|
If the faraday cage's gaps are big enough to let light through, then I would think that a small USB cable could fit through the gaps to charge the phone.
|
|
|
|
On August 15th 2010, somebody found a buffer overflow exploit in the wxBitcoin client (which is now called Bitcoin Core) and used it to create 184,467,440,737 BTC (184 billion) out of thin air ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=822.0 ). Just 5 hours later a new version of the Bitcoin client was published with a fix but in addition the blockchain was hard forked and the offending tx removed from it. If a serious issue like this was ever found in the Bitcoin Core client again, would the offending txs be removed again? if so, then why doesn't this happen when bugs are found in other clients? Does Bitcoin Core have some kind of privilege in this sense? or was this just a once off thing, or did the small bitcoin community at the time manage to get everyone to agree to have this tx removed? I don't think Bitcoin Core has this kind of privilege really. The offending txs were removed not because they were made in Bitcoin Core but because it was a massive consensus breaking bug that caused the problem. It will probably happen with other clients too if something comes from those clients that breaks consensus or completely messes with the blockchain like making 184 Billion BTC out of thin air. but i doubt that such a major bug will happen again.
I wouldn't count on it. Heartbleed went for 2.5 years before being discovered. The shellshock vulnerabilities have been around ever since bash was first created in 1989. Even if we don't know about a vulnerability doesn't mean that they don't exist. |
|
|
|
I think each answer is 5 characters that combine in a private key.
You still would need it to start with a 5 right? and private keys are 51 characters? We are then missing a character (or we switch the 5 and 2 or what was the hint on that?) They could also start with a K or L if they are uncompressed. Also, some of them might not be 5 characters. I think number 1 is more than 5. Has anyone figured out number 6 yet? |
|
|
|
|
If you need someone to do Java coding or Android app developing, I can help.
|
|
|
|
Help me with the hex to image conversion! Here's my hex code: http://pastebin.com/htR5DVnUI put it in a hex editor and save it as a.jpg but my image viewer says the file cannot be loaded/opened! It works for me. Try a different hex editor Here is the image  |
|
|
|
|
Has anyone figured out points 6 7 8 and 10?
|
|
|
|
It is just a Rick Roll, move on. |
|
|
|
1: oocm/h.kog/tp9muitnJ/r.pgkY.i: Scytale cipher + reordering = https://i.imgur.com/Yok9Jko.pngBUtIDONTWANTTOGOAm
ONGMADPEOPLEALICER
EMARKEDOHYOUCANTHE
LPTHATSAIDtHECATWE
REALLMADHEREIMMADY
OUREMADHOWDOYOUKNO
WIMMAdSAIDALICEYOU
mUSTBESAIDTHECATOU
YOUWOULDNTHAVEcOME
HErEDEADEnDLOOKFUT
HER intresting, quite hard to read tho, might be a quote ? Pretty Sure it is a quote from Alice in Wonderland. I'm thinking there is a theme of that here The text is BUtI DONT WANT TO GO AmONG MAD PEOPLE ALICE
REMARKED OH YOU CANT HELP THAT SAID THE CAT WERE
ALL MAD HERE IM MAD YOURE MAD HOW DO YOU KNOW
IM MAd SAID ALICE YOU mUST BE SAID THE CAT OR
YOU WOULDNT HAVE cOME
HErE DEAD EnD LOOK FUTHER and the red numbers map to |
|
|
|
So I am a little stuck with a small issue of ip bans. Bitcointalk will ban my server's ip if it makes too many requests at once. The limit is 1 request per second. The way that I have written my program is that it will request all of the pages where it shows the posts of a person and use those to calculate the potential activity. The issue is that if multiple people use it at once, then I will be violating the 1 request per second rule and get an ip ban. Thus, I need your help to brainstorm ways to solve this problem So far I have tried - Asking Theymos to whitelist the IP (No response yet)
- Doing the requests browser side (doesn't work due to same-origin policy)
And I have thought of but not yet tried - creating a queue where one person goes at a time
- doubling the wait time two 2 seconds per request thus allowing 2 simultaneous requests
- Using something that can distribute each potential activity calculation to another server
What you guys suggest I will add below. - Ask Bitcoin_BOy$ who manages Bit-x sig campaign bot (suggested by ColderThanIce)
|
|
|
|
Hey, so I have actually made my own bot that also does price estimation for accounts. It is released as open source, and I am working on getting the website up and working. I made a thread in project development here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1142314.0. The only problem with it is it might get ip banned because of too many requests which is something I am working on right now. You need to only request a page from the forum each second. Otherwise you will run in problems. It works when only one person is using it, but when multiple people are, then it runs into some issues. Also, longer delay times also means that people with thousands of posts will take a long time to calculate. And did you know that the timeframes arent fully exact?
