|
1621
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: about cloudmining.website
|
on: May 31, 2015, 12:07:05 PM
|
It is incredible that even after paying every week on time for seven months continuously, people still dare to question their authenticity.
This is how you know it is a ponzi. Pretty much any ponzi promoter will say that payouts prove legitimacy, when all it really proves is that the operator is (at that time) willing and able to pay out funds. That is true for a short time, when old investor's payout can be covered by new investor's investment. But, CMW is running for seven months now. At the rate they started selling their hashes, they'd have run out of fund within three months, unless they could get new users at a huge rate or difficulty rise went in favour of them. But, their payment proofs show that users did not massively increase. Nor the difficulty rise was huge in last seven months. Hence continuous payment of seven months is only possible if they are mining. No. Ponzis can run this longer too when people advertise about it. |
|
|
|
|
1623
|
Economy / Services / Re: *BOUNTY* My bitcoin wallet address hacked need help
|
on: May 31, 2015, 12:01:02 PM
|
GUYS
I have some business and get btc in transactions
the hacker hacked into my server ( the logs are spoofed ) - he changed the btc address to his and he stole 133 till now
I am asking again. How do you know that he stole 133 BTC? -snip- How was it hacked? Do you have any idea? Hacker left 0.57780655 BTC in your wallet! Why did he do that?  In this* transaction, hacker took 0.00000065 BTC and send 1.57780655 BTC(change) back to your address. If it happened in the other way, i.e hacker taking 1.57780655 BTC and leaving 0.00000065 BTC makes more sense. This doesn't look like a hack to me. * https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/8e8920292b1b158c1496256b2fb6c8b861a1012a5b56c6f4834b9baf3efc6f36he have stolen 133 btc from me till now - i want him fcked up
I can only find two transaction to hacker's address from yours. Summing both doesn't give 133. So why you are telling he stole 133 BTC from you? |
|
|
|
|
1624
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Did Quickseller & marcotheminer frame ndnhc?
|
on: May 31, 2015, 11:57:05 AM
|
I don't think QS and/or Marco framed ndnc nor do I think ndnc is extortionist. Only thing ndnc has to do now is to prove that 1GjMtZop3K6JZW7emBWXC11ZhdQ1xEJwpm is a deposit address. People do enter after contest is over. Go through threads and you will see. |
|
|
|
|
1625
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: CloudThink.IO removed management pictures after being caught with stealing
|
on: May 31, 2015, 11:51:17 AM
|
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. No, let TC escrow it. No offense to you TheGr33k but if anyone is going to escrow this IMHO it should be Tomatocage or someone with equivalent trust as this seems like a large escrow. If TC's offer falls through I will offer to escrow as an impartial escrower.
No, please. I don't want anybody to escrow this campaign especially highly trusted members like TC. It will only increase effectiveness of the scam.
It's a hard choice, isn't it? If we don't escrow, people might get scammed here...but escrowing will lead more people to the (potential) scam. Sigh. It's a hard decision. Partially true IMHO. If we don't escrow, I don't think people will get scammed unless if OP choose untrustworthy user to escrow the funds. From the conversion with TheGr33k, I think he will accept my request.* Hope he does. * My request to TheGr33k was to not to act as an escrow for this campaign. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. No, let TC escrow it. No offense to you TheGr33k but if anyone is going to escrow this IMHO it should be Tomatocage or someone with equivalent trust as this seems like a large escrow. If TC's offer falls through I will offer to escrow as an impartial escrower.
No, please. I don't want anybody to escrow this campaign especially highly trusted members like TC. It will only increase effectiveness of the scam.
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. If OP feels am not trustworthy and will run away with funds, its better he uses you or TC as escrow, Though I want to make it clear that I have no intentions of running away or harming anyone.
Dont get the wrong idea here, MZ concern is not about you are not being trustworthy or so , it is more to that if no one is escrowing the campaign, then no less people will be joining the campaign which means that there will be less people that will bescammed purchase the "product" from cloudthink P.S : though I personally do think that you are not yet "trusted" enough (sorry no offense) I agree with your point. Though, I might not be trustworthy for you, but I have escrowed earlier too and have dealt many times. That's why I said, am fine with daily payments. Can we have Tomatocage over here? Want to know that is he escrowing? I agree with your point that less people will be scammed if no one escrows but how can we be very sure that they will turn out to be scammers? No OffencePonzis always do. |
|
|
|
|
1626
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Gregory Maxwell threatens to sell his bitcoins and find other things to work on
|
on: May 31, 2015, 11:47:27 AM
|
Another misleading title.  Which part ? It is quoted from his comment as it is... You took two things which Maxwell told and made it one-like. This will make people think in a different way. Moreover, he didn't tell "I will sell my coins and will move on with other things", instead he told, "if Bitcoin goes a centralizing route, I will find other things to work on". Both are different. If you read the full statement that he has made, it'd be clear to you that he considers the adoption of Bitcoin-XT as the centralized route. Yes. Changing to something like "if Bitcoin-XT is adopted, Gregory Maxwell will find other things to work on" or something. The current title is misleading IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
1629
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Gavin Threatens to Quit Bitcoin Development and Join Hearn's Fork
|
on: May 31, 2015, 11:04:43 AM
|
The core developers, Gregory, Pieter, Luke and Matt are involved in a company Blockstream: https://www.blockstream.com/team/ . Obviously they want Blockstream to be successful. Please tell me how Gavin is biased and the others aren't.  There are two sides to (almost) each story, and there definitely are hidden agendas involved here. One of the biggest problem of people is that they only accept what they were provided with. Medias exploit this easily. BTW, where did Gavin threatens to quit Bitcoin development? And isn't this really Gavin's fork? The title is misleading. |
|
|
|
|
1630
|
Economy / Services / Re: *BOUNTY* My bitcoin wallet address hacked need help
|
on: May 31, 2015, 10:57:33 AM
|
all the transaction coming to him is from my website "customers" can't disclose
So that means you are running a website and hacker stole 133 BTC? Please recheck my post and answer my questions. Can you escrow that 1 BTC bounty? How was it hacked? Do you have any idea? Hacker left 0.57780655 BTC in your wallet! Why did he do that? In this* transaction, hacker took 0.00000065 BTC and send 1.57780655 BTC(change) back to your address. If it happened in the other way, i.e hacker taking 1.57780655 BTC and leaving 0.00000065 BTC makes more sense. This doesn't look like a hack to me. * https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/8e8920292b1b158c1496256b2fb6c8b861a1012a5b56c6f4834b9baf3efc6f36he have stolen 133 btc from me till now - i want him fcked up
I can only find two transaction to hacker's address from yours. Summing both doesn't give 133. So why you are telling he stole 133 BTC from you? |
|
|
|
|
1632
|
Other / Meta / Re: Would that work ?
