Not sure what OP's goal is, but beyond WalletExplorer there's also BlockSeer |
|
|
|
There's a MultiBit section on the forums. Transaction with high S value aren't accepted. You have to wait until the transaction is forgotten by the network, and then you can send funds again. Not sure if you can replace that transaction via CPFP... |
|
|
|
Interesting. Is there any source for this? I wonder why they suddenly changed their opinion regarding Bitcoin. Maybe they just don't want to waste time trying to regulate it?
There are a lot of sources both in Russian and English (for example here, here, and here). This sudden change of attitude seems to be connected with the legislative elections to the State Duma (the lower house of the Russian parliament) which are to be held in Russia on September 18, 2016... On the other hand, this had to be expected Thank you. We'll see how much this alsts. Hope they just forget about this once and for all... |
|
|
|
|
Interesting. Is there any source for this? I wonder why they suddenly changed their opinion regarding Bitcoin. Maybe they just don't want to waste time trying to regulate it?
|
|
|
|
http://whoadmin.com/bit2mobile.com.htmlDomain Name: BIT2MOBILE.COM Registrar: GODADDY.COM, LLC Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 146 Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com Referral URL: http://registrar.god addy.com Name Server: NS03.DOMAINCONTROL.C OM Name Server: NS04.DOMAINCONTROL.C OM Updated Date: 29-jan-2015Creation Date: 28-jan-2013 Expiration Date: 28-jan-2016Domain Name: BIT2MOBILE.COM Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.c om Registrant Name: Alex B Semenciuc Registrant Organization: Bit Alienz Factories S.L. Same registrant information from other domains related to him and the same discrepancy between time of death and last activity on his account. I'd like to believe that he indeed died, but it's getting harder to believe so. If he did, someone had access to his things, which I find odd. Won't updated still update if it was auto renewed by godaddy? If he had a 3 year lease on that domain, the last time it would renew would be a year before it expired which is what matches with the info. Not sure, but it makes sense that it would update with auto-renews. What I find odd is the account having funds to auto-renew, but that's not impossible either. EDIT: I have three emails and two phone numbers for him in the data, mostly from WHOIS records as you've got indicated above.
Wonder if someone tried calling them, likely that someone already tried. |
|
|
|
|
Not sure if what you want is possible. The only possibility I see is signing up to a service which allows you to have a virtual card through something like Tor and provide fake data, which you'd then input on the software website when making the purchase.
Please be aware that providing fake data might be against terms of service of these websites and may get your account terminated and funds locked up (it will depend on the service...)
|
|
|
|
|
Lately and always. I agree when you say that "FUD" should at least be based on something. However it's up to people who "invest" to be able to read through the information and sort it out.
|
|
|
|
Since clicking "mark all as read" does absolutely nothing, I think we can say this is reproduceable. If everything is working correctly on the background I'm fine with this. My worry was that there might have been something wrong with the forums but apparently not. I'm obviously not requesting or expecting this to be fixed since the new forum is well under way...  |
|
|
|
Suddenly my watchlist is 51 pages long (usually 1/2 pages) and it lists threads which had the last reply in 2014, and others I've obviously already read all replies to... What happened to the watchlist? Is anyone else experiencing the same?
Not that it bothers me, just curious about what's happening.
Nope. Mine seems fine. Just one page long and 15-16 topics. Is it still that long for you? Well, that's what I usually have, not anymore. Suddenly my watchlist is 51 pages long (usually 1/2 pages) and it lists threads which had the last reply in 2014, and others I've obviously already read all replies to... What happened to the watchlist? Is anyone else experiencing the same?
Not that it bothers me, just curious about what's happening.
Mine is fine with only one page. Maybe you mistaken the new reply posts or the unread post since last visit button and you assumed it's the watchlist? It never happened in my case. That's what I thought immediately, but no, it's really the watchlist. Aside from the occasional empty watchlist which fixes itself after a refresh, everything seems fine here. What browser(s) are you using? Also check your list of addons/extensions as something may be causing your unexpected problems. Maybe you mistaken the new reply posts or the unread post since last visit button and you assumed it's the watchlist? It never happened in my case.
That's a probability; it shows 44 pages for me in comparison to less than 10 for the watch list. Using Chrome and Safari. Same on both. No different add-ons from usual (ad block only, on Chrome). I guess it was just some kind of bug in my account. I just wondered if there was something being changed on the background. |
|
|
|
You can work for them and earn some by trading.
work for whom For whoever offers a job. Search on the forums and on jobs4bitcoin reddit. |
|
|
|
Anyone figure out a way to create a new HD wallet, and import a "watch-only" HD wallet?
I'm curious too, and wondering if this is even a possibility... |
|
|
|
|
You should upgrade. Instruction for verifying binaries are on the forums, you can find them linked in the News section
|
|
|
|
|
You can work for them and earn some by trading.
|
|
|
|
|
There are physical Bitcoins, but you can't really use them for purchases, unless you agree with the seller that that's the way you're paying him.
|
|
|
|
|
Suddenly my watchlist is 51 pages long (usually 1/2 pages) and it lists threads which had the last reply in 2014, and others I've obviously already read all replies to... What happened to the watchlist? Is anyone else experiencing the same?
Not that it bothers me, just curious about what's happening.
|
|
|
|
Cointelegraph gave two possible reasons since Baidu didn't make any statements.
- Because of Ponzi schemes which they can't control
- Because government asked them to.
1. Is unlikely... They can't control how many ponzis exist, but they can definitely control whatever is advertised on their website and even ask users to report scammy or malicious ads. I believe the second option would be more likely... |
|
|
|
A little expensive at $199 though.
My point exactly. Great news! Are there units available for review? Or any reviews out yet? |
|
|
|
"Backups of HD wallets, regardless of when they have been created, can
therefore be used to re-generate all possible private keys, even the
ones which haven't already been generated during the time of thebackup."
if i understood correctly this mean that the 100 pool address is olved, when you restore a backup after you have used all the privatekey previously generated, and added a new one? i can do this now without worrying about losing my coin?
Yes. Only thing you need to worry about is backing up every time you encrypt the wallet or change the password. So this means you can use the old wallet and don't need to send coins to the new wallet? Correct, it's not mandatory to switch to an HD wallet. |
|
|
|
Plot twist: the warning was just for everyone to start checking the files they download  I'm obviously joking.Finally! The 0.13.0 release was long awaited. The number of improvements is really large.
I like how they depreciated the Windows XP and removed the internal miner. The latter was just sitting there for no valid reason. That's how we move forward. Enough with supporting XP (generally speaking). |
|
|
|
If there's a dispute, a 3rd party might help solving it: hence why escrows still survive. Also, multisig technology doesn't need to replace escrows. Both can co-exist.
Oh yeah. Good point. I think 2-of-3 multisig can enhance escrows by making it trustless but still have the possibility of arbitration. Just have another person (the escrow) hold a key. But the problem here is that there's a possibility of an escrow being biased or the seller can give them a cut to release the funds to them. I know that for an escrow to be trustworthy, they should not do what I just mentioned, among other things. How do you think can we have trustless escrows? We can have trustless escrows when everyone starts being honest  Speaking more seriously, I don't think there currently is a way to make escrows 100% trustless, there are simply ways to reduce the possibility of scamming to a minimum. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