Yes. 1210000 seconds which is a little more than two weeks. |
|
|
|
|
So I have finished the final coding and it is ready for deployment. The only issue is that too many requests will result in an ip ban from Bitcointalk, which is an issue I am working on right now. I will update back when the site is up and running.
|
|
|
|
Hey, so I have actually made my own bot that also does price estimation for accounts. It is released as open source, and I am working on getting the website up and working. I made a thread in project development here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1142314.0. The only problem with it is it might get ip banned because of too many requests which is something I am working on right now. |
|
|
|
|
So if I understand this correctly, the funds in the guarantee message are locked away for 100+ blocks if the block that goes with it is valid and broadcasted within a given amount of time. If the block is not broadcasted or not valid, then the funds that are part of the guarantee message will be split either among the miners who produced a valid block off of that guarantee or as a transaction fee for a later block.
I don't see how this provides near instantaneous block propagation. It is still just like what happens now with headers being broadcasted first except this comes with some monetary guarantee that the header is valid.
|
|
|
|
Very nice project indeed. Since coding is out of my league, How do I use your code ? How's worth my account ? case "excellent":
qualitymultiplier = 1.10;
break;
case "good":
qualitymultiplier = 1.025;
break;
case "fair":
qualitymultiplier = 1.00;
break;
case "poor":
qualitymultiplier = 0.975;
break;
case "bad":
qualitymultiplier = 0.95;
break;
how can I measure the exact result to determine " execellent" , "good" , etc ? By quality ? By quantity ? To use the script that ColderThanIce helpfully posted while I work on the actual thing, you copy the text to notepad and save it as an html file. Then open up the file in a browser and fill out the form. My website (when it is done) will not require that you fill out the form, just the uid. It will pull all of the information from Bitcointalk for you so you don't have to do it yourself. |
|
|
|
How did this bug happen? I haven't seen any details by bc.i.
Somehow bc.i showed a fake tx. How? Whats the tx hex? Wat this signed properly? etc etc.. May questions.
I think they were sybil attacked. My idea of how they were attacked is as follow: Somehow bc.i was disconnected from all of the nodes they had previously been connected to. Then an attacker proceeded to perform a sybil attack by attempting to make sure that bc.i's node was connected only to the attacking nodes. The attacker then created an orphan chain starting at block 1 and fed that to blockchain.info. Then they included several transactions which spent the early coins and made it seem as if Satoshi had moved his Bitcoin. Since many people use bc.i, they were tricked into thinking that Satoshi had moved his coins. What I posted above is absolutely what happened, but is what I think is most likely to have happened. |
|
|
|
|
Buying trust is frowned upon here. It should not be a service. While it doesn't really matter if you aren't on Default Trust, positive trust means that you are trustworthy and people with more positive trust get away with less restrictions. They may be trusted to not need an escrow or not provide collateral when taking a loan. If someone on Default Trust is selling trust, they will probably receive negative trust and be removed from DT.
|
|
|
|
It's like a faucet right? And how much Bitcoin can be earn by doing this? It isn't a faucet. It is actually a captcha solving service which uses people to solve captchas. They pay up to 0.04 BTC per 10000 correct captchas. |
|
|
|
Just see this, and it is a good service  However, this will means a newbie of 14 activity, neutral trust and normal post quality worth 0.0105 BTC! Maybe you can adjust the algorithm? Yeah, I noticed. I think it is going to have to be a logarithmic scale instead of linear. That will require some more time to figure out. For now, I have a disclaimer  |
|
|
|
In my personal opinion, GUIs are a pain for the programmer. You can't 'prefer' that the OP concludes it as a GUI, since it might mean extra work, especially if they weren't doing it for web, and they're doing it for free as a service to the community. GUIs require more time, effort, and maintenance. At least for non-web contexts, a command-line application is a completely reasonable way of doing things.
GUIs are a pain, but fortunately GWT is very helpful and this gui is incredibly simple. Here is a screenshot  The code is available on github now. You can browse the code at https://github.com/achow101/BitcointalkAccountPricer. Pull requests are welcomed as are donations to 16mT7jrpkjnJBD7a3TM2awyxHub58H6r6Z. I will update when I get a server setup for the website. For now, you can download GWT, compile the code yourself, and do your own price estimation. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
