The amount of worthless advice in this thread is amazing. Suggesting trash like blockchain.info as a wallet provider, which goes against the very nature of Bitcoin is absurd. can any one tell me how to use bitcoin core qt without download the whole 40gbblol
that will end my internet storge:)
If you want to reap the full benefits of both privacy and security you have to be verifying everything yourself. This means that you have to download the whole blockchain, which is about ~100 GB today. If your bandwidth is somewhat limited, you could spread this download out over a couple months and use something like Electrum (not web wallets) in the meantime. If you have storage capacity issues, then you can use pruning which will take up only about 2-3 GB of space. However, this does not save you from having to download everything. |
|
|
|
Last I've heard, Poloherb was in the possession of this coin when I've asked regarding the charity auction. Don't take my word for it though. You should probably just message them about it to check.
I messaged them a few days ago and got no response so I am assuming they do not have it Not necessarily. You need to be more patient. It is highly likely that minerjones can give you a confirmatory response as to who owns the coin. |
|
|
|
|
Last I've heard, Poloherb was in the possession of this coin when I've asked regarding the charity auction. Don't take my word for it though. You should probably just message them about it to check.
|
|
|
|
Just ignore him/her. It's just another random spammer that is unable to read, understand and follow the campaign rules. Back when I used to manage campaigns, there were a lot of users that lacked a single posts to receive payments for those periods but even though I felt sorry for them, I had no choice to deny them and what you've done in this case is completely correct and based on the campaign rules itself.
That's the only correct way handle something like that. Rules are rules, and should be bent by no one and for no one. Not sure why a lot of "Legendary" members don't follow, read and understand rules and it's very annoying (given that they've been here the longest).
This is why an activity based system is misleading and wrong. People should either only selectively get 'promoted' to such a rank or selectively get demoted based on their actions/knowledge. |
|
|
|
|
If it doesn't broadcast automatically due to connection loss, you can:
1) Manually push your raw TX to a service such as a blockchain.info that offers this functionality.
2) Open your wallet again when you have internet access. It should re-broadcast it again to your connected peer(s).
|
|
|
|
Hello, #1 the nsa can easily manipulate the value of bitcoin as they made sha-128, and have super computers that can out race the hash algarythoms.
No, they can't. It looks like someone isn't familiar with cryptography. Why are you making baseless statements here? #2 with a quantum computer, (if you don't know what they are here is a link http://www.dwavesys.com/tutorials/background-reading-series/quantum-computing-primer ) it would be very fucking easy to solve mass amounts of chain blocks at a rate that the "currency" would lose all value, as either the system will crash, it would become unminable, or the owner of the quantum computer would earn so many bitcoins it would deflate the value to nothing. Wrong. Hashrate jump -> difficulty adjust -> everything is normal. Besides, Quantum computing is likely not going to be optimal for mining, and development in that area has a very long way to go. The claims by dwavesys are mostly exaggerated. You don't even need cryptographers to tell you this, physicists are enough. bitcoin is only just fucking numbers anyway. a fucking primer to try and make people believe in a financial system that has no physical tender, so they can eliminate money to control and monitor everyone.......
No. Stop spreading bullshit. Quantum computers are no "silver bullet" for bitcoin.
The *only* (known) problem is ECDSA, but that can be changed via a fork into a quantum-proof algorithm. |
|
|
|
Repeatedly bumping them without lowering the price could be interpreted as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Exactly. I am finding these daily bumped threads by bitmarket annoying as well.
-snip-
Even if the absurd asking prices are ignored, it is quite irritating. It is their right to be irrational in that aspect, i.e. to ask for such prices. However, whenever someone does something like this instead of opening a single sales thread like some do (e.g. Owlcatz, miffman, myself et al.) it causes unnecessary clutter. I even think that auctions should be grouped together into lots if someone plans to run a few at the same time (e.g. occasional flood caused by wheelz). On the other hand, I find this much more acceptable than the equivalent in sales thread since these 'waves' of auctions only last for a short period of time. |
|
|
|
Even thought I understand the frustration that people may be after getting scammed, not doing a proper report is really inconvenient. It takes other people more time to review / process than it should. Thank you for providing the link.
I have also tagged the user in question. |
|
|
|
Going into Jan 2017, the 100GB prediction is accurate, so still on track for 700GB blockchain by the time of the next halving.
SegWit acceptance and or an increase in the block size will cement the prediction.
Wasn't your prediction already debunked, without Segwit or a block size increase?[1] The maximum that it can grow per year is around ~52 GBs right now (assuming all blocks are 1 MB and found every 10 minutes on average). Due to finite rules, you can't assume a % monthly growth (since the 'amount it grew' will be increasing as well). [1] I don't remember where we left this thread at and I don't want to read all that franky1 stuff to verify either.
is not that a good thing  -snip- Obviously it's a bad thing, and the rest of your post is useless. -snip-
You should stop spamming since you're very obvious. |
|
|
|
I've reported the user in question at least once via PM. Good luck with this. 1) Is this rule still acutal, and if yes, does it affect all childs of the marketplace, including collectibles?
It should be. 2) Have reports about this simply not been handled, or an I wrong in my interpretation of the rules?
Your interpretation is not wrong. 4) What would be the most easy form for a report like this and how would the handling moderator prefer to get the information submitted?
If it were up to me, I'd prefer it done via PM. This question should be answered by only two active people that are able to handle it though. |
|
|
|
Banning Round 9: The following users were banned: xavier77
vennali
rally
freedoge.co
kodes88
Chemistry1988
If you have questions regarding your ban (or other personal questions), then PM me. Do not post here. |
|
|
|
Banning accounts isn't a solution since the spammers will create other one...
It is a solution in some way, because they'll get tired registering new e-mails and accounts. Question here is if it would require a lot more time for the MODs (or more MODs). Handling newbie accounts shouldn't be a problem considering the amount of patrollers on the forum. The only solution is to educate users..
I'm pretty sure this is not a solution nor is it a feasible one. Given a smaller and finite number of users, it probably would be. However, given a unknown amount of random newcomers I would say that it is not. |
|
|
|
|
I have always thought that the current policy of the forum is flawed. Even though it's impossible to properly fend of all scams, it is possible to prevent the obvious ones (or at least prevent any further damage as soon as someone gets scammed). Not everyone is smart enough (in this regard) to not get scammed here. Joining and getting scammed early on does not bode well for the early user experience.
|
|
|
|
But think of the time you could save yourself every day from having to moderate >320,000 posts?  True. However, keep in mind that: 1) I wouldn't be doing my 'job' then.  2) If I close an eye on 1 thread, the only fair/equal action is to do the same for all threads. Suddenly you get people talking everywhere about everything. This cat can handle it for now (mostly posts that were created after I started moderating here though). When you delete a post, you should state why it has been deleted to the respective poster.
That's just not feasible and not how things currently work. You get an automated response which tells you that it's likely an off-topic post.
I do miss the train/rocket pictures. You need to step up your game! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
