 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
I think it is important to add to the guidelines that posters in this section should not create locked or self-moderated threads. Free and open discussion of the linked articles is very important, and moderation should be left to properly authorized moderators.
Self-moderation will inevitably lead to endless censorship accusations, recriminations and flames - as we have seen recently when one poster refused to eliminate the dupe post because the earlier post linking to the same article was self-moderated.
I 100 percent agree. No need to censor the press section. Thanks Edit. This is not currently being followed. Ill give it a few days then start making non self moderated threads so the mods can get rid of the self moderated ones. Thx Let me break it down to you. You're a dog eating Thai scum. Your kind is not even part of the human race. Your subspecies shouldn't even be allowed to leave the boundaries of the shithole you call a country. If I ever get the chance to kill a single Thai, Cambodian or Vietnamese piece of subhuman garbage before I die, I'll die knowing I did something good for mankind. |
|
|
|
I think it is important to add to the guidelines that posters in this section should not create locked or self-moderated threads. Free and open discussion of the linked articles is very important, and moderation should be left to properly authorized moderators.
Self-moderation will inevitably lead to endless censorship accusations, recriminations and flames - as we have seen recently when one poster refused to eliminate the dupe post because the earlier post linking to the same article was self-moderated.
Translation: you're butthurt because I'm the author of most topics on the Press forum and because I post most articles before you do. Don't worry, I'm requesting that my account here be cancelled and you may have your little "kingdom" back. |
|
|
|
This is an open invitation to all illegal groups everywhere. Please feel free to make me an accessory. Send me all your Bitcoins.
Damn, you beat me to it!  |
|
|
|
Managed to sync with no problems on my first try (after deleting the old blockchain data). I'm on the same chain as you (block 253128 as I post this). |
|
|
|
Noone was saying Bitcoin is compromised by this. This is the Off-topic forum - description: "Other topics that might be of interest to bitcoiners" - and cryptography related news definitely fit that criteria. * * * Major US security company warns over NSA link to encryption formulahttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/21/rsa-emc-warning-encryption-system-nsa"RSA, the security arm of EMC, sends email to customers over default random number generator which uses weak formula." |
|
|
|
I think the problem is a slow CPU and a slow HDD.
In case it helps... the humble PC I use to mine alt coins has an Athlon 64 X2 4000+ (2100 MHz), 6 GB DDR2 666 and a rather slow Samsung HD160JJ 160 GB SATA II HD, running Windows 7Garbage Ultimate 64 (my main PC runs the last decent OS MicroShit produced, XP 64). I just made a test - I copied my Bitcoin data directory (which I updated about a week ago) from my main PC to the mining PC and it was able to sync Bitcoin-Qt 0.8.5 without any problems - and scrypt mining at the same time. I'm no expert on the blockchain structure, but I was wondering if maybe some parts you've already downloaded haven't become corrupted. Have you tried running Bitcoin-Qt (or bitcoind) with the -reindex and/or the -checkblocks=0 parameters? (That will take a LONG time, be warned!) Your best bet would really be to download the whole blockchain using the current official blockchain torrent and then import it following the instructions on that thread. |
|
|
|
This should be moved to service discussion for the whatever Casino he was dealing with. This isn't a Bitcoin problem, it's user error on the part of the end user or the casino.
Yes, but on the other hand, the thread turned out very informative on a few aspects of the whole process of transactions and fees that many people have lots of doubts about, so I'd leave it here if it were up to me to decide. |
|
|
|
No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.
That's great information. Do you know if something like that could happen if someone sent Bitcoins from the standard Bitcoin client with -paytxfee=0 ? Without basing it in unconfirmed inputs: As far as I know the wallet would keep on broadcasting the transaction and try to get it through (and you wouldn't see the Bitcoins in there as they are marked as reserved for transaction). So you would have to screw around the wallet a bit to get rid of that. That's more of a guess than knowing though ^^ That raises another interesting question: how to make that broadcasting stop in case the sender realizes he has set the transaction fee too low and wants to correct it? |
|
|
|
No, it has nothing to do with fees. The input to the transaction was taken from previous unconfirmed transactions. The network couldn't verify the input as existing as it is unconfirmed so the transaction was rejected. The casino will have to update their routines to handle building transactions correctly.
