The way I see it is: he took responsibility of holding money that's not his own and now that money is gone.
The responsibility... still remains and, I guess it won't be easy, but he will have to handle that.

It's not uncommon somebody has to pay from his own pocket for this kind of mistakes.
And, unfortunately, it's also not uncommon that even after paying from his own pocket, his good name on the forum remains (somewhat) tainted.

No matter how good or bad are @julerz12 intentions, tough days are ahead.  


Edit: I see that he also realized all this

It can be an old staked address, or he can use a new address for being escrow, or he can use new address for each job.
But, very important, in the last two cases the new address(es) have to be first "sealed" with a signed message coming from an old staked address.


That post you linked shows how a perfect storm can be made.
We get a campaign manager that's not that old in the business and maybe not too technical either.
We get a campaign that doesn't want to pay the price of more established campaign managers.
We get a lot of non-technical people in the campaign so they don't notice that the "signature" on those funds can hold bad surprises.
And then *spoof*, the money is gone and the campaign manager admits it that the has a hardware wallet, but he didn't use it for those funds (ffs!).
Are the money stolen by the manager or from the manager, it doesn't even matter.


I am sure that Gazeta can do much better (i.e. not getting even close to having funds stolen/lost). And if he has technical doubts, he is not afraid to ask.

I know that you are not only a reputable member of the community, but also a careful one, but in the light of some recent events, I will come with two advises (which I hope you already know and follow, but better one too much than one too few) :

* Always use messages signed with your address and ask the same from the parties of the deals. Make sure the parts are aware that only such signed messages are meaningful. Impersonation is a big risk in your business.
* Always store all the funds you need to work with on hardware wallet or cold storage. Just now a campaign manager has opened a topic saying that he got hacked and lost 5000$.

Interesant mod de desfasurare! Si nici premiul nu e rau deloc, chiar si daca probabil este vorba de 25$, nu 50$.
Dar nu voi participa. Am avut niste discutii in contradictoriu cu omul (eu cred ca exagereaza in legatura cu cel putin o persoana), asadar nu ar fi frumos/normal sa particip la concursul lui. Nu este vorba de vreo vrajba/suparare pe care as tine-o, ci pur si simplu asa mi se pare corect.

Asadar, multa bafta voua, celor care participati (sper sa fie mai multi romani)!

Very correctly stated. And, as a matter of fact, I've already seen another Reputation thread exactly on this: people asking who's to be blamed / tagged for the loses.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5433651.0;topicseen

(Of course, as usual, it's not the campaign members asking this in new thread; but that's another story.)

The first question is: where were you holding that money? Was it in a hot wallet? Because if so, it was a big mistake, no bounty manger should hold such funds without a proper setup - cold storage, hardware wallet, maybe even multisig.

If it was a hot wallet that got emptied, you'll need to see what you have installed on the computer(s) and/or smartphone(s) you've accessed that wallet with.
If it's a cold wallet, you'll have to see how you've generated it and where you've stored the safety backup/seed.

Expecting the thieves give you back that money is, sorry to say, pretty much a hope in vain and also counterproductive.


LE: wow, you have Ledger and still used a hot wallet. Impressive! How could you go this wrong?!? 

My guess would be that he has thought it over or found out that posting private key info can get his funds stolen, hence he decided to remove that. A bit late though, since it already got a backup...

I've got Fulcrum build his database during the week-end. It grew to 112.7GB. Not small, but not too big.

The first config had a lot of values on default and Fulcrum started trying to connect to a lot of peers after the sync.
For a second run I've turned more things off, but Bitcoin RPC Explorer only just gave me errors.
A third run was the lucky one.

The first request for address info was very slow though. Afterwards (for other addresses, clearly), all explorer requests were fast.
The fill up of wallet data in Electrum, afterwards, was also OK.

The only problem is that for now Fulcrum data in on the SSD I've done the initial download with. Now I'll move everything to the HDD designated for the job. It'll make the things slower, clearly, but you've got the test you aimed for.

Some recommendations for the config on the normal run:


During the initial sync I also had:


I cannot tell more. Optimal would be that maybe somebody does a really good look into the code. But I won't.
I am still deciding whether to use or not Fulcrum for long term. It's nice to have so simple "setup" on Windows, but Electrs is already configured too.
Speed is nice too. I hope it helps anybody. Maybe we get more feedback too.
These days I'll add Fulcrum to that docu/install topic too.

Și eu tot așa știu: Trust Wallet nu este complet Open Source, sau cel puțin nu era ultima dată când citisem despre subiect. Deci ceea ce zic ei (că ar fi Open Source) este o minciună. Iar regula de bază în lucrul cu banii este că dacă cineva a mințit o dată, să nu îl mai crezi, indiferent ce zice, că altfel, mai devreme sau mai târziu, o să te arzi.

Iar comparația cu Coinbase Wallet nu ține. Faptul că există variante mai proaste nu îl face pe acesta bun.


Pentru unele monede alternative există variante derivate (forks) de Electrum. Clar, pentru foarte puține și cred că este vorba doar de proiecte foarte asemănătoare cu Bitcoin.
Nu știu cât de bun e acel Wallet Connect... poate că o fi Open Source, dar cel mai probabil este insufficient testat și am văzut câte minuni se întâmplă fiindcă lumea se aruncă să folosească programe netestate cu banii lor. Deci... nu e convingător.


Din câte îmi amintesc, s-a și întâmplat așa ceva. Nu cu Metamask. Cineva a intrat undeva unde nu trebuia și a pus o actualizare de care tu zici că nu se poate întâmpla. Îmi pare tare rău că nu îmi amintesc numele extensiei să caut și să pot să dau sursa informației...


