I think someone may be withholding blocks on BTC Guild. Someone (BTC talk user Brucexie claimed to be shorted 200+ BTC from eligius and it appears they were selfish mining see the below thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=650831.0They claim that 17JkL94B2ngJg4QQZuiozDQjnxXB6B7yTc and 1Gu8zxRi8cyENV8CQe52D7QEsiZ7ruT73u belong to the selfish miners. Looking at these addresses on blockchain.info, it looks like that both addresses are receiving payouts from BTC Guild. Checking the PPLNS stats page on BTC Guild I see that they had had very bad luck 67% over 3 days and 83% over one week. Based on this I would think that it is likely that "Brucexie" or the person/people who control the above addresses are selfish mining at BTC Guild. It looks like they have set the automatic payout to receive payouts in 10 BTC intervals If someone who has access to the "back office" stats at BTC Guild could please look into any users who have the payout address set to the above addresses and/or any accounts/ipaddresses that are showing very bad luck? I would recommend disabling payout instead of disconnecting them, as they would be less likely to notice this right away and would slow down their effort to selfish mine on large pools. EDIT: changed selfish mining --> block withholding to use proper terminology |
|
|
|
EDIT: I would say that they are almost certainly selfish mining at BTC Guild: Here is the "luck" as per the BTC PPLNS stats page: Approximate Pool Luck* (24H / 3D / 1W / 2W / 1M / 3M / All Time): 79.021% / 67.264% / 83.068% / 88.530% / 93.371% / 89.219% / 97.849%
*Luck is how much each share was paid compared to 0% fee PPS (ideal earnings). All-Time calculations started in Sept 2013. |
|
|
|
whew...I'm stuffed on popcorn...this is getting good  Yea this is ridiculous. Not only that but noone has any real proof of any of this. There is sufficient proof to easily hold up in a criminal court case, IMO. I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof. I respect eligius a lot and would say that the reputation of eligius would be sufficient to believe you if you say that there is proof. However I would be very interested to see proof. That is something up to wizkid057 to try to organise and present. If it were me, I'd consider the effort to try to put it in a form understandable by anyone to be more trouble than it's worth. In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence. I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact. If you were to testify, the defense attorney would ask what you think he did. Your response would be something along the lines of he withheld blocks that he founds while mining on our pool (you would explain what mining, pools are and what with holding blocks mean). The next thing he would ask is "how do you know" you would respond by saying something along the lines of "I looked at our pool records and saw x y and z" The defense attorney would ask to see the records and for you to explain what they mean. Having the records in a presettable format may be the difference between guilty and not guilty or 400 BTC or 0 BTC In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm. Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC.  If you could find out his identity with relative certainty you could pursue civil charges against him. Assuming he was not mining via tor finding his identity shouldn't be more difficult then filing a lawsuit against the alias, then sending a subpoena to the ISP, data center until you can connect the dots to his identity. Have you considered "flagging" accounts/addresses/ipaddresses that have more then x hashpower or less then y luck to be manually reviewed for this type of attack prior to them entering the payment que? IP addresses would probably be best. If it is apparent that he was doing this on purpose (if this person is who he says he is then he was doing it on purpose) then there is no reason to provide payment at all IMO. Intentionally withholding blocks from pools will degrade confidence in pools, which would lead to a decreased number of people mining in the first place (they would only solo mine and only if they could do it when they have enough hahspower that luck will not be a big issue), which would lead to centralization of mining. The more he talks, the more I get convinced it was intentional. But we may never know for sure. I read something somewhere that said BTC Guild banned a bunch of accounts that were having very bad luck. I don't think it was on these forums (it may have been one of those agitators that pull from the forums - it was defiantly not from the news page on BTC Guild - here, I found it - http://www.bcoinnews.com/btcguild-bans-accounts/ but I am not sure where their quote is from) that said it appeared that those accounts were behind their very bad luck. It mentioned that they were contacted by the owner of one of the accounts and were going over the configuration to check for problems. The quote said they were having 90% and 80% luck, but I think their PPLNS page was showing even worse luck then that. Regardless if this is the same person then I would find it very doubtful it was anything but intentional. |
|
|
|
I believe it's socialism and to be more specific, communism.
ONLY, if it was applied in a proper way.
I can't find a solution for poverty in capitalism.
Communism and socialism take away incentives to be creative and create more efficient ways of doing things. |
|
|
|
Should have sold off only a portion rather than the whole sum just in case in the long term we moved upwards. Regardless though I'd say he's just another one of those cases where having some luck and being in the right place at the right time can pay off overall.
