 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
Hi, this guy owes me 300 btc doe sanybody have his info or managed to get any money back from him??
I have his info. PM sent. |
|
|
|
|
Is early Jan the original estimated shipping date or a revised one?
|
|
|
|
|
rf5dYHZoHqyiBKdekcpfebSR1owbWVgo1u
|
|
|
|
It's been over 2 months and only slim pickings of an excuse, This scam is overclouded by bigger ones and he is getting away with it,
I have some leads, I'll do this myself.
If you need help, let me know. I have some BTC with RustyRyan that I'd like to get back |
|
|
|
|
I have some funds with Patrick as well and would be interested in helping in any way I can
|
|
|
|
|
Received back my principal with interest today. Vescudero was polite, professional and a pleasure to deal with.
|
|
|
|
|
Not to mention that cavirtex does not take deposits at the moment of anything except bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm getting 395 mhash/sec at 990MHz core 330MHz mem using phoenix and phatk on linux on a few of my 5850s
|
|
|
|
Dropbox pissed me off the other day, so I happened to take that evening to look at replacement options. They all pretty much suck. BUT I'd come across Wuala which had one inspirational feature: users can donate space to receive equivalent space in return depending on some function of their uptime... so to cut to the chase, the idea is to start a distributed peer-to-peer "cloud" storage service that is paid for in bitcoin. I haven't worked out all the details yet, so I was hoping the forum could help me with that. The framework I have so far is: A person called a server from now on sells storage contracts to other persons called clients on a market. The contract is paid at arbitrary intervals, say once per day. The payment is scaled appropriately so it could be any reasonable interval. The client needs to periodically connect to the server to verify the file is still available. He does this by asking the server to hash a random chunk of the file, perhaps with a nonce. After verification, the client pays the server. The client and server are free to break the contract at any time. The client should hire enough servers to cover the probability that his file will be lost due to a server breaking a contract, its hard drive crashing, random acts of nature, etc. If the client wishes to update or retrieve his file, he must "pay up"; that is, the client can only update or download recently after submitting payment. There are problems with this, such as that there is no notion of quality of service or locality. Also it's unclear to me what the distributed model would be, if it could use the contract stuff ( https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Contracts) or would need to be a separate system. Would appreciate some discussion. |
|
|
|
From the site,
[Update June 24 - 02:56 GMT] Pushing until 15:00 GMT.
We have found that balances on some older accounts look significantly incorrect when compared with the old database. At this time we do not know what caused the balances to be off, or how many of the older accounts are affected. We haven't touched the old backend or database, so we're going to import the accounts again once we have found what caused the off-balances.
No money is lost, we still have the records of all transactions that happened prior to the bitcoin sell-off. All funds deposited are still in our bank accounts, and we're going to try and get this resolved by 15:00 GMT.
We look forward to getting everyone trading within an hour of getting users logged in and accessing their accounts.
|
|
|
|
Application-specific integrated circuits, or ASICS, would be much more energy efficient for mining. As far as I know no one has done this yet. Field programmable gated arrays, or FPGAs, have been used. These also are highly efficient but can be prohibitively expensive... though cheaper than an ASIC.
There's one guy who has done asics, name of artforz. Also, have heard rumblings of someone that wanted technical expertise and wanted to spend some money. Search is your friend |
|
|
|
Is there a calculator which will allow u to put reasonable difficulty increases in the formula?
Mine does that, it defaults to the current estimated difficulty increase. http://bitcoinstuff.appspot.com |
|
|
|
|
At the rate that difficulty is growing, once you've broken even in eight weeks, you don't really stand to profit much more... by the end of August you'll have mined 82.4% of the perpetuity.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, you're right but the issue is more subtle. They already do have control over .bit but not the blockchain. That is, ICANN may introduce a .bit TLD and NOT specify opennic (or whomever represents the namecoin blockchain) as its owner but they could never control the blockchain itself.
|
|
|
|
But who can see it? That's what I don't have clear.
When I own a namecoin .bit domain, do I own it forever?
It's early days still. So people will need to adjust their settings to use nameservers with .bit support. Sometime in the future .bit may be added as an official TLD... but who knows As for your other question, in the current system, you need to keep updating the name in the blockchain every some odd blocks (i think it works out to about a month?) but this is free.. so you own it forever unless you forget to update it once a month. But this is a fee-less update so you will never have to pay more than the namecoins you originally spent. |
|
|
|
3 to 4 times more profitable.... right... I think YOU'RE trolling. So that's like mining today @ $3-4 a bitcoin at current rates. Who the hell would mine at the current difficulty level for $3-4? If you pay for power, you'd be lucky to make more than a couple of dollars a day.... I call BS.
I don't think he was lying... look at the P/D ratio back in April: https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=7427.0 it was below one while right now it's about 2.5. Also, I'd say 50-55% difficulty increase on or slightly before June 16. No idea about P/D though, anyone care to guess? |
|
|
|
|
I just recently got a couple of 5850s and I think I've reached my tolerance for noise and heat so I've decided to sell these off.
10 BTC each or $140 CDN plus shipping.
|
|
|
|
|
