Not easy to say exactly something on this topic whilst being in absolute possession of the truth. Normally one would need to compare to competitor forums, but there are not that many (if at all) that are significant in numbers to compare to, and less to infer flow of users from one to another (and even less if we go into quality instead of quantity of the lost users). Forum usability and looks, alongside a phone-friendly interface may help, but my gut feeling is that it is not a key driver. Phones usability is indeed important nowadays (and the Forum will have inner numbers on phone access to the forum), but I personally find that posting with quoted extracts, searching, multiple tabs, and writing more than a few lines in a post, become a pain on a phone, and would likely still be so (at least for me) on a phone-friendly environment. Then there’s the number approach comparison of users to BTC price (which is not aligned) and trends. Whilst BTC price has gone up noticeably this year, reaching the 11K zone during July 2019, the number of unique IPs and unique logged-in users did not follow the trend here (see [Chart] Bitcointalk statistics on impression counts for ads ). I wouldn’t have expected it either, since the price rise has not made much buzz, and there are no ICOs to add to the whole hype feeling. I would not expect much shift in tendency here, until BTC reached the area of the ATH again, and a heavy influence on forum newcomers may not be met until the ATH figure is well surpassed. Probably the heaviest element of influence are ICOs over the last couple of years, and that should account for a fair share of user gains and losses in recent years. |
|
|
|
Ayer les respondió Google Play a través de Twitter, indicando que: En respuesta a @metamask_io
Hi , thanks for reaching out. We have escalated your issue to the relevant team for further investigation. We appreciate your patience while we are looking into this. #AskPlayDev
https://twitter.com/GooglePlayDev/status/1210381282989035520Vamos a ver lo que tardan en resolverlo. Parece que cada vez hay más Inteligencia Artificial que requiere un posterior barrido de Inteligencia Natural … |
|
|
|
<...> I can say that it is less than 910 and more than 755, but what exactly is the number?
You can’t really tell which is your exact activity magic number, and even less if you reached your Activity requirement before Merit requirement. Nevertheless, there are two infallible methods: One is to find out what the forum’s secretSeed is (used to derive all personal Activity magic numbers): <…> update smf_members set ID_POST_GROUP=21 where ID_POST_GROUP=8 and
activity>=775 and activity>=775+conv(substr(sha1(concatenate(ID_MEMBER, secretSeed)), 1, 2), 16, 10);
The required activity level per user is suitably random for betting, but anyone who can read my code (there are a few such people) will be able to exactly predict when someone will become Legendary, so I don't really recommend it. : In order to see the code, I had to change 'concat' for 'concatenate'. Follow the link to @theymos' post to see original code (Cloudflare is blocking my post if I use 'concat'). The second is to ask @theymos to reveal your Activity magic number (I’ve seen some posts here where he has done it). The code in @theymos' post basically adds your userId to the forum’s secretSeed, performs a Sha1 over them, and then converts the first two characters returned from hex to decimal, adding the result to 775 (thus the 775-1030 range). |
|
|
|
<…>
Gracias por estar pendiente de este caso. Como es lógico, habrá que estar pendiente de las explicaciones detalladas de @enunrom. Dado que ha recuperado su cuenta, quiero entender que se ha normalizado la situación, y que el verdadero dueño de la misma la ha recuperado. Thanks for being on top of this case. The right course now will be for us to be expectant to @enunrom’s detailed explanaitions in the OP. Since he has recovered his account, I assume that the situation has been normalized, and that the real owner has regained control of his account. |
|
|
|
Data as of 27/12/2019Updated the lists in the OP (and subsequent post) to reflect the forum members that still qualify in each of those lists. Currently, on those lists there are, lacking <= 20% merits to rank-up (activity may not be met though): - 29 Heroes (on their way to Legendries) - 38 Sr. Members (on their way to Heroes) - 41 Full Members (on their way to Sr. Members) - 39 Members (on their way to Full Members) - 205 Jr. Members on their way to Members) Added this week (19): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
904524 ChiBitCTy Active 1690 658 N 807 Hero Member Sr. Member =+25 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=904524
817592 IeSua Active 1817 1134 Y* 801 Hero Member Hero Member =+1 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=817592
2530429 RapTarX Active 804 336 N 414 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2530429
