This is probably an attempt to create an alt farm (and not a very intelligent attempt), given that all the posts from different profiles come within a few minutes of each other and are usually in a row. Besides being annoying spammers, I see that they also get some merits from time to time. I hope this topic will help prevent them from getting the opportunity to become part of a sig campaign in the future. Some of them already have a tag, and I'm thinking of leaving them all a neutral tag with a reference to this topic. Examples -> 1, 2, 3, 4 |
|
|
|
Another (in my opinion very obvious) case where an alt opens a new topic and asks a question, and then the same person replies from the main account. @H managed to notice the new topic, write and publish his post in just 78 seconds - I know some people type fast, but this is more about fast typing. Additional information - the post with the answer was not edited, which means that it was not reserved as in some similar cases.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5520628.0 |
|
|
|
This competition starts tomorrow and it is strange that none of the regular visitors to this board has already opened the topic, considering that this is a kind of European football championship. It should be noted that the format of the competition consists of 4 main groups (A, B, C, D) of which all but the last one (has 2 subgroups) have 4 subgroups. Of course, the strongest main group is A, where the best teams of the old continent compete - Portugal, Croatia, Spain, Italy, Germany, France - and for those who are wondering where England is, it is in group B according to last year's results in this competition. Although many do not consider this competition particularly interesting, it should be emphasized that it has an impact on the ranking that will determine the holders of the groups for the World Championship 2026 qualifiers, and that some teams will surely look for an easier way to these qualifications through this competition. Considering the large number of subgroups, I will post a link to the official UEFA website where you can see all the details. Groups, Matches, Teams...
I would single out the match from League A - Group A1 between Portugal and Croatia for tomorrow. Portugal won this competition in the 2018/19 season, while Croatia played in the final in the 2022/23 season and won the silver medal. As for Croatia, I can say that they are coming here after a big disappointment at the European Championship, and that Domagoj Vida and Marcelo Brozovic have said goodbye to the national team, while a large number of players are injured and will not play tomorrow (Stanisić, Juranovic, Erlic, Vlasic, Majer...). It should also be emphasized that Luka Modric continues to play for the national team, but it is increasingly clear that a man who is almost 40 years old can no longer be the one who should be the driving force in the team. As for Portugal, it all boils down to whether Ronaldo will play or not, and if anyone has more information about the situation in their team, feel free to write. It is interesting that in a friendly match before Euro 2024, as a guest, Croatia beat Portugal (1-2), which was the first victory for Croatia at all - and there should be no doubt that Portugal will have more motivation in this match. Bookmakers give the odds for Portugal to win around 1.6, and the odds for Croatia are 5.6
Be aware that this is a self-moderated topic and that spam, plagiarism and the use of AI will not be tolerated - as well as the meaningless use of the quote option. |
|
|
|
For all those who use Mozilla Firefox and all browsers based on the same (Tor), it is recommended to update to the latest version as soon as possible due to the upgrade that disables vulnerabilities that are marked as Critical/High because they allow an attacker to run code or install software without any interaction with the user and to collect sensitive data without the user's knowledge. If you have automatic update enabled in your browser, it will update itself after which it needs to be restarted - for manual update, click on the tab Help -> About browser. Source |
|
|
|
They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, but I will still write something considering that it is about a application to become a merit source. I believe that as someone who is online practically every day on the forum and visits various boards, I could contribute to the forum in the way of being a good merit source - and besides, it has just been 9 years since the registration on this forum, which, along with all the other statistics, has some significance. I believe that there are many good posts that do not receive a single merit, but also that there are many that I personally reward with only 1 merit because unfortunately my sMerits supply does not allow me to give more. I know that there are currently several applications that are active from good members who will hopefully become merit sources in the near future, and I hope that the admin will consider mine as well. It was difficult to choose only 10 posts that would meet the criteria, but I believe that these 10 posts that I have chosen can serve as a good example of what I consider to be posts that are worthy of an award with merits. All your comments and questions are welcome 
