accounts. If I lose my account I'll just start over. Now having Gleb's account puts a bit more responsibility on me but maybe Bruno has a staked address on that one. I don't think this is the attitude someone on DT should have. If your account gets compromised then it's free to scam people out of anything. You might not put value on your own account, but someone else would. |
|
|
|
How much did you give him for it if you're happy saying?
I don't want to get into the details without Bruno's permission but if he wants to share that info - I'm fine with it. Yeah, I expected that. I just wanted to see if it was an amount fairly high currently ~1 BTC+ to see if it was similar to that loan which, as I understand it, didn't get filled. @Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?
I don't have a staked address as I never expected to be in this position. I'll see if I can find one posted somewhere. Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one. Therefore I'd like to ask Tomatocage to exclude Gleb from DT2 before we see suchmoon to start tagging people with it.  I would also like to ask Blazed and dooglus to exclude suchmoon from DT2, she is a blatant account buyer. unless Blazed and dooglus agree with suchmoon's actions? if they agree with such a blatant case of account trading maybe we need to ask theymos to exclude them from DT1? Have you contacted the DT1 members yet? This should be a good test of the rumor that Quicksy controls Tomatocage. I can't imagine him being happy with this so Gleb almost certainly will get dropped from DT2 if that's the case. Is that some sort of reverse psychology |
|
|
|
Nothing is lost yet, if you admit what you did was wrong, I will give you another chance and would remove my tag. you could've paid him from your pocket without taking control of the account. it also seems that Bruno has been on account sale business for years. why did you take the account if you trusted him and even asked for his red tags to be removed? you didn't trust him enough that's why you tried to buy the account and make it look like you are helping him.
Why would they care to remove negative trust from you? You're negged yourself but DT members. I don't think what they did is against anything. And there is also irony in your post. Suchmoon said he isn't going to sell it on or use it (unless back to Bruno) so the account is now stagnant and won't continue to be sold. Therefore I'd like to ask Tomatocage to exclude Gleb from DT2 before we see suchmoon to start tagging people with it. I would also like to ask Blazed and dooglus to exclude suchmoon from DT2, she is a blatant account buyer. unless Blazed and dooglus agree with suchmoon's actions? if they agree with such a blatant case of account trading maybe we need to ask theymos to exclude them from DT1? Blazed has a history of account sales afaik, it was on a thread somewhere (unless that's just Quicksy fud). And those accounts/people should do what they seem fit to in response to this. I don't think either should really have much done differntly to them though. |
|
|
|
That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259So from my point of view the timeline is this: 1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account. 2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands. 2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so... 3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money. 4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue. 5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again. 6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly. Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not. Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you. How much did you give him for it if you're happy saying? Also this is kinda sad that all these users accounts are changing hands since the time I've been here. It'd be nice if more people would just hold onto their accounts but sure, If people need the money then they can sell. Although, this is one of the more notable members so hopefully Bruno gets posession of his account once again! I'm also curious as to whether this was because of the loan request he made in October/November (for 2 BTC) or whether it's for something else he needed the money for, though I think that's a bit too intrusive. I'm not sure that loan request ever got filled, I knew that he didn't want to give the Gleb account then so something must really have hit him hard. I'd also suggest that the negative tags on the Gleb account get changed to neutral and that they read that the account has been changed to be owned by Suchmoon. @Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it? |
|
|
|
I assume bots are against the site as there isn't an api.
You can use a bot to play dice but not claim the faucet. A lot of people use https://bot.seuntjie.com/ as it is a lot more sophisticated than the autobet (every site supported paid Seuntjie for his time to program them in). Anyone know how to channel that through TOR. Do I just click proxy and use 127.0.0.1:9050? |
|
|
|
Am I just missing the point here? I use hardware wallets for long-term storage of large amounts of crypto - the last thing I want is to be carrying them around with me and expose them to the risk of theft or loss. For transactions on the go, I can just store a small amount of crypto in a mobile wallet.
This is what I thought. You're only supposed to carry small amounts with you on your phone at any point otherwise it's too accessible for potential thieves. A small day-to-day amount of bitcoin is probably best to keep on your phone and store the majority of your bitcoin on your computer/hardware device. If you're needed for a hefty business transaction, you can carry your laptop around with you and the pendrive sized hardware device (it's not that difficult). |
|
|
|
@jackg That's not the person that lost.
Ahhh. I saw the name began with an s and just assumed hahaha  . solosss is just a pathetic hypocrite troll. He has made a bot to claim the faucet and advertises it on Youtube. It only works if they sign up to his referral link so they pay extortionate rates for captcha solves and make almost nothing while he pockets the referral income with no costs.
Part of his advertising spiel is to make out that we are the evil enemy because we encourage people to gamble and that somehow justifies abusing the faucet with bots.
The truth is that his referrals are humans and many of them gamble. In total, they have lost twice as much as they have got from the faucet.
He likes to troll this thread and say how evil gambling is, and freebitco.in in particular, even though he continues to actively promote us to gain referrals.
Is it a bot that takes out the time part as well. Why don't you/wetsuit just block him otherwise it looks a bit like you don't mind that he's doing what he's doing - even if he is bringing other people to the site? I assume bots are against the site as there isn't an api. You never know but that person that lost might even be someone he introduced to us. Or the next one that loses more they can afford to lose might well be. But that won't stop solosss from his insane rants.
Yeah, I'm guessing it probably isn't as sad lost 10 BTC they probably wouldn't waste time on a bot to reap very little. |
|
|
|
Go to network settings in electrum and uncheck "select server automatically" and start picking other servers to connect to - I think it's in preferences.
Does it say a balance at the bottom of the window, synchronising or not connected?
It says synchronising What's your internet speed, you can test it here → speedtest.net How long has it been stuck on synchronising for, if it's been more than half an hour/a few hours, recover the wallet from seed instead and see if it works any better. Is this your first transaction in electrum? |
|
|
|
but it might be a phising attack, today i received an e-mail from bitman that the phising attack is being made, and its true they called me claiming they are bitman, and they send me mail about the S11,...so i guess it is not yet true,...on Bitman shop only they claim bitman,...so its a phishing attack...sounded to good to be true anway, so much GHS for same power, doesnt make sence.
Yes I got that email. Their also called Bitmain, not bitman (just in case you're checking for phishing as it's usually that 'i's they would attack as they'd go less noticed). Their official email is webmaster@bitmaintech.com so this is the only reliable source of information. There are other sources though depending on whether the other users have got an email from a pharming attempt or an actual separate service claiming they had some. 2.6K usd was the offer aprox 11K they will dispatch till agust the end,...so yeah 3.5K would be kinda good price for a start...but i have a feeling they launched the ICO, so this is their new cloud mining thing,...a new coin, by them, like bnb for binance,...cant blame them
This looks really fishy. Up until about a month or two ago they were limiting everyone to only ten or so miners per sale/account. Now, why would they want to sell 11000 to a random company at that mcuh of a discount on them. The second bit about an ICO makes sense since they failed to get full control over Bitcoin Cash for very long (especially since ViaBTC mined the first block). |
|
|
|
|
Go to network settings in electrum and uncheck "select server automatically" and start picking other servers to connect to - I think it's in preferences.
Does it say a balance at the bottom of the window, synchronising or not connected?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
