I find it a little weird that one day Gavin wants to be demoted from his global mod position, and the next one he yells at hazek for wanting to move the TBF thread into service announcements.
Link? All the TBF-stuff went TLDR too fast. Moving TBF to service announcement sounds like a good step to calm the waves a bit although I understand it hurts each and every service provider to see his baby being moved out of the spot light. instawallet for example was granted that prestigious spot forever while others get moved quickly. I suggested before to have some consistent rule for that and maybe this case makes my suggestion clearer. Lets move all service announcements to that forum after a predefined time please. My suggestion would be two weeks. |
|
|
|
TBF has far more noise around it than it deserves from both sides. Please stay in your thread or have your own sub forum.
I really had enough announcements and talking for a bitcoin-year now. When is bitcoincard coming? When is bitcoinwireless coming? When will my hair-dresser accept bitcoin? I don't care about announcements of announcements about committees dedicated to the discussion of designing foundations or not. Just do it.
We just added instant banking transfers from 27 new countries on BitInstant.com UK, Poland, South America, ect.. No announcement yet because testing Feel free to give it a try  I would if Chile was on the list. |
|
|
|
|
TBF has far more noise around it than it deserves from both sides. Please stay in your thread or have your own sub forum.
I really had enough announcements and talking for a bitcoin-year now. When is bitcoincard coming? When is bitcoinwireless coming? When will my hair-dresser accept bitcoin? I don't care about announcements of announcements about committees dedicated to the discussion of designing foundations or not. Just do it.
|
|
|
|
Where is this chart from? The linked article has no charts. |
|
|
|
I pledge 1 BTC towards a farsi translation of multibit. (I think many other resources of bitcoin should be translated first but jim stepped up asking for it, so I support this now.) |
|
|
|
 Necroposting, yeah!!!! … cause it's cool to resurrect 2 years old threads!!!! How difficult would to associate one address with your other addresses? What precautions should be taken to protect against this?
It's not totally easy, but it's possible. For example, a node could listen on the network and see that you are using the same IP when sending from two of your different addresses, and thus associate those addresses. To prevent this, you should mask your IP using Tor or similar. There's also a more fundamental risk in that the chain of ownership of each bitcoin is public knowledge. So, if you, say, purchased the bitcoin from an exchange and gave your name during that, then the exchange can associate your name with that bitcoin. There's a really really nice post by Theymos on that here, and the following thread proposes some great solutions (mainly, a "scrambler"): http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=241.0Even besides these two things, there are some other things that need to be handled. For example, you should find a way to encrypt your traffic so your ISP can't read your addresses. Also, you should send out identical traffic regularly, so that your ISP cant associate your addresses using timing alone. If all of these things are accounted for, I believe you are very close to 100% safe from technical address association. Wallet boundaries are normally not identified by spying on the IP used (which might help but is not necessary) but by the fact that almost always the input of transactions does not fit exactly with the output which is why more than one input is used. Each time more than one input is used, these inputs are guaranteed to belong to the same wallet. How fast does wallet.dat size grow with creating new addresses? It would be nice feature to physically remove entries from it if I'm pretty sure no one will send coins to that particular address. For example, if would be useful for shops which create one-time addresses to recieve payments. If it's used once it's not needed anymore so the shop engine sends coins from that address to a certain fixed address and removes keys for that temporary one. It will prevent wallet.dat from growing indefinitely. Also note that invisible address is created each time one sends the sum which isn't equal to the sum of a particular address or sum of several addresses so it's divided by two parts: one goes to the recipient and the other goes to your just transparently generated invisible address (you don't see it in your address book but it's in your wallet.dat). If you often send money you'd already have lots of such addresses and some empty ones. AFAIK no automatic garbage collection is done for now and it's right — there is no way to know which address is temporary and which is constant. Another proposal is to make a special «temporary address» flag which may be set on any of your addresses either on its creation or anytime later. Bitcoin checks this flag on transaction and if this (these) address(es) become empty AND the transaction was confirmed by the network (6 confirmations) then it's removed from the wallet. Hence this flag should be set for all «change» (invisible) addresses because they can't be used to receive payments (they aren't displayed anywhere).