1. Yes bitcoin.org is legit. BUT, and this is just me talking, I would not trust their recommendations for anything. A while ago lukejr suffered a hacking event / hack: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5432665.0On the bitcoinknots page that he maintains there WAS actually a warning that the downloads may be compromised. It's not there anymore but for a while it said This server may be compromised at present. Do not blindly trust downloads - always verify both the SHA256 hash and the OpenPGP signatures match. Luke Dashjr's OpenPGP key is likely to be compromised, so his signatures have been removed and replaced with other developers' signatures. There is no evidence of a tampered download ever having been offered, but if you have downloaded Bitcoin Knots after 2022 December 1st, it is recommended you re-verify the files you previously downloaded to be sure. At NO TIME did the maintainer of the bitcoin.org site put up a warning. 1 line of text was all that was needed. But NOPE they didn't. If they can't do that, then why trust them with other recommendations. -Dave
2. Glad you found the right area for this (or close enough) One thing that must be pointed out is if they have found a weakness in sha256 the effect of it goes far beyond Bitcoin. SHA256 is used as the basis of most commercial financial and document encryption because (to date) it is uncrackable when a long enough key is used - finding a way to hack it would have major repercussions across many markets and industries. The weakness they claim to have found is based on them stating that AI-driven pattern analysis can narrow down the data ranges that still must be guessed by established brute-force miner chips. As I said in the other thread I do not think it can be done because there are no patterns in proper sha256 encryption. If any patterns DO exist in a hash or series of hashes it is the result of a problem with the RNG that created the hash in the 1st place. Most - but not all - RNG's do not have issues and generate truly random numbers that are used as an encryption seed. Knowing the bias that any given RNG can introduce would certainly allow for making more accurate guesses to possible decryption values provided that you know which specific RNG was used and what (if any) flaws it has. If a different RNG is used that advantage is gone. Regarding Bitmain, Canaan, Bitfury, et al - all of those miner companies also make pattern recognition AI chips. You really think they have not investigated this? A worrisome bit from the Financial Time article: Quantum Blockchain told FTAV it has not published any papers on technology or methodology “in order to protect their research”. Its patent applications are “as far as they have dared to go with making the developments public,” said a spokesman which to me raises a huge red flag. That is NOT how research works! Publishing papers is the ONLY way to have ideas properly examined and critiqued by ones peers. Not publishing and using the excuse that it is 'to protect their research' screams scamming Marketing Speak. A Patent does NOT have to describe how to create a workable process, device, or idea. It only must describe how you say it will work. The numerous patents for perpetual motion machines, free-energy devices and their ilk prove that. Pursuing and even being granted a patent for something does not mean it works or ever can work.
3. - Otherwise, a simple 51% attack will do some work to destroy the reputation.
This remains to be seen. I mentioned this scenario briefly in my last post: if there's not much damage (in terms of double spends) done, then it could be possible that BTC recovers relatively fast, as did most of the altcoins which were 51% attacked until now. And if this happens, then all the effort of the state was in vain, and even such an attack would be expensive. A big dictatorship like China or Russia could perhaps be tempted to perform this type of attack anyway because they could try to hide the attack, as they don't need to care that much about transparency. But for any government of a democratic state such an attack would be basically suicide - why should people pay with their taxes for an attack on a tool that e.g. 10% of the voters already use? This would be a major scandal. In China or Russia it could work to hide it, but there are risks that such an attack could destabilize the government if there are traitors leaking the attack. I believe even in the most aggressive and authoritarian of the big dictatorships, Russia (and much less China) they aren't that dumb to waste billions on that. The only actual constellation I can imagine is an intelligence department of a dictatorship performing the attack, but sponsored in secret by several other countries (every government contributing with, let's say, less than $1 billion, which perhaps can be hidden). But even there, all participants would be at risk to destabilize. Thus a FUD & Regulation attack is much more promising. But if they go too far the attack could impact in public opinion against the governments and could lead to resistance, like we've seen in the European Parliament. The more Bitcoiners we are, the less likely is such an attack. I think for a completely destructive attack of this kind thus it's already late. We could also speculate: was Ordinals such an attack? The idea itself is not bad for a malicious entity - create some service on top of Bitcoin that lowers the utility of the chain for most users because it clogs the blocks, but leads to profits for a sub-group like the NFT investors and can even return the cost of the attacks from "greater fools" (like those buying ORDI at $60 or more). However, due to the way such "trends" work, sustaining such an attack would be very expensive too. And we can already say that it probably failed, because Bitcoin became even more popular. The long term solution to make such a "spam attack" much more unlikely would be - second layers (sidechains, rollups and LN).
