 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6
|
I've noticed that AdultWork.com has also started to accept Bitcoin. They are much more than just a porn site though, and they offer all kinds of products from escorts to webcam shows to custom pictures! |
|
|
|
I use Bitcoin to pay for a lot of things, and I often noticed that it seems that some Bitcoin payment processors calculate the amount of bitcoins required to pay by a different rate than my Bitcoin wallet. For example, if paying for something which costs 100 EUR, when I scan the QR code with my smartphone, my Bitcoin wallet shows the amount in euros as 102 EUR. I have decided to test if this is just a fluke, or is this a deliberate behavior by some Bitcoin payment processors (aka a hidden fee). To test it, I have generated invoices on 7 different Bitcoin payment gateways for 100 EUR and 100 USD twice a day for 2 weeks, compared it to the bitcoin conversion rate on bitcoinaverage.com, and compiled the results. I have missed several measurements when I was unable to make them on time, but in the end I made a total of 30 measurements of invoices from each Bitcoin payment processor. Bitcoin payment processors I tested: https://bitcoinpay.comhttps://bitpay.comhttps://coinbase.comhttps://coingate.comhttps://coinify.comhttps://coinsbank.comhttps://paymium.com (only EUR measured) The results in chart form:   Interactive charts: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DtCPYCh8CDv6Oh6lhJCfjBAbxK1IhcO1gDHt5u39DwM/pubchart?oid=1812289472&format=interactivehttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DtCPYCh8CDv6Oh6lhJCfjBAbxK1IhcO1gDHt5u39DwM/pubchart?oid=1003355989&format=interactiveRaw data (the data used to generate the charts is in CHARTS tab; more detailed data is in DATA tab): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DtCPYCh8CDv6Oh6lhJCfjBAbxK1IhcO1gDHt5u39DwMScreenshots of invoices: https://jdoett5.imgur.comPlease let me know if this information is interesting to you and if there is anything I could have done better. I might do the same type of research again in the future, with feedback from the community. What is your opinion about this? Are we often paying more than we should because Bitcoin payment gateways add fees that the customers are not informed of? Or do you think this is how things should be and such practices are acceptable? |
|
|
|
"Jaunimo linija" is the first non-governmental support organization in Lithuania accepting donations in Bitcoin. It was founded in 1991 and is the oldest and one of the biggest support organizations in Lithuania, specializing in emotional and psychological support for youth ("Jaunimo linija" translates to "Youth line"). People in need can get support by phone or email from about 350 voluntiers working in 3 biggest Lithuanian cities. I invite everyone to show appreciation for them and donate - everything helps, even 1 euro (donations are automatically converted to euros using Lithuanian Bitcoin payment processor CoinGate). You can donate on "Jaunimo linija" website: https://www.jaunimolinija.lt/lt/paremk/paremk-1/"Jaunimo linija" is considered one of the "major voluntary organisations in Lithuania" by the European Commission (source: http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/pdf/national_report_lt_en.pdf, page 5). |
|
|
|
|
1NkzGtJGpZcpbqoNuvFVDi8CQpxtV7QfNw
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Your problem is easily avoided by using coin control. That way, you can choose which coins to spend, how to combine them, and you will not be caught by surprise that you can't spend the change, because you will know exactly how much change there will be in each transaction, and where will it go.
Coin control is a feature, which currently only the original Bitcoin Core wallet has (as far as I know).
|
|
|
|
|
I also agree that feathercoin would be a good coin to add.