In bitcoin, 2 things that take disk space do grow. Wallet and blockchain. Deterministic wallets can avoid the former and pruning can avoid the latter. I hope that miners some day will reward transactions that allow significant pruning aka merge many addresses. Why should I pay for a transaction of 50kB if after this transaction the blockchain shrinks by 49kB? |
|
|
|
I prefer mBTC and µBTC
I will argue that it's hard for people to understand what these exactly mean. I can't even grasp it based on those names. You would better argue that its hard to you to understand. Where were far more exotic currency divisions in the past, well known the Pound in great britain was divided in 20 Shilling each 12 pence. And even 1/1000 division exist 1 Kuwaiti dinar = 1000 fulūs (singular fils). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fils_%28currency%29Iran has toman which is actually funny because one toman is either 10 Rial or 10,000 Rial depending on what is more reasonable. As a tourist you can easily be off by x1000 in your guessing when it comes to buying small quantities of funny stuff you can't identify on the bazaar  In software I see no problem with mBTC muBTC and nBTC as people will get used to it easily and won't confuse it twice. |
|
|
|
Instawallet is down... "We're sorry, but something went wrong." What happen with the wallets???  It's solved now, sorry for the downtime. [CONFIRMED] instawallet got hacked!!!! AHHHH, get your lawyers lined up!!! lol  thanx for the great service. I have far too many BTC in instawallet regarding my general skepticism towards hosted wallets but instawallet is the best so far. Do you know your up-time? I would guess it is >99.8% |
|
|
|
|
If nobody wants Pesos outside the country resulting in a 20% margin nobody wants to/can arbitrage down, think "remittance":
In such a scenario, relatives can send BTC in and not only have zero costs in the transaction but even get 20% more Pesos for their dollars instead of paying 20% fees which is not uncommon for many remittance payments. The trickier the country, the more you pay for the established providers and in turn the more BTC might be valued in the country.
To make this happen, you need a distribution system in the respective country so people that need to convert their store of value into shopping tokens can do that on short notice.
|
|
|
|
NCKRAZZE has been given a scammer tag and is not reacting to messages.
He has failed to present any information for repayment.
you sound like he defaulted? We have no right, ability or interest in playing the police. There is no way to determine the origin of the bet, "rightful" owners or a new distribution scheme. We will make the distribution as usual. It seems that Vescudero did not default so far.
you sound like you know he did not default? (As much as I felt very stupid to fall for this 300BTC bet right after placing my 1BTC I now feel slight chances of not loosing it. How is "default" determined when people claim he owes them money and he claims not to be in default?) (Special "lol" for scammer tag being a clear sign of somebody being evil.) |
|
|
|
The bet itsself is not the problem, as it is not based on NCKRAZZEs business, but Vescuderos (which is a victim of Nick by accident too)
Its more the problem that Nick fraudulently acquired the funds to place the bet on Vescudero.
That is also the reason, why he has been given the scammer tag on this forum.
So you suggest to "only" remove 300BTC from the 307BTC side of a 307BTC vs. 27BTC bet? Basically the 300BTC that were the initial bet that were part of the bet submission? How is that "The bet itsself is not the problem"? |
|
|
|
Uhm, interesting Ok, I have 1BTC in that bet from being more or less the first to take the agree side. Does your post mean I won? I mean I didn't investigate the situation but felt somehow save to side with the agree position given 300:0 in the bet at that time. What is your proof about sock puppets? Would that mean that bets of bitcoin should freeze bets in the future in case they might come from shady business? I did not have to register with my real name and wonder how they should enforce such checks. |
|
|
|
So if i changed my mind and don't consider it being worthy to be posted here, why can't I delete my post? Anyway, the original reference should not be pubnub but xkcd. |
|
|
|
pubnub-xkcd is funny and has a small bitcoin reference:  Not sure where I could have put this but I wanted to share it
|
|
|
|
|
This is crazy. 600k. Bet it is behind the careful up-trend of exchange rate today.
|
|
|
|
Reading giszmo's accounting of coin holders I noticed pirateat40 is one of the first players. So, what does that say about the "Circle of Trust?"