4. The US government selling bitcoin will never cause the market to crash and that's obvious. But what I find strange is that the bitcoin market is worth more than 1 trillion USD and the total market capitalization is almost 3 trillion USD. But why every time just a few billion USD (BTC) sold at the same time can cause a decline of 5 to 15%, it is difficult to understand because 2 or 3 billion USD is very small compared to the trading volume and as marketized capital.
Take two half a litre glasses that are 2/3 full, and move 1/10 or 1/5 of the water between them. You can move like a million litres, that is the volume, but what happens if you try to dump an additional litre into them? They both overflow. So despite being able to move back an forth 1 million litres, just one poured without 1 taken out made them overflow. That's the difference between value and market depth. Look here: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin/BTC/fusd volume is right now 5 billion, but it would take only 4 million to reduce the price by -2% (market depth).
5. I keep the source code closed at the moment, but just ask if you would like to collaborate.
You can run the binaries released it if you want: <link-removed>
I can only expressly warn everyone not to download ready-made binaries from unknown sources and run them on their computer. As long as the source code is not open, you never know what the program is doing in the background. Someone with malicious intentions could use the executed program, for example, to spy on and extract data from your own PC, i.e. it could, for example, read your existing hard disk or RAM data and copy passwords or wallet files out to the INternet on some server. Never ever download programs in .dll or .exe form from unknown sources and never run them. Whether and whom you trust is of course up to you, this is only a well-intentioned warning. The shown program (test.bat) calls a binary executable: colisionador_x86_64.exe -list puzzle_r160list_sorted.csv -puzzle 0 -threads 1 -start_pk_bin 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
as well as all other start scripts listed here. Stay away !
6. For everyone else: There's no need for a signed message or transaction ID since it's a made up scenario of scammer who doesn't know how Bitcoin address works. He wanted to pass that he " accidentally" typed the wrong last character thinking that it wont invalidate the address. The alleged address that received the 4.37BTC doesn't have the correct checksum, thus any well-written wallet wont be able to send to it. You can try it in any wallet that you use. Some technical explanations: - Address 1L1UduuGPZ8ttGe59F2w9tTEumQFhtxiuT, base58 decoded, separated the last 4Bytes checksum: 00d08175a8f7d52324279706dae9d132e17a1bfce8 8c7b316e
- The first 4-Bytes of the SHA256x2 hash of the above's left part should be equal to the right part (checksum): 8c7b316e.
- So let's get: SHA256[SHA256(00d08175a8f7d52324279706dae9d132e17a1bfce8)]: 8c7b316c28e25f67a1b027243d1b9558c15a7efb10e8e283c2ce9e12f89f794a
- The first 4-Bytes of the above are: 8c7b316c which isn't equal to 8c7b316e.
- With that, the address is invalid.
On a slim chance that the exchange/wallet is miswritten to accept such address: Since it's only the checksum part that's wrong, the output should still be sent to the address with the correct checksum, thus, to his own address ending with " R". That's because Bitcoin P2PKH outputs aren't actually addresses but " scriptPubkey" or " locking script" which is in the first part of the decoded data above. It's a different scenario if he edited one character that's not part of the checksum instead since it would be sent to another address. ( only if a buggy wallet allows it) There's a 1 out of 32bit chance ( 4-Bytes) that it will be valid to any wallets, that's 1 out of 4,294,967,296 ( 2^32).