1077067 LibertValance Active 1369 784 Y 406 Sr. Member Full Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1077067
724243 hornetsnest Active 496 496 Y 219 Full Member Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=724243
2269783 MagicByt3 Active 434 392 Y 204 Full Member Old Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2269783
1277439 El-Cezeri Active 683 238 N 203 Full Member Old Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1277439
2649358 Ya3rob Active 194 168 N 201 Full Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2649358
1218995 samcrypto Active 2041 756 Y 200 Full Member Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1218995
1291688 Senius Active 109 109 N 95 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1291688
1297306 haloxon Active 908 672 Y 81 Member Member =+7 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1297306
1855426 Iamtutut Active 1143 672 Y 80 Member Old Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1855426
2377947 kartepe Active 1591 448 Y 80 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2377947
2705337 newalias Active 30 30 N 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2705337
1273026 Bagiira Active 66 66 Y 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1273026
828118 Pang. Active 116 116 Y 8 Jr. Member Old Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=828118
2002328 nixplatform Active 30 30 N 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2002328
2099283 Bodarbala Active 314 224 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2099283
2026929 jagaban Active 346 294 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2026929
Removed (*) this week (11): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
1039323 Goran_ Active 4749 812 Y* 1022 Hero Member Full Member =+5 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1039323
1052091 CryptopreneurBrainboss Active 2287 658 N 1010 Hero Member Member =+2 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1052091
300014 DaveF Active 1897 1876 - 1000 Legendary Hero Member =+17 / =1 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=300014
1292764 tranthidung Active 2845 672 N 1019 Hero Member Old Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1292764
1059082 hugeblack Active 4181 910 - 1000 Legendary Full Member =+2 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1059082
1239188 Bttzed03 Active 3322 812 Y* 527 Hero Member Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1239188
1096237 tbct_mt2 Active 1633 728 N 500 Hero Member Full Member =+1 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1096237
1339358 gospodin Active 4763 714 N 508 Hero Member Old Era Newbie =+2 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1339358
943729 skarais Active 1692 896 Y* 514 Hero Member Sr. Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=943729
1903411 BITCOIN4X Active 440 378 N 308 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1903411
2453797 Ljunior Active 172 172 N 108 Full Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2453797
(*) Due to enough merits for the next rank, or being banned.
|
|
|
|
Update 27/12/2019:The dashboard gives you access to anyone’s complete merit history in the TX tab, surpassing the 120 day limit. Link: BitcoinTalk Merit Dashboard. Recent: Google Sheet Tabular sumary for all merited accounts (updated weekly): (user_id, name, datecreated, rank, posts, activity, merit, MeritReceived, startedwith, meritsent, probableInitialRank, url) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mD6cdsQNJ8dauTL-XLi8I0oDG5WBl0z0NeKzXTByNyw/edit?usp=sharingUpdated the Merit Dashboard to reflect the most recent sMerit available data: Total sMerit: 552.522 Total Txs: 281.404 From Users: 21.486 To Users: 32.143 minDate: 2018-01-24 22:12:21 maxDate: 2019-12-27 02:39:43 Aggregate awarded sMerit for the last complete week (16/12/2019 .. 22/12/2019) is 6.010 which is up 31,54% from the previous week. In addition, there are 2 new Legendary members and 4 more Heroes this week: DaveF -> Legendary from Hero Member during Merit System kick-off. hugeblack -> Legendary from Full Member during Merit System kick-off. Bttzed03 -> Hero from Member during Merit System kick-off. gospodin -> Hero from Old Era Newbie during Merit System kick-off. skarais -> Hero from Sr. Member during Merit System kick-off. tbct_mt2 -> Hero from Full Member during Merit System kick-off. Note: If anyone wants to know how many merits they earned per day (as opposed to per month) and/or when was the last time so and so merited someone or vice-versa (or see the merits received per month from such and such), that is achievable through the Personal Summary Tab (by clicking on meriters/merited names and or changing the view to day or week instead on month). This is pretty powerful, although not trivial to use. If anyone want’s to give it a go and encounters issues, tell me and I’ll detail the process.