lol damn. lets cancel this. Seriously, this experiment is very bad for finding the good guys by looking at who played nice. It's no surprise pirate played nice. Far more interesting is to see how much fees were payed to send the coin through 100 hands and to see how many countries were involved (if we ever get some idea of that) etc. |
|
|
|
update (wanted to add respective changes in BTC forwarded but the thread is hard to read for that) ID NICK RECEIVED BY POST_ID_AND_COMMENTS
1 Garr255 189JHV6KPzvnPmjYCGPbvMMmZUWppere7h #2
2 the joint 17EVRSvdPJGhk7uKHCpY9ghnWnx7j3pPAs #3
3 sadpandatech 13YmfB6TeLzyCdnwsVZ5MdYVCLnfm5eNGF #4
4 nimda 1KiZGitw2zEr4uPzZsT7dh7F6e5yoKGvE7 #5
5 Al the Alpaca 1EWRJ5BeibZxMguujPLzqM8WWiHpFJtLLx #6
6 pirateat40 1CR5BadHQt8wd4t98mE4rw9hUfSGQ4ZGDg #19
7 rjk 17qypELtTKqr716m937wLWbapnFG6i4fyZ #20
8 NothinG 1BjMLLGrwYk3hrcnSqEUEeGchkx9tiykfY #21
9 PatrickHarnett 1KwECAhJGr8BPGgn6mezf5Z3jT7vG1HaAZ #27
10 pekv2 12NcNYb2oEh6ANo95AakEjPqQdgbcxh4m9 #32
11 unclemantis 12kM9BocNb5zSG7RMKp9wPxopK5NpayrMZ #34
12 mb300sd 1HVmv5EtQZtcsFfXe6Crz972BrB1MwsNCM #39
13 rudrigorc2 1MSPwixhqiwMLXxw3WXtNjg2nst6qVWhCX #44
14 Brunic 16Hz2xA4NmAp4CU3Mr9aJy8H9D5XqXupHG #49
15 fatigue 1Fj4QZbavJeKfagjDqUPFqQ4iJ4bHqFAMG #52
16 Phraust 15UJrPbxd6ULPJaxASUoWUp6xc473T7mww #88
17 adamstgBit 15nutdfqcS38hXdZoL7LNz5wBt8Aq4wCUT #89
18 bluefirecorp 1PsQ8qFp6ZY94gXvFLP4cqcmoLQSDCqLJc #90
19 Drakahn 1C1UMHsdPxgsWGWBhdaTC47kibJjFgWnhb #91
20 Gladamas 1FVySmZNZ6LUvz1mKkt9zgRWjBzvkM4Roh #92
21 phantitox 1GtGFJskG47Q6Q1NFsfMLWfNV9ivabbyab #93
22 John (johnthedong) 1Cm2ymVqiHA42jv31rtyze684oWTDkreza #98 instawallet addy, DON't REUSE
23 Keefe 1BZy1xxwcxQyRZErcYUFke72TSU7cV5Ptf #107
24 Otoh 1G5apmPvo2iTtmkNWAHTCET7Y842Ufijs8 #110
25 [Tycho] 1VayNert3x1KzbpzMGt2qdqrAThiRovi8 #75
26 Dalkore 12SSYCcvaHadm8Myxb3mUTzyv96VNhyzeZ #67
27 payb.tc 14no5MUE4ur2gyyEE3BHpHhV82gKm8NLbH #133
28 damnek 17xbiU6EWdaf74rmwxPv9AQZc1MeKMWh5n #115
29 Tril 1Xgeo7EQgrk22paxmKVrhNVSmauczL6EE #117
30 Scott J 18UVSvCAb6QGjPSdiXxveeu56ujmu3kTt4 #118
31 honest bob 14x3n2ntSAGN4gGvGoLhi6NbUuuoWwvfdL #140
32 giszmo 1KLYFWyv5aeci2PwJQs9aTRN1JRzDDL96o #143
33 arklan 1F4j4Lha8BjL4wxwFVbGaQwMJ4Kd1brfXb #145
34 dooglus 1BooBz2AEwUd6JepB7NhNsnAe58Q6obpcu #159
35 riX 155gBnpiBQcpnP6coTX6V7znSK3G73uNjK #160
36 RyNinDaCleM 1Bgi9fX1TD9cnuzBvWGLfm7D7sNVEq96UU #175
37 hongus 1APyqdvGMvjfEMPKCo3oHSJ4CkJuXhTCy1 #251
38 flatfly 1337sfeChyyzZLzdHLewXzcaAaJSNTM893 #256
39 URSAY 1MzjNVW8z5SuMsGPgQfWZoyKaxsc1VkLXh #261
40 nckrazze 111mamKazi1ofZ854rKTcAxhTVuGDPhhL #270
41 TYDIRocks 1PowhrA8kxnn9UBj2ESg7GQzkwTpcg44zm #280
42 Gyrsur 1FSfmWAMUsuBzUTrXgKaTE9TsSjJw1knvw #281
43 OneEyed 1MJS3FuUrWmyfvvRnm5gUYvpuFkYDzxCP4 #286
44 Namworld 14x36ktcNuf3CNrkVH1XY7vXwGHb9mCZwF #288
45 augustocroppo 161gEQewAVp6CFnoY5198vHchrbWLQytG7 #291
46 CornedBeefHash 1FvXoLCFmmRTAHJv5xMZLoMoeKBJHMCLnY #298
47 theboss 1EQfkKVZndiesJcwThRe5AAq15dZ56mZku #302