7. The answer is absolutely not.
No blockchain system can come even close to handling mainstream loads, which would require transaction loads in the millions of transactions per second. Bitcoin is necessarily slow and expensive by design. You cannot have a decentralized system that is fast/cheap because it would be too easy to subvert (long long story short).
Only a fully centralized system--and even then, a very purpose-built, streamlined system--could manage this problem.
Here are the calculations as I wrote them up here a while back:
***
Let's start with the estimates of the number of credit card transactions there are on any given day, and extrapolate the peak volume per month, then per day, then per hour, then per second.
To keep the numbers easy, I'll just give you the very rounded numbers:
1. There are about two billion credit card transactions, world-wide, per day--if you average over the course of a whole year.
2. But some months, e.g. the holiday season, have much higher volume, so figure ten billion per day during those periods.
3. This comes to about 500m transactions per hour, but all of the hours in the day are not the same from the standpoint of purchase volume: there are peak shopping hours. Those hours can be 10x higher sometimes. So figure two billion transactions per hour during peak-peak periods.
4. Any internet-level system needs to account for a multiplied "peak second" volume, as the network can create holdups, which are then released like when you put your hand in front of a stream of water than then pull it away--and getting "behind" will cause a "traffic jam". Hence, figure a rate of about 10 billion transactions per hours to account for that, which comes to about 300k transactions per second.
5. So that's just credit cards, and that's just the volume we have today. But the vision here is extremely fast, extremely small, extremely cheap transactions that can be used even more broadly than credit cards: in other words, the vision is that someday humans will not use paper or metal currency at all, since we will have a system that cheap enough and fast enough to truly replace cash. Current estimates put the number of cash transactions at about 3x that of credit cards in developed countries. Hence you get to (again, heavily rounding here) to a level at about one million transactions per second.
So the "replace all current transactions" level of performance is about one million transactions per second, and for growth, to actually handle this problem, you need to imagine you could eventually end up at a multiple of that, e.g. millions of transactions per second.
8. Eventough a hardfork is always a strain on the community, i have to say that a hardfork solving this mempool flood would be interesting. I'd defenately think solving the mempool congestion with those inscription thingies would be a better cause than the last "big" hardfork (BCH).
If such a fork would exist, i'd think it would have a reasonable chance of getting adopted by the majority (depending on how many of the core dev's were willing to switch to said fork).
If enough users adopt the fork, miners would eventually switch since big adoption usually means an OK FIAT value, and eventough the block reward is getting lower, money could still be made mining the "new" fork. Personally, i think it would be great being able to make a transaction that doesn't need 200 sats/vbyte to have a decent chance of getting confirmed in the next couple of blocks... I'd also think it would be a good idear if the nodes didn't have to fill their disks with nonsense data when they store the blocks.
And censorship? What censorship? Those inscription thingies could still exist in the "old" chain. If they want to keep filling blocks with their data, they can do so, just not on the "new" chain... If somebody wants a chain to store even more ridiculous stuff, they can make their own fork, and if they gain some adoption, they have a network and they can store whatever they want... I don't see creating a hardfork to see if it gains adoption as censoring.
I'm not saying it's a good idear per sé, i'm not saying i would blindly follow such a fork, i'm just saying that such a fork would probably have more merit than BCH, and eventough BCH did not gain the biggest part of the community, it does still exist.