|
|
|
|
<…> Hay que cambiar contraseñas de vez en cuando, yo para hacerlo fácil voy añadiendo caracteres a las mías <…>
Creo que todos/muchos hemos usado este sistema. Al fin y al cabo, memorizar tantas contraseñas como hacemos hoy en día no es sencillo, y más aún si hay una política de cambio de contraseñas cada x tiempo (acceso a servidores por ejemplo). No obstante, si alguien se hace con una contraseña tuya antigua, por fuerza bruta es probable que sacasen tu contraseña nueva, dado que es de las cosas que entiendo se intentaría (añadir caracteres y probar permutaciones sobre éstos). |
|
|
|
<…>
One thing to point out is that feedback (be it negative, neutral or positive) does not abide by some strict ruleset to consult on the do’s and don’ts. There are a few posts here on the Forum that point in a certain direction, and guidelines created by forum members, but there are some controversial and contradictory uses of the Trust System that often bring along heated discussion (when not retaliation). Of course from an operational point of view, some feedback is, on first impression, more relevant than others, since it affects the numbers that we see on the Trust Scores. DT in general, or those included in your Customized Trust list (if you have one) will be more relevant in that sense, although all feedback should be read to try to get a general composition (alongside considering who submitted the feedback, and the reason that can sometimes be clearly derived). I personally prefer the more core commercial related motives for providing feedback (that includes scams), but rather differ from those related to merit abuse, clear gut retaliation, and I am even sceptical about tagging bought accounts, lest they move on to shady actions (I’d prefer a clear rule here, that a subjective tag by means of negative feedback). I do not support this course of action at all (account purchasing), but since it not disallowed per-se (but rather frowned upon), it does not clearly mean that there will be any commercial damage (potential to some extent yet, but so is any account potentially). |
|
|
|
… at least for some of us … -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Felices Navidades y buena entrada de año a todos, o como he dicho en el foro en inglés:
Merit Xmas and a halving new year!
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
13upczNkBd7t3yP9Mp5Lg7bgX7ewKFYkjA
INEc8/k/5MS/zSs0PBQrM6G17+Uw5FEwBqQCQLZPwOP2BX799xcucW2ktWvehgAuGQJI46xyMrqxfP6LgCJ9QU8=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On christmas eve, I though that it would be interesting to create a thread on my local board (see Felices fiestas, con un mensaje BTC firmado … resuelto - Happy holidays, with a signed BTC message … solved) where people could place their xMas greetings, using a signed message for it. To make it more interesting, ideally, people would be using their original BTC address used when (and if) they signed their message on the Stake your Bitcoin address here thread, which is important to evidence account ownership starting point in case we need to recover our account. Now the interesting lesson some of us encountered there, and even more so me, was that signing a message from the original address after some time is not always that simple (nor user friendly), and that it is good exercise to perform every now and then. In my specific case, I originally signed my message from a Ledger Nano S alongside the BTC Chrome app. Now that app is depreciated (although I still have access to it), and has been replaced by Ledger Live. Fine, let’s sign the message from there … where’s the damn option now ? … no where … it hasn’t been added to Ledger Live .. now what ? … To cut a long story short, I ended-up installing Electrum (newbie here with it), and was unable to find my original Legacy address there (the address has 0 balance and 0 TXs historically). I played around with the derivation path (which I though was not part of the solution – and it wasn’t), the xPub, and a few other things, and still could not see my original address amongst the 20 displayed in the Electrum Legacy wallet by default. I tried to sign a message by manually feeding the address, and, if I recall correctly, Electrum stated that the address was not included in the wallet I had created. It wasn’t, until I played around with the console that I got to finally see my address, after extending from 20 to 200 addresses by means of: wallet.change_gap_limit(200)
wallet.synchronize()
After doing that, I could now see my original BTC address in the list of addresses in my Electrum wallet, and, at last, sign my xMas BTC message from my original BTC address (shown above). Having said all that, this thread is not about a specific hardware/software wallet, but a gentle reminder to, perhaps, try out the Bitcoin Message signing process every now and then, especially after important updates or change of the wallet being used, or simply to remember the process. Ideally, trying out with the original address used in the Stake your Bitcoin address here thread. Note: The informal formal thread to verify addresses should remain the same: Stake your Bitcoin address here. This current thread you are on here does not guarantee quoting and verifying messages, and is intended solely as a reminder to a, what seems to me, good practice (+ xMas wishes). |
|
|
|
|
Creo que en el mercado institucional es de gran potencial, pero quizás esté algo agazapado a falta de tener un marco normativo claro y conciso. Al fin y al cabo, las inversiones con riesgo se asumen, pero el terreno de juego para ellos debe estar claramente delimitado, y ahí quedan carencias por cubrir.
