 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
They announced they reopen: https://www.okex.com/support/hc/en-us/articles/360052758931-OKEx-Official-Announcement-Reopen-of-withdrawals-and-other-related-updatesIt's still quite vague, but it seems to confirm that the issue was the arrest of Star Xu. Their description of the key backup is quite worrisome, still: The reason for the suspension of withdrawals in this specific incident was because a private key holder was not able to authorize transactions. OKEx has always used a backup mechanism for private key holders to ensure that each private key holder can trigger the activation of the backup private key in the event of long-term incapacitation, such as death or memory loss.
However, we unfortunately failed to include other specific scenarios, such as private key holders becoming unreachable due to unforeseen circumstances in our contingency plan. In this specific incident, therefore, the ultimate resolution for the private key holder’s short-term incapacitation was not a technical one. What does that mean? I interpret that they have Star Xu as a necessary part in both the main and the backup paths. That if his main co-signers went missing, he could "trigger the activation of the backup" but only he was able to do it. That could be read, alternatively, as that there were timelocks involved. However, I think that's not the most likely, for many reasons: they don't explicitly mention timelocks, their known cold wallets are plain multisig with no fancy scripts, suspension covers all coins not just Bitcoin, etc. |
|
|
|
I don't think getting paid something like 80 cents on the dollar is worth it. Why don't traders just open another account at another leverage exchange like Binance Futures or Bitmex. Then go 100x their account when they think BTC is going to go up and basically try to get liquidated on OKex and get the entire sum on the other account minus fees on both exchanges.
Wat? Even at the lowest margin tier (which is $50k max, i.e., at 100x salvages $500 max), liquidation costs amount to 0.5% which, at 100x, would take 50% of the margin. Add an additional 0.06% -> 6% and whatever the fees at the other exchange. A ruinous strategy. |
|
|
|
Please, don't. Bitcore wallet / Copay is unmaintained, at least on the Bitcoin side (they focused mostly on Bcash). Electrum has easy multisig and it is also cross-platform. |
|
|
|
|
The bot is spamming now. Did you get hacked?
|
|
|
|
https://1fox.com/ is still up. Wasn't this by the same people running the 1broker? Or were they interested only on that fiat/stocks/other trading? i would definitely withdraw any funds from 1fox ASAP until the dust settles..... A better option to be done than to be late and regretting later on when your funds is on hold.If 1Broker is being seized then we can presume that related or similar exchange will be already on the list.So we should prepare for that. Wow! Bitcoins seized ? Surely the FBI does not have access to cold wallets  Bitcoins are not seized. I was able to withdraw mine after they processed my request for 2+ days. It's alright. how? where? Total shitposting. How to withdraw if you cant access the seized site?  You could not, if it was. Fortunately enough, it is not: It is just the domain that got seized. Site is still available via hosts file redirect or, I believe, via the app. |
|
|
|
|
Funds are apparently locked. I would guess that SEC ruling affects 1Broker only, but that by CFTC could be affecting 1Fox too.
|
|
|
|
What the fuck ? 4.6 bilion ? 10% premine ? Nice scam  If max supply is 4 600 000 000 so why on coinmarketcap i see "max supply 210 000 000" ? WTFThis is about the other Bitcoin Diamond, the one that is a fork (as in blockchain fork, not codebase fork) of Bitcoin. That one has a 210M supply (10:1 airdrop w.r.t. BTC) and it is also a premined scam, just not this one in this thread. |
|
|
|
Completed a successful claim transaction a few days ago but never got any tokens.
Does this actually work?
Same here. Do not get fooled by "smart contract"; this is a scam! |
|
|
|
|
Looks prone to abuse. Does the BTC address need to be funded? I tried an unfunded address and it got accepted. If yes, at which blockheight?
What is preventing someone from creating 1000 addresses, thus claiming 5000 BTR? Or if there is need to have the addresses funded, spam them with a small amount?
|
|
|
|
The Future of American Cryptocurrency
For Lending And Voting!!!!
|
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████████
█████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒██▒███████▒▒███████████▒▒███████████████████
████████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒███▒██████▒▒███████████▒▒██████████████████████
███████████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████▒▒████▒█████▒▒███████████▒▒█████████████████████████
█████████████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████▒▒█████▒████▒▒███████████▒▒███████████████████████████
███████████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒██████▒███▒▒███████████▒▒█████████████████████████
████████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒███████▒██▒▒███████████▒▒██████████████████████
█████████████▒▒████████▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒████████▒█▒▒███████████▒▒███████████████████
██████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████▒▒████████▒▒█████▒▒█████████▒▒▒████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
Sample Signature By: Stephen Costiniano |
[/color] [/td][/tr] [/table] American crypto, but closed to Americans. Quite "interesting" indeed. |
|
|
|
|
Nice, so even at the certainly overpriced rate of $5400 per rig, you can now buy this "token" for a 5000% premium only.