9. You're talking about 2140 but I would be worried much sooner, unless you believe the market cap will double after each halving. Two more halvings and the security of Bitcoin could be in great danger due to economical factors and before this happens we will see higher centralization due to less companies mining it. The tx fees will not be enough and block reward will be too small, if you can't see it - you're blind. There are only two solutions to this problem: .1 Switching to tail-emission and forgetting about "there will only be 21m" mantra. .2 Switching to PoS (which will make it even more centralized) Tail emission quick summary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRwSqM0YBtoAnother problem is the Bitcoin project competition, mining companies don't care about the project and securing it, they only care about profits. So why would they buy another batch of power hungry ASIC's if they can buy a lot of general purpose CPU's and mine with them more profitably ? Add the fact that you have more resale value of this CPU's, better warranty, etc. Numbers will speak and if Bitcoin price craze stops, this companies will reevaluate their mining business and alternatives. If they see they can have double the profit mining with CPU's on a stable enough project... they will switch in a blink of an eye. They could as well trade to BTC if they want, but the matter is - security of Bitcoin will be in danger. Some hints about current Bitcoin mining profitability (or rather lack of it): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCFwmJXx7dcIt will only get worse as the electricity costs rises and more mining taxation come. If nothing changes, there will never be 21m - So the mantra will die anyway along with the project. As far as high fees, people will just use 2nd layers.
If you're gonna use second layer solutions, you can as well use PayPal. If there will be a decentralized way to handle much more transactions per second than today, it can as well be incorporated into first layer. Centralized "solutions" are not solutions and LN has failed in this regard. It's a shame "hard fork" term was even invented, because before that we just called it "Update" and all software needs updates. Due to this protocol code stagnation, right now I don't see bright future for it. Maybe someday it will change but it could be too late. PS. I know I sound very pessimistic but it's safer to be incorrectly pessimistic than incorrectly optimistic.
10. I actually consider moving, i already downloaded aegis and bitwarden. I remember some people here recommends using aegis as their 2fa manager. I would love to hear thoughts on those who have experienced of using of both app (aegis and bitwarden).
I've used both and I would recommend both (be aware that Aegis is just a TOTP generator, it can't hold any passwords). Bitwarden has the possibility that you can self-host it but you have to consider what is safer : Are you able to provide a more secure environment than Bitwarden infrastructure? If you are then you should run your own version so that you are in full control. Otherwise you will just have to trust that Bitwarden will protect your encrypted vault better than you would. They use AES-CBC 256-bit encryption for your vault and PBKDF2 SHA-256 to make a derivation of your private key[1] (using 200,001 rounds both on the server side and client side) so it ends up being better than the encryption implemented by Authy (which is almost the same, but it only uses 1000 rounds[2]). The integration of the TOTP within the app works really well and if you have the browser extension running then it is a seamless experience when you are logging in to any service. Do note that you only have access to TOTP integration if you pay their premium plan - which I consider quite affordable at $10 per year - plus you'll also get 1GB of encrypted file storage and access to Bitwarden Send[3] for both text and files. If it was me what would allow me to rest better at night would be a combination of the two - Bitwarden for my password needs and then Aegis for my TOTP needs. Like I said to TryNinja I wouldn't feel safe having all of them stored in Bitwarden - if by any random chance a malicious actor would gain access to my vault then he/she would have total control of my accounts.