|
|
|
|
Bueno, ha costado algo, pero ya lo tengo, usando la misma dirección que en el hilo de firmas del foro : -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Felices Navidades y buena entrada de año a todos, o como he dicho en el foro en inglés: Merit Xmas and a halving new year! -----BEGIN SIGNATURE----- 13upczNkBd7t3yP9Mp5Lg7bgX7ewKFYkjA INEc8/k/5MS/zSs0PBQrM6G17+Uw5FEwBqQCQLZPwOP2BX799xcucW2ktWvehgAuGQJI46xyMrqxfP6LgCJ9QU8= -----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Resumen del proceso: Tal y como comentaba en el OP, Ledger Live aún no permite realizar firmas de mensajes. Pensaba que estaba abocado a firmar desde una nueva dirección, pero persistí en intentar hacerlo desde la dirección legacy original que utilicé (que carece de saldo ni mivimientos): - Intenté lanzar la antigua aplicación de Bitcoin Chrome que se usaba para manejar los BTCs del Ledger Nano S. Esta versión está descatalogada, y no se debe usar, pero quería ver qué sucedía. Una vez abierta la aplicación, enseguida localicé mi dirección de firma, pero al intentar firmar con ella (para probarlo), el Hash que veía en el Ledger Nano S difería del mostrado en la aplicación … como tampoco quería usar este método, ahí lo dejé, pero es raro que no cuadrase el Hash (estoy bastante seguro de que no tengo un KeyLogger, pero estaré al tanto). - Me bajé Electrum (novato aquí). Validé los hash de firma del aplicativo, y lo instalé. Al enlazar con el Ledger Nano S y crear la Cartera Legacy, no localizaba mi dirección de firma original entre las 20 direcciones mostradas en Electrum por defecto. Nada … a probar jugar con los paths de derivación (que no me parecía lógico) … y con el xPub y algunas cosas más … nada. Lo raro era que el orden de las direcciones en Electrum no eran el mismo orden que en Bitcoin Chome (ni el número de ellas) … y así hasta dar con la tecla: wallet.change_gap_limit(200)
wallet.synchronize()
Lo anterior, tecleado en la consola de Electrum, permite ver 200 direcciones (según parámetro) en la Legacy wallet, y, al haber ampliado de 20 a 200 direcciones, ya apareció mi preciada dirección 13upczNkBd7t3yP9Mp5Lg7bgX7ewKFYkjA, por lo que ya podía proceder a realizar la firma … Muy user-friendly no ha sido el proceso … |
|
|
|
En el seclog veo que hay tres registros al respecto del proceso seguido en tu caso (no sé si son todos, dado que hay tan solo un mes de datos): December 25, 2019, 05:49:06 PM - enunrom - password reset via email
December 25, 2019, 03:25:01 PM - enunrom - manual recovery, previously-queued ownership change completed
December 18, 2019, 02:32:15 PM - enunrom - manual recovery, ownership change queued (completed)
Lo interesante sería que, cuanto tengas tiempo, pudieses detallar un poco el proceso completo de recuperación para dejar tu caso de uso patente aquí. Específicamente, creo que sería bueno conocer las fechas asociadas a cada paso que has tenido que realizar, a fin de que los miembros del foro de nuestra sección local se hagan una idea. Veo que en Noviembre 2019 publicaste un post en Altcoins (con un gap de año y medio con anterioridad), por lo que asumo que has tenido que seguir el nuevo protocolo de recuperación de cuentas, que es sustancialmente más ágil que el protocolo anterior. Si además tienes noción de cómo te hackearon la cuenta, sería interesante conocerlo. Ya puestos: http://brainwalletx.github.io/#verify?vrAddr=16HsACYWFjgNEDNFYG9TKEuAw8SoTmbZNg&vrMsg=26%2F12%2F2019%0AFelices%20fiestas%20para%20todos%2C%20estoy%20encantado%20de%20haber%20recuperado%20mi%20cuenta.%0AAtentamente%0AEnunrom&vrSig=H6v5a8apt3y3InjtydXPAfikG2hUPrJRSeHXDvRXJFAQT9Q%2Folsj2hZu2JeIrw3s2pamYrG6HrdXXsznmkB7rsA%3DArchivo: http://archive.ph/pFVFgP.D. Ver también Felices fiestas, con un mensaje BTC firmado … fallido (por ahora-casi resuelto) |
|
|
|
<…>
I figure the lesser (in terms of number of posts) local boards may not really have a Merit Source, but many of them certainly do. I find that earning merit on my local board (Spanish) is not currently difficult at all, due to the number of posters not being that large, and the regular presence of a merit source or two. On the other hand, the number of merits awarded per post is not large (I’m partly to blame there), so decent posters will get merited, but may take more time to rank-up in comparison to equivalently good posters on other boards. |