|
|
|
|
Screenshot from this Lithuanian payment processor (bitmarket.lt/mistertango.com/payweb.lt; don't ask me why they use three different brands, but it's the same company):  Screenshot from BitPay:  Find 5 differences? I think not... I don't see anything inherently bad in copying, but there are two very different things: 1. Copying something, and improving/changing/adding new features. 2. Copying something, and then selling the identical copy for a higher price than the original thing cost. This is because as you see in the screenshots, they ask more BTC for the same amount of FIAT (both invoices were generated at the same time). I wanted to inform you of this, and also to hear your opinions. Is this kind of copying acceptable, or not? |
|
|
|
"Pilėnai" has become the first pub in Lithuania to accept bitcoin. "Pilėnai" pub is located in the Old Town of Vilnius, less than 1 km from the main Train & Bus Station. This is their facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/PilenaiThis is the post on facebook (by their employee) announcing the news: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1511842829051166Translation of the post: "nuo šiol pas mus dar vienas atsiskaitymo budas!!!" - "from now on we accept another method of payment!!!" |
|
|
|
|
I'm located in Lithuania, please offer price here or in PM.
|
|
|
|
|
I am selling one standard Batch #2 Avalon miner (3 modules). Extremely stable, running at 350 MHz and doing 82 GH/s, haven't restarted even once. Unit has ckolivas firmware installed.
Will do escrow. Shipping WORLDWIDE, the buyer can choose the method of shipping. Will ship instantly (same day) after receiving payment.
Please PM your offers.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for silly question, but would it not be better to release 0.8.5 version with this bug fixed, than to give instructions for workaround? Version 0.8.3 also had just one fix added, so why not do the same?
|
|
|
|
Yes, he can. But his checkpoints will cause conflict, all clients will switch into safe mode and "Invalid checkpoint found!" or "Invalid chain found!" warning message will be displayed. Stolen key becomes useless immediately after this and checkpoints chain reset would be required to resolve this situation. That's why he must DDoS existing node before, to prevent it from sending checkpoints.
Something does add up here... Why would the attackers' checkpoint cause conflict? How would the network know that they were created by the attacker, if he used the same private key and/or same physical machine as the "real" masternode? If the network had a way of knowing this, then this masternode would not be necessary at all. The masternode serves as a "trusted party" - the network trusts the masternode, so if the attacker gained control of the masternode, then how would the network know that the control of the masternode was overtaken? Where could I read technical information about how exactly this "advanced checkpointing" works? |
|
|
|
Checkpoint master key can be established by using the 'makekeypair' command. The public key in source code should then be updated and private key kept in a safe place.
Any node can be turned into checkpoint master by setting the 'checkpointkey' configuration parameter with the private key of the checkpoint master key.
What if an attacker (instead of DDoS'ing the masternode) steals the private key? Could he then become a masternode himself and generate fake checkpoints? |
|
|
|
On why checkpointing is not there, my guess would be it was pretty much decided long back.
It could be true, but it looks like it was not there, because if it was put to vote, nobody would vote for it. If you are honest about your idea, and honestly expect people to like it, then you would not mind putting it to a vote. The mere fact, that this was done secretly, and never put to a vote (that's why feedback section exists), is a huge red flag for me. |
|
|
|
|
If the attacked gained control of this "master node", then he could scam the network, without even doing the 51% attack. Is this true or false?
Again, if this is so important, why were people not given a chance to know about it and vote for it?
|
|
|
|
NVC isn't more scamcoin than FTC or LTC. And you have nothing against this sentence.
Was FTC premined? No. Was LTC premined? No. Was NVC premined? Yes. Not just premined, but half of the premined coins were given to an exchange so they would accept NVC into their exchange. |
|
|
|
It seems you are just trolling. Normally, if I get to learn something (and I learnt a lot from Balthazar's posts in this thread), I would be a bit respectful at the very least. This was one of the later threads https://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=1878.0There were threads earlier than this around the time of the first attacks when the suggestions cropped up. The thread titles were differently named so you can do some digging to find out. No, I am not trolling. All new features are discussed and voted upon in feedback.feathercoin.com. It is the way to do it publicly. Discussing it in the forums is doing it privately. Besides, discussion doesn't mean that people want it. Voting for it in feedback section means that people want it. And how many votes did it get? ZERO. It didn't even get on the feedback ideas list. I followed the ideas on feedback.feathercoin.com everyday, and there was no mention of any checkpointing, ever. This is completely out-of-the-blue for me (and I was the one who followed feathercoin progress), so what about people who were not following at all? |
|
|
|
|