[1] https://bitwarden.com/help/what-encryption-is-used/[2] https://authy.com/blog/how-the-authy-two-factor-backups-work/[3] https://bitwarden.com/products/send/ |
|
|
|
Most of us know who Hal Finney was, and I think we can all agree that for his work when it comes to Bitcoin, he deserves a special place next to Satoshi Nakamoto. Although Hal has not been with us for 10 years, it is nice to see that people still remember him and that the Human Rights Foundation decided to establish an award that will bear his name, and that the first winner will be Hal posthumously. HRF allocated a total of 33 BTC, of which 1 BTC will go to Hal, and given that the prize will be awarded every four years, there will also be prizes for the periods 2012-2016, 2016-2020 and 2020-2024. It will be interesting who will receive the awards for the remaining three periods, and of course it will also be interesting what the members of the forum think about it. More info at the link -> Bitcoin Pioneer Hal Finney Posthumously Wins New Award Named for Him |
|
|
|
Maybe this is another in a series of topics about how the fees are too high these days, but considering that a lot of members are literally disappointed that they can't use Bitcoin the way it should be used, maybe we should clarify some things so that everyone would not continue to pretend that we live in a world where we should continue to expect that Bitcoin will become a global means of payment that will be used by just about everyone. Bitcoin has long since become a money-making machine, and in order for the machine to work well and be profitable, it needs to be given a little extra energy from time to time, even if this means that it will have a negative impact on its main task. While the average user who just wants to send an on-chain transaction has problems and is looking for a solution to the problem in a single free transaction accelerator, let's try to summarize who all benefits from the fact that fees have exploded. Miners certainly benefit from what I personally call "ordinal madness", and suffice it to say that in recent days the rewards per block amounted to over 10 BTC, and considering that the reward without fees is 6.25 BTC, it is clear how much their profit has increased. Without going into any conspiracy theories, isn't it logical to think that some of them (miners) have their fingers in all of this? Who knows, maybe we'll find out one day. CEXs (centralized exchanges) also benefit from high fees, not only because they can increase their service fees more than necessary, but because high fees discourage most of their clients from withdrawing Bitcoin to their non-custodial wallets. Let no one be fooled that the people behind such companies have any good intentions towards Bitcoin, they only care about profit and they don't care what they will generate it from, that's why they support hundreds of shitcoins without any problems regardless of what they know that bunch of people will lose their money trading with that garbage. Creators of altcoins who will use every opportunity to say that their project is better than Bitcoin and that their transactions cost only $0.01 and that you should invest in their project. What they will not tell you is that the security of their transactions is so great that you have to wait for several days to be sure that your transaction will not be messed up in some way. Economic and financial experts are perhaps the last, but no less important in this story. For them, moments like this are a time in which they rejoice because they think that the idea of Bitcoin as a currency is collapsing before our eyes, and of course they say this all the time. On the other hand, they have nothing against Bitcoin being "used" to generate profit, which again leads us to the fact that the idea of Bitcoin as a currency should be "killed" in every possible way, and on the other hand, trading should be encouraged. In the end, it's no secret that the whole world has its foundations in centralization, and above all, finances are important because they control people most effectively. Bitcoin as an idea is dangerous in that sense and I have no doubt that "they" will do everything to reduce that idea to mere trading and nothing more than that. However, you should not be pessimistic because I believe that there are millions of those who own Bitcoin and they will not give up so easily, and if we have ever been at an advantage, it is today, because we understood what Bitcoin is much before them and we have much more of it than them. If they want it, I tell them "the price is $10 million per BTC" and only if you ask me nicely  |
|
|
|
I'm not in the habit of accusing someone just like that and I had no intention of opening this topic, but the sequence of events gives me a hint that I'm on the trail of possible merit abuse and a possible alt farm. Yesterday I came across the following topic I'm new here in the B&H board and what first caught my attention was the post that was published only 44 seconds after the topic was opened. The post was edited about ten minutes later and I can't say how it looked originally, but it's not at all realistic to me that someone wrote it in just 44 seconds and I assumed that it was a pre-prepared post that was just copy/pasted. Furthermore, the second thing that caught my attention is that this post received 4 merits in total, 3 of which were from newbie @Turn it off. The third thing that is definitely suspicious to me is that today that topic is locked, and I sincerely doubt that the reason is that someone reported that topic to the moderators (after all, for what reason?), and newbies usually don't have the habit of locking their topics. Of course I questioned @Cantsay and he tried to justify himself in some way. Another interesting fact, the OP ( @Dextro) is Nigerian, and so is @Cantsay. Facts to consider: 1.@Cantsay responds to a post in just 44 seconds. 2.@Cantsay gets 4 merits, including 3 from the newbie who has earned a total of 8 merits so far. 3.@Cantsay in a way admits that what he is doing is a good way to earn merits and advertise his sig campaign. 4.The topic is locked to prevent further discussion, which only further indicates that the matter is being swept under the rug. What seems to me that @Dextro1 is an alt account of @Cantsay, and also @Turn it off which served him to award himself merits.