|
|
|
<…>
I don’t find it to be as you mention for the most, but everyone has got a different story and perspective. There are a bunch of accounts that do get merited regularly, due to the content of their posts, and, in the process, they may create some for themselves some kind of lateral posting reputation towards the account, as a result of the sum of the posts the account has made. Altcoin Discussion and Bitcoin discussion are not amongst the most merited boards as you say (that is where you post most), but more likely, the effect of the sheer number of posts that are made there, make one’s posts disappear into the oblivion within no longer that a few hours. If you want to take a peak at merits per board over the last few months (I’ve filtered from July 2019 onwards for a more recent view on distribution): https://public.tableau.com/shared/YZB289526?:display_count=y&:origin=viz_share_link |
|
|
|
|
Recientemente estuve hablando con un YouTuber-to-be, y me comentaba que hacen cosas francamente extrañas hoy en día. Me puso como ejemplo que YouTube clasifica automáticamente algunos videos como orientado para un público infantil (aun sin serlo), lo cual provoca cambios en la visibilidad en las búsquedas, además de una bajada en la monetarización. Además, si utilizas ciertas palabras claves en los mismos, YouTube te penaliza en el revenue, sin que sean palabras tremebundas de por sí.
La censura de los casos citados no sé es puntual, automática o manual, pero denota que, aun en el mejor de los casos, sus procesos arrojan falsos positivos que son molestos. Veamos que cariz toman y si es algo recurrente o puntual.
|
|
|
|
<...>
Mensaje:
I am bitserve, and this is my segwit bitcoin signature for my account on Bitcointalk. Date is 26 dec 2019. FELICES FIESTAS!
Dirección: 33FTcRm9yVHTT5a69MHRjbag2xVAHrXRP3
Firma: ICD8c9UF3l7eGdJVHh7spByh4xZQsQ21M7mLUhpluti5STv+pqiAKIqfXGiFSm16Z4xS367bh/OoSE7OK0F58rI=
<...>
Lo he verificado con Electrum. He visto que, en el hilo Stake your Bitcoin address here algunos han usado como (pre-)evidencia un pantallazo como el anterior. <...> si, esto puede dar para un buen hilo en el idioma que sea.  La idea es precisamente estimular que la gente que dejó hace tiempo su firma BTC en el hilo Stake your Bitcoin address here, verifique que ahora siguen pudiendo firmar usando la misma dirección BTC. Edit: ... y por si acaso...: http://archive.ph/zpmsS |
|
|
|
|
Estoy de comidas copiosas y prolongadas, así que no he podido acabar este tema del todo. Estoy com el móvil, y así me cuesta lo mío escribir. A ver si puedo acabar mañana.
Yo he llegado a enlazar con Electrum, donde soy novato, y está mañana me estuve peleando para intentar localizar mi dirección de firma del foro. La que usé en su momento, para más señas, carece de saldo ni movimientos. Esto tampoco ayuda, dado que no figuraba en las 20 direcciones de la cartera de Electrum que creé (legal). Al final, tras batallar lo suyo, amplíe mediante la consola de 20 a 200 direcciones y voila.. Ya veo el Electrum mi dirección legacy utilizada para firmar. Iba a probar firmar, pero la llamada de los eventos sociales tiene prioridad hoy... Mañana más...
Esto creo que da para un buen hilo el el foro en inglés.
|
|
|
|
|
He tenido que leer el OP y el artículo varias veces para entenderlo bien. Serán las vacaciones y las comidas copiosas, pero he tardado algo en comprender que se atribuye la campaña de amenazas y desalojos en Rusia a uno de los afectados del robo del Exchange Wex, que en un afán por recuperar sus 120 Bitcoins robados, ha (supuestamente) orquestado esta campaña, a fin de extorsionar a terceros para recuperar como poco un equivalente a lo que le robaron en el Exchange.
Sea como sea, el despecho de este personaje dudo que sea una acción unilateral, y probablemente se haya asociado con otros a fin de cubrir más terreno (750.000 evacuados por acción de una sola persona parece una brutalidad). Digamos que es bastante distinto del usuario tipo, y algo de predisposición mental a todo esto debería tener.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