Remember that each token represents a 5-millionth of a rig.
|
|
|
|
The distribution model encourages holding, month to month, so I expect to see the price steadily increase.
Not really. New issuance is fully proportional, so it is actually debasement. Because of this, no value changes hands and, rationally, the market cap should stay the same. There is an additional issuance to BTC holders too, but it is too small to be relevant. |
|
|
|
|
My black for your white byteballs:
WTS 113 GB Black (buy white GB), at 0.25 each
|
|
|
|
The transition bot has gone silent for me and does no longer reply to anything. Even if I delete my profile, it still does nothing. This is very strange. Did I trigger some IP ban or something?
It seems this is an issue with the bot. When first pairing the device with the bot, it replies with instructions to linking, however, after closing and reopening the wallet, there doesn't seem to be a way to make the bot display the linking instructions again (or anything else). Even after a full reinstall? (that is, with a newly generated wallet) Anyway, do you know what are those linking instructions? |
|
|
|
|
The transition bot has gone silent for me and does no longer reply to anything. Even if I delete my profile, it still does nothing. This is very strange. Did I trigger some IP ban or something?
|
|
|
|
Sukrim, the actual implementation has more casuistic over what is described in the paper. This is the case for both Ripple and Stellar. What makes you think that Ripple is not vulnerable to the consensus fault and subsequent reorganization that affected Stellar? (other than the fact that it has not happened yet) Edit: Consider for relevant discussion, by the inventor of the protocol: https://stellartalk.org/topic/6698-jeds-technical-explanation-of-the-ledger-fork/ |
|
|
|
Is a full working version of coinshuffle being developed? The research site says the current version was just a proof of concept for testing and not usable for real coins.
Amir says it's being worked on for Dark Wallet.
I thought they were implementing CoinJoin instead. EDIT: true, Amir confirmed that: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2ijsw1/the_coming_of_darkwallet/cl2qow6On the other hand, I see a problem with CoinShuffle. The participants are supposed to sign their messages "with their addresses"; this assumes that the inputs they provide were paid to standard P2PH addresses, but they cannot use outputs sent to P2SH (those starting with a 3, e.g., "multi sig" addresses). Participants could still be required to reveal their script and then sign their handshaking rounds with a key contained there (if there is any). |
|
|
|
I think the proyect is abandoned , but i think Catalunya needs a great proyect of a national cryptocurrency, in November there will be a referendum about independence from Spain, its a great idea to Catalunya to be backed off by an alternative currency, a innovative one, providing people a new way to improve the economic wealth of a new formed country. More than Auroracoin (i think in the beggining was a great idea), this new X cryptocurrency have all the winning cards to become a key point in the adoption of decentralied money. I think there is time left to the dev team to go ahead with the proyect and take it seriously, if not another dev team could make another launch.
I think the key is to inform political forces of pro-independency parties of the feasibility of making a national cryptocurrency, the big pro-independency party is an anticapitalism one, ERC and i think they will be interested, Spain allways arguee about Catalunya never will be aceppted in EU neither EURO currency if independence wins, having the posibility of making a strong national crypto is more than a threath to Spain.
Well, I definitely do not think that that new project should back off in light of Catalonia's independence  . You probably meant that a future Catalan currency could be backed by the new country, which is valid but unnecessary. In my view, the point of cryptocurrencies is that they do not need any backing. The Catalan people can use bitcoin or develop their own cryptocurrency without asking anybody's permission, with or without independence. The only point of national (or group-restricted) coins is if they can provide something unique that would be impossible in the universal framework, e.g., equal initial distribution. Auroracoin and all the others have failed in that only a tiny percent of the population actually claimed their share (they cannot grow now, because if they did they would be sharply unequally distributed then). Consequently, any valuable national coin should avoid any premine and airdrop, and be gradually distributed instead to provable individuals, as I proposed a few posts ago: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=518418.msg6761117#msg6761117 |
|
|
|
I cannot see how RSC could ever be valuable.
[..]
Mine RSC, sell if for XRP. If you don't like XRP you can sell if for anything (e.g. for LTC). I'd gladly sell. But selling requires someone buying, and I can't see who'd rationally buy. But someone is buying :-) ASKS Ask Price XRP / Size RSC / Sum RSC 0.02000 / 3,000.00000 / 3,000.00000 (...) Those are asks not bids! You just showed the opposite: someone is selling. To be fair, there is also a rather thin bidding-side book: I count a total of 2100 XRP (around $10-15) with most of these at 0.000001 (one millionth) XRP per RSC. Even the average bid, 0.0001 (a tenth mill) XRP per RSC, is ridiculous: electricity costs orders of magnitude more, let alone a DigitalOcean droplet. Anyway, my comment was about the fundamentals, not the actual book. The OP and a few dumb speculators are bidding these few dollars that we observe, but I still do not see how any rational research supporter would ever buy RSC in any significant amount. |
|
|
|
|