Self-moderated only because of possible trolls who usually pollute such topics - not a single constructive post will be deleted. |
|
|
|
|
Today I received a private message from the user @Amph in which he informs me that he wants to sell his BTT account, and he refers to the fact that we communicated via Telegram, which never happened. The PM also contains a name (I assume the one he uses on Telegram), but I'm not sure if that might be his real name, so I don't want to reveal it here.
Given that the sale of BTT accounts is not something we approve of (although it is not prohibited), it would be logical to leave a negative trust for such an account - even though the reference is a private message, so it's my word against his.
I can't say why @Amph chose me, but it seems to me that I am not the only one who received or will receive such a private message. I also don't see that there has been any change of e-mail/password, so the assumption is that the account has not been hacked.
|
|
|
|
Regardless of the fact that it is still too early to predict what this year will be like in comparison to 2022 and a few years back, the news says that the beginning of this year is very optimistic considering that growth has been recorded on all world stock markets, and accordingly we can see that the price of Bitcoin has risen slightly after a long time. First of all, encouragement came from the US, where all indices rose from 1% to 1.5%, while the news that the number of employees increased by 223 000 was positively echoed - and investors hope that the FED will still reduce interest rates, perhaps even this year. Good news also comes from the EU, where the stock market indices rose between 3% and 6%, which can mostly be attributed to the data that the decline in production activity has very likely bottomed out and recovery is expected. A drop in inflation in the Eurozone was also recorded, and this could mean that the ECB will also be more lenient when it comes to raising interest rates. There is also good news coming from China, where the restrictive COVID measures have been eased suddenly, which means that their economy could begin to grow rapidly with the news that the Chinese central bank is announcing support for the domestic economy. Each piece of news may not mean much, but if we look at the bigger picture, the conditions are created for the world economy to begin to recover. Of course, this entire recovery is still in the shadow of the war in Ukraine, but somehow it seems to me that this war will end this year, either with the victory of Ukraine, which is getting stronger militarily every day, or with the withdrawal of Russia from the occupied territories. Source ( Translated) Edited : Translated link fixed |
|
|
|
Considering that all three accounts left me negative feedback at the same time, I assume that it is the same person, and considering that a thread from 2016 was put as a reference link, it seems that it is an old scammer and account seller ONLYfree.  This thread only serves as a reference for some future research and possible connections with other alt accounts. |
|
|
|
User DigitalMonk recently started his digital adventure on this forum and nothing seemed overly suspicious until he opened the following thread How to buy and sell Bitcoin? ( archived) in which, as a complete ignoramus who does not know what Bitcoin or blockchain is, he claims the following "For this purpose I have setup an Offshore Bitcoin transaction platform."Accordingly, @LoyceV expressed his doubts, and @DaveF created a flag, and I reported several of his topics in the Bitcoin discussion, which were all marked as bad. Considering the possible bad intentions of this user and the obvious thread spamming with questions that have already been answered hundreds of times and that definitely belong to the low-value topic, I want to warn you not to waste your time answering his questions. |
|
|
|
I don't know what's going on with mods lately, and despite the fact that it's normal for everyone who works to make mistakes, it's hard for me to believe that some of my reports, which are without a doubt quite clear and meaningful, are marked as "Bad". It's not even a problem when the report is marked as " Bad" and appropriate action is taken, but if nothing is done and the report is marked as "Bad" does that mean that some mods don't understand that things that have nothing to do with Bitcoin do not belong in the Bitcoin discussion , as well as that those members who offer paid or free services should use the appropriate boards for that? Example 1Post SEC Charges 11 People in Alleged $300 Million Crypto Ponzi Scheme was originally posted in the Bitcoin discussion although it is quite evident that it has nothing to do with anything related to Bitcoin. I reported a post that was marked as "Bad" and the topic was left in the Bitcoin discussion until I decided to contact one of the global mods who moved it to the appropriate board. 