It is not written that he sold it all, he probably kept 10-60% of it and he can buy back, earn a nice income with his business, earn BTC with his business or sell his business for a large fiat amount that he can partly transfer in BTC for safety and value There was an article that say some 15 year old used $1,000 that his grandmother gave him to buy bitcon early last year and old it recently for a $150,000 profit. |
|
|
|
ghash could earn more by ignoring all other pool blocks and just extending on its own chain. diff would even decrease and they could earn more  They would not earn more in terms of fiat. If they were to attempt this kind of attack then the price of bitcoin would decrease substantially and what they mined on their own chain would be worthless. i am not sure about this. it was definatly true in the beginning: but now? too much investors... This is even more true now. Ghash makes a lot of money off of selling their GH/s on cex, if they were executing a 51% attack why would anyone want to deal with them again once the network recovers. The hitch is that what individual human decision-makers do can be quite far removed from what you'd think would be in the rational best interests of the conpany. For instance, if you're a manager who has promised $x in revenue for this quarter and you think you'll lose your job if you don't make it, you'll be motivated to do whatever it takes to make that number, even if you secretly think it harms the company long-term. Also they may be coerced into doing things they don't want to. Conceivably the moment they hit 51% they became legally obliged to do all kinds of AML-related censorship that they don't really want to do. Like somebody said about Google, it's all very well having the motto "Don't be evil", but if you accrue too much power, evil will find you... This may be true about the manager wanting to get x amount of revenue for the company for a pool that earns revenue from pool fees, but ghash does not. As far as I know the only source of revenue that ghash makes is from selling it's equipment via cloud mining. |
|
|
|
the question is: why spend bitcoin if it will be worth more in the future?)
This is an issue with bitcoin. With people thinking that it will increase in price in the future, it makes people hesitant to spend it unless they absolutely need to. Sounds like a benefit, not an issue. Instead of being afraid that you will lose purchasing power if you don't waste all your money (and all your borrowing power) on useless trinkets that have no longevity, you're encouraged to think about your purchases, buy things that will last, and avoid wasting money on things you don't need and don't really want. Besides, in reality, you have the exact same problem with any money you spend (bitcoin, U.S. dollars, or otherwise). The existence of bitcoin makes me hesitant to spend my U.S. dollars unless I absolutely need to (because, if I don't waste my U.S. dollars on useless trash, then I'll have more U.S. dollars available to exchange for bitcoins that may increase in value). The issue with this is that if people think the value of their coins will appreciate indefinitely then they will not spend unless they absolutely have to. People will only buy necessities and will in general live a lower standard of living. The incentives to invest your bitcoin are there but are diminished by the fact that you expect a return by keeping them "under your mattress" If you have a small amount of inflation, you do have a small incentive to buy something sooner rather then later if you are going to purchase it regardless (say for example you have a refrigerator that will need to be replaced in the next 6 months, you may purchase now instead of later to get a better, more efficient refrigerator as you think the price will rise slightly by the time you are forced to buy one). Small inflation also gives you the incentive to invest "smartly" (in investments that are likely to produce a positive return) and to innovate (if you invest the time, energy and money to make something better then what exists today then you will earn a profit) and gives you a disincentive to hold money "under the mattress" |
|
|
|
i like invest, and always invest, but if big invest big risk got scammer -___-
This is why it is important to only invest in things that you truly understand. It is also why you need to remember to due your due diligence. Above all if something sounds too good to be true then it probably is. |
|
|
|
It looks like they said in their OP that they will only enroll 25 people, but per the OP they have more then that. |
|
|
|
Buy 10 SP30 miners. When you make your first 25k then put them back into your pocket, next 25k reinvest into mining. I would advise you to exchange BTC only when new and better mining equipment comes out or when BTC reaches at least 1000$.
I was thinking about mining too,since bitcoinis on the wave ,better to mine it than buy it.But what about the electricity consume and the space?I have an small apartment ,so not to much free space,plus i am thinking that i need an extra AC too? Mining is great fun and highly addictive. However, if profit is your motive you'll definitely want to look into investing into anything but mining. Hardware value depreciation in the asic and scrypt asic markets are absolutely insane right now (and have been since I started mining). Factor into this how quickly difficulty is increasing, a small apartment with limited electricity supply and you have yourself a recipe for disappointment. Also, odds are you won't really be able to host any kind of serious mining equipment on a typical apartments wiring. If your space, electricity, and cooling are limited, consider cloud mining instead. Although you'll run into the same issue(s) of depreciation of whatever you buy soon enough. Hope this helps. It may still be early enough so that ASIC scrypt mining would still be profitable. |
|
|
|
Why not collect faucet & invest in Bitcoin at 2011 I might have $100 - $10000 now Yeah, I remember when faucets used to give 1 BTC each time. Nostalgia again Those were the days! |
|
|
|
Many people seem to think the buyer will just dump all the coins at once, resulting in the last ones being sold very cheaply. First of all, we don't even know he/she will want to sell all of them. But if so, he will probably sell a little but everyday to get better rates. I Will buy as many coins as I can afford after the market has reacted to this news.
If the buyer(s) buy the coins hoping to arbitrage between their price (from the FBI) and the price on exchanges they would likely sell right away. if they were hoping to simply buy at a discount and think bitcoin is a good investment then they would likely not sell anytime soon. |
|
|
|
But perhaps its possible to build a transaction that would enforce this. For example, p2p pool. Sure there would be a delay in payment, but you have to compromise for privacy. And why not allow for paying form this service? It is a service after all.