That's great information. Do you know if something like that could happen if someone sent Bitcoins from the standard Bitcoin client with -paytxfee=0 ? |
|
|
|
OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?
Good question. Anybody knows an answer? They were never sent in the first place then and are still on the old address. (might only be that some clients don't show them, because they are marked as "reserved to be sent") Bitcoins are never "lost in cyberspace" they are always on a Bitcoin address. That makes a lot of sense. But isn't it kind of pointless for a client to generate a transaction number for a transaction that is never going to occur? That's what's confusing me. And from what the OP said, it seems that at some point the transaction was showing on blockchain.info. If you look in the other thread, you'll see what happened that a transaction was sent out that relied on a previous unconfirmed transaction. The second transaction was rejected and removed from the network. The client creates a transaction number and broadcasts the transaction, so that miners can grab and include them (and blockchain can show the transaction), but until it's included in a block the Bitcoins didn't move.
So, in a nutshell: the Bitcoins were sent from an address belonging to the casino and blockchain.info showed the transaction until it was rejected by the network because of insufficient fees. That way, the Bitcoins remain in the casino's original wallet. Now it's up to the casino operators to verify that and, if they're honest, correct the OP's balance on their site or send the Bitcoins again with enough fees. Correct? |
|
|
|
OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?
Good question. Anybody knows an answer? They were never sent in the first place then and are still on the old address. (might only be that some clients don't show them, because they are marked as "reserved to be sent") Bitcoins are never "lost in cyberspace" they are always on a Bitcoin address. That makes a lot of sense. But isn't it kind of pointless for a client to generate a transaction number for a transaction that is never going to occur? That's what's confusing me. And from what the OP said, it seems that at some point the transaction was showing on blockchain.info. |
|
|
|
|
First, congratulations to the trolls who have bank accounts that charge no fees because they're very wealthy or whatever other reason. Second, a "please get lost" to the other trolls bashing the OP because he was playing at whatever casino he wanted to play at.
Now let's get back to the problem in question: the OP's transaction disappeared from blockchain.info, and he hasn't received his Bitcoins. Did they return to the casino's address they were sent from? With the transaction information gone, how do we know for sure what happened to the Bitcoins?
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so considering a situation like this: someone sends Bitcoins and doesn't include a transfer fee. What happens to those Bitcoins if the network "decides" not to deliver them to the destination address? Are they returned to the sender?
|
|
|
|
these big coin hopper pools are really bad .. put the difficulty to hell and dump IFC on cryptsy or other exchanges fu*ck CryptoSwitcher or MultiMiner or MultiPools!!! difficulty retarget every block would be a acceptable proposal!! I've been mining IFC only for a while, and all the coin hopping has really fucked the coin up (as well as other alt coins with an average low hash rate). It happened again just a few minutes ago. Network hashrate was around 20 MH, difficulty finally fell to 0.83 or so, and then in a few minutes the network hash rate skyrocketed to almost 2 GH, bringing difficulty up with it. Now the coin hoppers will leave, network hash rate will go back to what it was before and we constant miners will have to spend hours finding blocks very slowly until the next difficullty retarget, when the whole thing will happen again, in a vicious circle. Starcoin's difficulty retargets every block, and I agree with the other miners who are complaining - unless IFC's difficulty retargetting changes, there will be less and less constant miners and the coin will eventually die or become irrelevant. BTW, on coinchoose now IFC is the most profitable coin with diff at 0.83.
Seriously, are you even mining your own coin? |
|
|
|
People don't read the sticky. Instead, you should force people to read the guideline when they are about to post. Annoying yes, but I hate having to chase around a handful of people who don't care about the date format and don't fix it.
+666 |
|
|
|
WTG COIN HOPPIN, 51% ATTACK WAITING TO HAPPEN, PARASITES !!
+1 |
|
|
|
|