Example 2Post MY DAILY BITCOIN TRADING SIGNALS is posted in Economy > Economics > Speculation and I reported it with the indication that it should be moved to Trading, although it could also be suitable for the Service board. I don't understand why a mod thinks that providing any service is appropriate for the Speculation board, but my report is marked as "Bad".  As someone who is trying to contribute to a better forum, things like this are quite demotivating for me. I repeat once again that I am already used to reports being marked "Bad", but it is not clear to me that nothing is done in such cases. |
|
|
|
Does anyone have a problem displaying their personal avatar? Today I noticed that my avatar is not displayed in this thread.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5399845.msg60211983#msg60211983I use Firefox 100.0.2 on W10 with AdBlock off on the forum. I noticed that my avatar is not displayed in case I access the post through the path Profile -> Show Post - no post I access that way shows an avatar... As far as I've seen, the avatars of other members are displayed correctly. |
|
|
|
Given that there are a lot of beginners who have obviously never used the forum, or used it in the wrong way - I would like to warn them of some things that are not strictly against the rules of the forum, but are quite irritating and definitely reduce your contribution to the forum, regardless of your good intentions. Some members will ignore you for this, others may report you to moderator - but you can change all that if you apply the tips below. Posting images to the forumThere's nothing wrong with that, sometimes a picture speaks more than a thousand words and we all love to see an interesting photo - but the thing is that some really overdo it with sizes that are inappropriate for the forum. It should be taken into account that some users of this forum have limited data internet traffic or very slow internet, which in combination with browsing the forum on smartphones can be quite frustrating. As an example, look at what the post history of one of our artists looks like. ( archived) The solution is very simple and consists of simply placing a link of your image in this code, and adjusting the width + check by clicking on the preview how the image looks. [img width=200]your link here[/img] Using the quote optionAnother thing that we all use more or less and that makes it easier for us to communicate on the forum. The problem is that some members abuse this option to make their posts look longer and more meaningful, when in fact they make them completely uninteresting. Quote exists for a reason, and if you want to refer to someone's post or part of a post, simply click on "quote" when you are in the menu for writing a post and then edit the post (delete the part you don't need). You can also use more than one quote in your post by simply scrolling and selecting the post you want to respond to. Examples of how this should not look : 1 2Posting multiple posts in a rowThis is actually something that is against the rules of the forum, and I noticed that some older members are still making that beginner's mistake. As I explained above, you can reply to multiple posts in one post by adding multiple quote posts, or simply address each member by their name. If you see posts that have a moderator note printed in red font then it means that the moderator has merged the posts. If we use the forum correctly, there will be less work for moderators. |
|
|
|
I'm not happy that I have to open a new thread on the topic of plagiarism/paraphrasing, but I would like one of the moderators/admins to explain why for 10 days no one wants to ban the user I reported for as many as three cases of plagiarism? The matter is very clearly presented in each of the reports and there is no doubt that the user in question uses plagiarism in his posts.    Link to public reports -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1926895.msg59840056#msg59840056 |
|
|
|
Since this is a very popular mobile crypto wallet used by many beginners, I want to warn everyone who uses this wallet or will use it in the future that there is no verification and do not fall for this cheap trick that scammers have been using for a long time. A new phishing campaign is currently underway, so if your email leaked somewhere you can expect to receive a message identical to the one I personally received. If you get it in your inbox, report it as spam, and in no case click on the link in the message - it may just be a classic seed stealer, but it is possible that at the other end you will find malware/virus.  |
|
|
|
It is human to make mistakes, but things like this really don't make sense. I reported this topic as a spam megathread (which it is by all criteria) and some mod thinks that after 27 pages this topic does not deserve to be locked? I don't know if it's a shame that someone thinks so, or that it is allowed that such a topic can survive for so long. There is no point in reporting the same thread again, so if some mod agree with my opinion, please lock that topic - one less place for shitposters. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5117970.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