Clar, asta este o problemă mult mai frecventă, și, spre deosebire de programele pe care le poți da jos și să le verifici semnăturile, aici nu poți face așa ceva, deci ești legat la ochi. Bucuria hoților.


Corect, dar acesta este alt subiect, și nu unul prea interesant. Dacă sistemul e compromis.. nu poți avea așteptări de bine.


Păi ideea ar fi să ai banii în siguranță, că sunt bani. Deci optim ar fi să folosească, mai ales începătorul, portofel hardware cu MetaMask.
Și până acum nu m-a convins nimeni că e absolut sigur și nu poate vreun token, bridge sau ce o mai fi, să nu producă vreo surpriză.
Teoretic ar trebui să nu fie problemă, că portofelul hardware ar trebui să dea doar informații publice sau semnături. Practic, am auzi povești de groază care încep cu introducerea în MetaMask a cuvintelor de seed pentru portofel (clar, nu știu dacă e vorba de MetaMask sau o clonă), ceea ce nu are voie să se întâmple când se lucrează cu portofel hardware și m-ar bucura tare mult să confirmi sau infirmi că MetaMask cere așa ceva.


Pentru unii neajunsuri, pentru alții nu
Eu în timp am concluzionat că cele mai multe (99.9%) monede alternative nu merită atenția, așa că nu mă deranjează atât de mult că Electrum e "limitat" (nu e limitare, e bine așa) la Bitcoin.
Atomic nu știu. Sparrow e o alegere mai bună, dar, din nou, cred că e doar pentru Bitcoin.


De acesta am auzit și mai puțin. Mare atenție cu Binance chain, că este extrem de centralizat. Poate aduce bani dacă ești atent și te pricepi, dar poate să facă surprize neplăcute tot la fel de ușor (de la bani blocați la infrastructura complet picată dacă vreodată Binance sau CZ au probleme).
Nu spun să eviți, e treaba ta, eu doar avertizez că nu e înțelept să ai prea mulți bani acolo (inclusiv BNB, BUSD sau versiunea Binance de wrapped Bitcoin).


Mai este și abordarea majorității: vezi ce și cum au instalat cei mai mulți, faci ca ei și speri că e totul în regulă. Și de obicei este în regulă, că majoritatea nu știe (sau îi e lene) să facă toate acele verificări. Ideea mai importantă e să nu faci mișcări greșite (pe care poate că majoritatea nu le face), vezi introdusul de seed al portmoneului hardware în MetaMask...

Mempool space shows some +11% the estimated next difficulty change. I didn't recheck the calculations, but I am sure I didn't have this big numbers.

No worries.
And you could have been done better. The hash rate is rising so fast I now expect we're both way off

This one just got confirmed.

I suggest you take a look at https://mempool.space
You'll see that the last few blocks were mined without being full. Still, in "waiting" there are already transactions for more than a block. So if you send now at 1 sat/vByte there is a chance it won't be mined exactly in the next block, instead 1-2 (or more) blocks later. I cannot foresee the future, hence I can't tell when. But it's reasonable to guess that's not too long, especially as it's week-end (in working days it's more congested).
But if you don't want to wait, just use higher fee. You will see that even now pay fees like 100-300 (or more) sat/vByte. Imho it's wasted money, but you can do that too if you're such in a hurry.

Mastercard fast will still not happen, a block need to be mined, which can happen in the next second after your transaction was sent (by you) - if you're overly lucky - or even in an hour - if you're unlucky or have set rather low fee. Keep in mind that the average is meant to be one new block at every ~10 minutes.

Loyce is right.

Go to Tools->Preferences, change Base unit from mBTC to BTC and try to make the transaction using BTC as denomination.

Even more, you should be able to set the fee to 1 sat/vByte, which should get your transaction confirmed before tomorrow morning. But first change to BTC, since you were sending too low amount to the casino.

_______________________________	___________________________________________
Bitcointalk-Nutzername: NeuroticFish	Preis 31. Dezember 2023 um 23.59.59 MEZ: 48512 $

Ich wollte gerade eine Schätzung im Bereich von 65000$ machen, aber ich fürchte, die Weltwirtschaft wird das im Jahr 2023 möglicherweise nicht zulassen.

Danke 1miau für die Einladung und deine Großzügigkeit!
Viel Glück euch allen!

That website is owned by bcashers, who, last time I've checked, were still trying to convince the world that their altcoin is the true bitcoin.
This being said, simply I don't trust their news are always correct/good.
So I'd recommend looking for other news sources too.

I will add some possible entries to "the list":
https://defidive.com/news?filter=bitcoin
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/

And for the actual info (not news) on bitcoin:
https://bitcoin.org/
https://learnmeabitcoin.com/
https://en.bitcoin.it/

This can be used by the new IFNs poping up like mushrooms. Some of them use virtual cards (too). The most known is Revolut, but it really depends on what country your residence is in. (I don't know which of them support well the online casinos and sportsbooks, that's up for your further research).
Plus, from what I know, even Google Pay/Apple Pay hide your card/bank information, exposing actually a virtual card (I don't know how or if it can be used online, not that much experience in that).

However, as the others said, why don't you just use the online services that accept bitcoin/crypto? This should be much safer and better.

This looks easy, but can also be, at times, extremely difficult, tricky and with a great potential for troubles.
I wish you best of luck and may all the trades you'll be escrowing be nice and smooth!

Some voices are not convinced that everything can be properly turned off, see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5377997
And, in your case at least, the point it to not turn everything off and use it as every day smartphone, isn't it? And that's, by far, much riskier.

Am vrut sa-l folosesc (din nou) nu demult si nu mergea. Fiind foarte aproape de sarbatori, am crezut ca e o problema temporara. Imi pare rau ca a disparut de tot...
Mersi de actualizare.