This would be wonderful!
The ban is also great; it just took way too long until it happened.


And maybe a bugfix in bpip extension.    (edit: indirectly, but this is how I've found it).

I think that I've found a bug.
If an user is Ignored, although the proper settings are there in the extension, the extra info is not shown (for example "Banned") in a discussion thread.

Halving doesn't make any difference in the total proposed coin supply, so you can say it doesn't make a difference.
But on the other hand the miners will receive half of previous the block reward for the same effort (hardware and consumption).
So I'd guess that the miners will do their best to sell at higher prices to stay on profit. Hence the price should increase. Hence it could be a good reason to invest.
On the other hand, many say that the prices are manipulated, that the halving price is already counted in and so on.
So there are reasons to invest and reasons to not invest. It is up to the potential investor to decide for himself.


Of course, this makes sense for established coins. A fairly new coin, if it's worthless, if it has no proper infrastructure, use, market, ... halving will change nothing.

Let's not forget the pools. And what keeps the pools "honest" is the competition and the fear. The fear that if they do something wrong they may get punished by losing the miners and getting out of business.

If the source code is publicly available (on Github or not), anybody can check the source code for bugs, back doors and such; also anybody can build and run the source code as a safer alternative (provided you understand what's there vs some executables which may contain anything).
So the public source code is a plus. Source code on Github, where people can even follow the evolution and fixes, is another plus.

But that doesn't automatically make closed source projects a scam.

And I will give you a simple example: just think of a miner software. Somebody may make the miner with developer fee. No source code, since if he'd publish the source code, others will build it without that fee. Somebody else may make a fake miner, which tries to steal your coins, but advertises it as a miner with lower or no developer fee. Why would you trust one and not the other? Hard to tell. But if a 3rd developer makes am miner and publish the source code with it, people will use this one and maybe even donate or help improving it.

If I go as dt I see the -1 : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=787736;dt
If I go by my normal settings, I don't see the -1 because Vispilio is excluded, although not directly (he's not in my distrust list).

So OP may indeed see the -1.

Bitcoin is not just the devs and bitcointalk. Bitcoin actually can run very good without the current devs(*) and without bitcointalk.
And then what remains? Miners and pools which compete for resources, various nodes made for various reasons (from being nice to supporting a business) and plenty of users - investors, traders, speculators, people who work for Bitcoin, people with businesses in Bitcoin and so on.
This is by no means something organized.

I think that one of the reasons Satoshi has disappeared is to avoid Bitcoin become an organization under the lead of dev team.


(*) Some may argue about the devs and I will come with an idea. What if multiple dev teams emerge for Bitcoin and their ideas differ? Well, the nodes should ultimately decide which change they go with and the others will have their fork. This is the "power" of consensus.

Did you look into the mirror when you said this?
Did you get a good laugh? 


You have to make your mind. You don't seem convinced your problem is about Chipmixer or ... one person.
The Chipmixer members I discuss with (on this forum) on a daily basis are way more than "OK".
And however you try to put some personal grudge under the blanket of "fight for the truth", it's just plain pathetic.

They don't have to. It's their money, their rules, their ways of following them. You just cannot argue with that.
If you comply and get lucky, perfect. If not, move on. That's what I've done. And many others too. There are more campaigns, there are more opportunities, and it's not all about money.. or should not be.

Now... if Chipmixer would also pay 25-50$ per week, would you care?  

Another important question is where he kept the backup of the seed. You know, some still keep it in e-mail or such 
(People are great at making sure they have no back doors open and forgetting to check the front door).

The initial thread is deleted, so OP can also remove the link.
And I've also supported the flag.



And he's also good on triggering the greed. "The only downside of this method is that you can use it only once" he tells. Obviously the scammed newbies will not try it twice.

Although it's not perfect, Aegis can be a good alternative. There's quite a review here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5192978.0
I'm using it for some months now.

The difference is that Aegis keeps its data password protected and can be exported/imported too.

Indeed it's a bad move to keep useful data on desktop (or on the system drive). And the seed ... in a text file, really?!

From what I've read it's a bug they had/have: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/windows-10-kb4532693-update-bug-reportedly-deletes-user-files/
Their testing department is getting weaker and weaker, and that's already well known.

From what I've read there's a chance that uninstalling that update may restore the correct desktop. And this means that the files are still there somewhere.


PS. My computer got updated today and everything seems to be in place, including a handful or reminders I have on desktop.

Imho even the far-from-subtle "trolling" is not much enforced, if by that we mean the posts deleted or more.
Imho at least the far-from-subtle "trolling" posts could be handled better. But I know it's not easy, since, yep, freedom of speech. I guess that all depends from report to report and from mod to mod.
And there's always the ultimate tool - ignore user - although it's a dangerous tool, since it could allow the forum become a cesspool without us noticing it.

This being said, my vote is to keep the rule, whether it's well enforced or not.
(Maybe we can discuss towards improving the way this is handled better.)

It's a big fuss about a feature that's not really special, other companies also have for transferring money between their own customers.
One example that comes into my mind is Revolut, where you can transfer to a phone number (may be considered less private, but it's the same thing).
The catch is that both sender and receiver have to be customers of that company since the transaction is off-chain.

Each deposit is "separate" even in the same address! They're called inputs.
When you make a transaction, that's built from one or multiple inputs. And if on input has to be "broken" in order to obtain the correct amount, the transaction will also create an output towards an address of yours. That's called "change" (it's the same concept like you have more banknotes, just they are most probably of different sizes)
However, you just type in the recipient, the amount you want to send and maybe the fee too and the wallet will do these operations for you.



Exchanges have one or more deposit addresses for an user (especially if he clicks on "change my address").
The money those addresses receive become numbers in a database.
All the trades are really operations on those numbers in exchange's internal database (for various coins/currencies/users).
When an user withdraws, the amount is subtracted from the internal database and it's sent to the address the user wants to withdraw to. The funds are sent from the exchange's wallet and it may be from any of users' deposit addresses or not, depending on how their software is made.

It's actually more complicated since the cold wallet also may come into equation and also they may consolidate their inputs from time to time (send money to themselves to not have too many inputs; this helps on reducing the tx fees)

I've also merited some of the topics/posts from the list I've found very interesting.

I find the start of the tutorial unnecessary and OS dependent (Windows)
Tails page already has step-by-step tutorials for the major operating systems one wants to install from: https://tails.boum.org/install/index.en.html

Probably this won't change the table, but right now Matrixport.com has one open slot.


Edit: it still writes "open", but the one member was accepted

Congrats! You also have an impressive number of posts, and since I know that you make quality posts, the other stats are not a surprise.