It should be an automatic service and is better than a mixed as you can't track the coins as they have no relation to one another. The payment I send to slush could be constructed where the forwarding address is included in some way (a hash?) And the payee could be a stealth address of some sort so that the pool can't keep track of the payment itself. It could be worth developing- in theory it could work even after coins are no longer minted as it could redistribute the transaction fees.
The dangerous way to get your coins re-mined is to create transactions that send 100% of the inputs to transaction fees, privately send that transaction to a cooperative miner (don't broadcast on the network!) then trust the miner to credit you (minus some commission) in the coinbase transaction. Downsides are that you have to trust the miner (mining pool operator), and with getblocktemplate you also need to trust all the participants in the pool to not spot your transaction and forward it to another pool who could put it in their block instead. Also, smart blockchain analysis tools could look for that kind of thing and correlate your "clean" coins to the "dirty" coins based on the output size. And the miner might keep records intentionally or unintentionally. Oh, and if that block gets orphaned you could lose your money. Making this practical means solving each one of these problems, and maybe some more that I didn't think of. Any single flaw in the scheme means you don't actually get any privacy. If you were to do this then everyone would be able to see the block with the huge amount of TX fees. if the amount of BTC in question was small enough to not attract attention it would likely not be enough money to have to worry about that level of privacy. If You sent a TX with for example a 10 BTC TX fee then the block reward would be at least 35 BTC and it would be obvious that you were colluding with that pool. |
|
|
|
Oh, can't forget about that guy bought the pizza for 10,000 btcs. Poor bastard. Quite the contrary. At the time, it was a good deal and it bought the BTC community a lot of physical world publiscity. BTC would not be as widely known today if it wasn't for that infamous pizza purchase. Has anyone done a follow up article on the shop that accepted the coins? 10KBTC @ $500 now that's a story! It was not a shop that accepted the coins it was a person on these forums that traded the coins and called the pizza shop and gave them his credit card number. I think he was actually in England when he called but I may be mistaken about this. |
|
|
|
Wow, very detailed charted overview. I'm surprised that BTC-E performed so poorly in a lot of areas - this is my exchange of choice. So far they have proved to be excellent (for me), I just hope that it doesn't turn into another Gox.
Thanks for sharing!
I can't say I'm surprised personally. While BTC-E has been around a long time and had few problems the fact of the matter is that it's an exchange that's shrouded in mystery. They definitely don't want governments knowing too much about them and I can't really say that I blame them. But they're never going to be considered a top tier exchange when it comes to safety unless they open up and before much more transparent. BTC-e does allow you to have additional privacy that other exchanges do not, however it also creates a greater possibility that something similar to what happened at GOX would happen there as there are just so many unknowns. I guess it's a risk some are willing to take in the name of anonymity. I am not sure how much more anonymity you reallly get when using BTC-e. |
|
|
|
Really tricky, I never thought of it.
What if the being divorced knows about it, can he prove it in the court during the judgement ?
Divorce is tricky and has tricky rules of evidence. If the wife makes an accusation that is shaky but does have a little evidence the judge will likely want to see proof to the contrary. |
|
|
|
OP, do you think that the FBI will listen to us ?
There are issues which are beyond all of us.
You would probably have a greater chance that they would not sell the coins if we told them that we wanted them to sell the coins. |
|
|
|
Hiya,
I've been using the Satoshi client for a long time now, and since my internet speed and CPUs are horribly slow, well blockchain synchronization takes forever. However, I very much like the coin control feature in the client.
Is there any alternative client where I don't have to download the entire blockchain but there is still coin control features?
Thanks.
The only other wallet service that I am aware of that allows you to control your coins at the level that Bitcoin-QT does is blockchain.info's wallet. You can us custom send to specify which addresses to use for inputs, the change address and the miners fee (custom send) Yes, I am well aware of that possibility. However, I was looking for something similar to the level of control as Bitcoin Core, where you can control the individual inputs. Per-address input selection is just not fine enough for me. I believe there is an option on the blockchain.info website that allows you to push a signed TX to the network without a client. If you were to create and sign a TX with your individual inputs that you want to spend then you could use blockexplorer to keep track of your spent and unspent inputs. I've been using raw TXs to do my transactions for the past while, but it got a tad complicated with so many inputs. I think I'll go away from that path for now because the last time I tried, I sent my output as the fee. #whoops I know of a site (brainwallet.org) that has a slightly less complicated GUI for creating raw TXs, but AFAIK, you can't use inputs from multiple addresses on there, which I nearly always do. My question is, why do you wish to have that much control over your inputs? Any program that gives you this control will have the possibility of making that mistake. With a wallet like multibit this would never happen. Even if you used blockchain.info's custom send, you would have control over where the coins come from. |
|
|
|
First thaing that we would have in that option would be massive exploatation by exchanges.
They do hold most of the coins anyways.
But, regarding the price, well POS would make it interesting for investors , but not in the long run
Even if everyone were to get "interest" from their coins they would still hold the same number of coins in terms of a percentage of the total. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