48 Maidak 14bsB5cugXFYaVZWsuoEYABd9gvkowv42a #306
49 scintill 1jCU7tevhLNaY3nDL4tinNu8NuSzDtwKh #309
50 chrisrico 1Mn7mjk69WJY85Ukwd4sFSRMALokoni13L #311
51 jasinlee 1AvxDf5WPWvrUgLsPLpb6a8mYsPXNYxNMr #314
52 fabrizziop 1MFfixQTJJ4v2PUKrz5kotQq1dPSJFUA71 #321 +.0001BTC
53 sethsethseth 1K42vUtvmg8hW6M6UjubCFhmJLv4jLby4C #324
54 Spenzert 19nPdToTaAh2jVUuotaiDhPBxcPLuLEuXD #329 signed his message, +.0001BTC
53 sethsethseth 1K42vUtvmg8hW6M6UjubCFhmJLv4jLby4C #332 <- keeping it in place of #54
55 Fjordbit 1KZnfWkXXLdEjvQKYALbEsjbeWpvSG9NWB #338
...
101 Return to Sender 18dktRf1EYbyaYTkSSZJiacBmCemxwWdqm #1
|
|
|
|
Can I get added to the cycle?
no  Uhm … just add your receiving address and don't start a discussion about whether or not you may play with us. In the end, the guy with the coin(s) has to decide if your account looks like automated 100 posts to scam us out of $25 or like a trustworthy forum member. |
|
|
|
Can I get added to the cycle?
no |
|
|
|
On the other hand, one must consider that a two-part key is still only marginally more secure than a one-part key, as the two parties could plausibly conspire to commit fraud (and, blaming two parties pointing fingers at one another is a fair bit harder than blaming one and only one party who is clearly identifiable). Well, with the thief needing both addresses, it would require both to be corrupt and even if both conspired during production, I am sure they would not share their keys with each other prior to running with the money as that would put them to the risk of not being out of the country when the "partner" moves the money. Q. It's impossible to prove you didn't keep the private keys, and with all the Bitcoin scams lately, why should I believe you? A. I have given out my real-world identity and have digitally signed a list of the Bitcoin addresses used in this project. I have made it so that it if I were to perpetrate a scam, it would be possible to prove it and to hold me legally accountable - something no scammer wants to do. You should demand the same from anyone handling your cryptocurrency. That's nice, but what if his wife gets rare expensive cancer. Also he could set it up to give the keys to his illegitimate son or mistress none of us know about on his death. … exactly this is what gets me most concerned. I bought one of his coins for my brother but I know he's smart enough to scratch it open before BTC goes x1000. We have to have some trust to make this system work. Nope. The Bitcoin works exactly without trust in any single person. That's what makes it so beautiful. Hosted wallets and physical coins are a step backwards. As always I feel bad for pulling down a great initiative that most likely was done in best intentions but in a system where you don't need trust, adding services that need trust is something nice but unnecessary. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