|
on: May 31, 2015, 10:43:15 AM
|
There should be other methods to get my account back as I don't like the signing message thing. If the account is not sold after getting hacked, an email address and IP address should be enough proof to prove that it's your account.
People who hacked account may also hack email but chance for getting private key of the user is low. Wallets as well can be hacked and if a person loses access to his original BTC address, they cannot prove that they own their BCT account. Hence there should be another way to prove ownership. PGP key is another way. Email can be used but it is less secure IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
1633
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: blockchain.info API - callback IP
|
on: May 31, 2015, 10:31:44 AM
|
I'm actually receiving payments on random generated addresses by blockchain.info which forward the bitcoins to my wallet address
Just for that I'd never use bc.i. Why spam the blockchain with an additional transaction? Bc.i and satoshidice are the reason we have to download 10gb blockchains. Have they not heard of offchain tx??? Honestly, do you know what you are talking about? |
|
|
|
|
1635
|
Other / Meta / Re: Would that work ?
|
on: May 31, 2015, 10:06:09 AM
|
There should be other methods to get my account back as I don't like the signing message thing. If the account is not sold after getting hacked, an email address and IP address should be enough proof to prove that it's your account.
People who hacked account may also hack email but chance for getting private key of the user is low. |
|
|
|
|
1636
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Confirmations
|
on: May 31, 2015, 09:27:51 AM
|
i was thinking that there should be a way for the next block, to confirm the inclusion of the transaction, without actually including it, but it is just based on the first block inclusion, in this way you need only 1 confirmation
is something like this even possible?
Don't think so. There are problems with this. We can't know how the owner will spend the UTXO and without knowing it, I don't know how can we confirm a transaction which is going to happen. |
|
|
|
|
1637
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: CloudThink.IO removed management pictures after being caught with stealing
|
on: May 31, 2015, 09:19:26 AM
|
I disagree with you here. They decreased pay rates and people who join the campaign will be much less when it is not escrowed. I might be wrong. ATM only a few joined the campaign.
Still listed as "HERO & LEGENDARY: 0.0025 BTC/post" for me. That's hiiiiiiiiigh as hell. My mistake. He was only planning to do it. Anyway, only rate for Hero Member and Legendary is very high. So the registrations probably will be low because HM. -snip-
To resolve this issue once and for all, we plan to lower the payouts with 20-30% and lower the available slots (for this week only, until June 8) so the budget estimation doesn't pass the total funds in escrow. And if this happens, we will immediately add funds to the escrow to cover it.
Please tell us if this is ok and post any recommendation you may have to resolve this issue. We can also change the payout time to Daily for the first week.
As I said though: I'm aware that's not the case right now but I'm fairly sure it will. Once it does someone needs to step up - perhaps not yet though.
Perhaps there's no need for someone to escrow yet, but if people start joining up (and I think they will due to pay rates), there will be a need. I agree with you in this. Let's wait and see. |
|
|
|
|
1638
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: CloudThink.IO removed management pictures after being caught with stealing
|
on: May 31, 2015, 09:08:21 AM
|
FYI, TC declined to escrow it. I received a PM from TC few minutes ago.
Right. I'd rather someone else other than me escrow it, I >might< consider stepping in as a last resort but that's it. It's an easy decision. You want to protect the few who joined the campaign inspite of being aware there is no escrow and that they are advertsing scam. You're ignoring all those outside the few threads who can't see the warnings exposed to the ads and thinking this is legit.
There is no reason for any trusted escrow to help them. In the current situation they're getting no one and campaign is dead. If any trusted escrow helps them they are responisble for anyone getting scammed by them due to their ad.
No, it's not. This campaign pays something like 75% better than the best available non-risky signature campaign. It will fill up and the same advertising potential will be achieved regardless of whether or not someone escrows. I want someone to escrow so that less people are at risk of being scammed. I'm aware that's not the case right now but I'm fairly sure it will. Once it does someone needs to step up - perhaps not yet though. I disagree with you here. They decreased pay rates and people who join the campaign will be much less when it is not escrowed. I might be wrong. ATM only a few joined the campaign. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
