|
401
|
Bitcoin / Armory / Re: Armory i18n (internationalisation)
|
on: August 22, 2015, 11:43:48 AM
|
The work isn't finished. Long story short, the ideal solution is to upgrade the Armory codebase to Python 3, which has much better internationalization/Unicode support. It's far more difficult under Python 2, and prone to weird bugs too. IIRC, we had one translation (Icelandic?) we tried sticking in. We found that it broke a lot of our code and had to abandon it. The aforementioned Python 3 upgrade is something that must come sooner or later. The question is when exactly we will make the jump. It definitely won't be in time for 0.94. Honestly, I'd be surprised if anything is released before the year's out, but that's just a personal opinion, not official policy. I've been surprised before.  Are you planning to support compressed public keys when upgrading to Python 3? Congrats for becoming Sr. Member, btw!  |
|
|
|
|
402
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Nodes that accepts non-standard transactions
|
on: August 22, 2015, 11:27:41 AM
|
but noone relayed that transaction(except webbtc but that transaction propagated only to 0% of the network) even if I connect bitcoind to only one "68.168.105.168" node which is Eligius it still doesn't relay it.The only one who relayed it was f2pool.com/pushtxWhat is the problem the tx wasn't relayed by anyone. Also how to create OP_TRUE? how to get a referral code from f2pool? I need to send a non-standard-tx but don't know how to get referral code. Contact them. Email: admin@f2pool.com |
|
|
|
|
403
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Is this 16-of-16 multisig tx redeemable under current bitcoin implementation?
|
on: August 22, 2015, 11:24:23 AM
|
You can see txid just above that. Try doing it again: 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
I tried many times, but it doesn't work. Only this site accepted my transaction: https://live.blockcypher.com/btc/tx/bc23946a4335370962015d7947e37717568852a83f4b1721ee2a8eed499914a4/but it doesn't propagate into network. The main problem with this transaction in that it re-sends 0.0 btc to the input address. I made this transaction sometimes ago using brainwallet, and I've read that this is a common problem of brainwallet ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=466347.msg5154124#msg5154124). However, there is a txfee, so it may be possible to send this tx in some ways. Most of the nodes rejects that transaction. So it won't be confirmed. I thought you were just testing. If you want to use that UTXO, create one more transaction. Do you still have the private key? |
|
|
|
|
404
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Is this 16-of-16 multisig tx redeemable under current bitcoin implementation?
|
on: August 22, 2015, 07:25:19 AM
|
I need to send this non-standard tx: -raw tx- is it possible to do it using Eligius pull? Yes. txid: bc23946a4335370962015d7947e37717568852a83f4b1721ee2a8eed499914a4 I tried to send this tx using this page: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/pushtxn.phpbut it doesn't work (it says "Response = 0") You can see txid just above that. Try doing it again: 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
|
|
|
|
|
407
|
Economy / Lending / Re: ★[No Collateral*]★[No Interest]★ Offering Micro-Loans To Everyone!
|
on: August 22, 2015, 02:53:53 AM
|
MZ has promised to give me an extension. However, I was quite busy hence I haven't post the request till now. Please extend the loan by 1 month thanks! P.s. If you need, I'll send you an Full member account with close to Sr member potential that I own as a collateral. Confirmed. Getting a collateral is always welcome! Please PM me with details. Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
408
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Is this 16-of-16 multisig tx redeemable under current bitcoin implementation?
|
on: August 21, 2015, 05:22:54 PM
|
I need to send this non-standard tx: 010000000147ce0e81fac45653e8f82b4edfb2873c83fc95ee67219a0b2c9a7f9a0020a0c500000 0008b48304502205814f0c588383a38c00b7f9d2317f2aeb2649e60dd341e603b22ae79f334f83c 02210094a35f42d1c9f32ea700e66354ecd457ab2bcf0247865cb037be886569a5ac7f014104227 f4a6de87d345dc08601920c1ab8b9bf4a76868e053f5f90faf307bcf0d72b014be36394a1f8a98b d8f2e5bb2243464fa67eee14e5cfc0888d7f15b7b2a1100c0000000264d31300000000001976a91 4a90cf97578df33b7d261105f3ba7b7297fd3f77d88ac00000000000000001976a9149f27c31c0b f89cb4958e7fc99c0f9117623b4e4b88ac44a70500 is it possible to do it using Eligius pull? Yes. txid: bc23946a4335370962015d7947e37717568852a83f4b1721ee2a8eed499914a4 |
|
|
|
|
410
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: How exactly do off-chain microtransactions avoid total transaction fees?
|
on: August 21, 2015, 04:41:43 PM
|
I understand that, they have an onsite non-bitcoin ledger to keep track of the account balances, but I don't see how that escapes the fees.
If 1 million people send bitcoins to the sites pooled addresses in a single site-owned wallet, all of their accounts will be credited with what they sent. Then, those 1 million people send their coins to a business that also has an account on that site. The coins inside the sites wallet never move, but are still in 1 million different wallets. The business then tries to withdrawal their total received coins to their own private offsite wallet.
How does this save on transaction fees? It takes 1 million transactions to send to the site, and then it takes another million to send to the business offsite address. If anything, the total transactions are doubled, thus doubling the fees. The only advantage to this would be that the business could trust the site and know that the customers instantly has the correct amount of coins.
Where is the savings taking place? Is it merely just a matter of "batching" payments together for the chain? That is, bundling 1 million payments into a single 'transaction'? I didn't think the savings in doing this were too significant.
They send to multiple users in one transaction. It will only decrease total transaction fee. -snip-
Take faucets for example. With most you do not pay any fees to get the dust to your wallet once it reaches a certain level. I guess there is a 'fee' built in on the side of the owner of the faucet i.e. he gets charged a percentage on total payments to be made from his faucet.
-snip-
You sometimes have to spend more Bitcoins than the dust you get. Xapo is advertising their service using faucets. AFAIK, Xapo does not charge any fees, they cover 'em all. Other micro-payment processors and faucet owners running their own daemons pay service fee(usually, 3%-5%) or transaction fees(usually, 0.0002-0.001 BTC/week). |
|
|
|
|
411
|
Bitcoin / Wallet software / Re: Copay: Open Source HD-Multisig Bitcoin Wallet – 1.0 Released
|
on: August 21, 2015, 03:58:24 PM
|
-snip-
Bitcoin transaction fees are not static. Bitcoin fees depend on your transaction size, coin age etc... Setting same fee for all transaction is not a good idea. If you are okay with paying a fee more than you need to pay, then using 0.0005 BTC as fee for all transaction is fine. Using dynamic fees will reduce your expense. I am for dynamic fee with an option to set custom fee. |
|
|
|
|
412
|
Other / Meta / Re: recovering old scammed account
|
on: August 21, 2015, 03:05:06 PM
|
When did you lost the account? The account have first posted a BTC address at 11th May, while the negative ratings there are of 12th May. Are the address yours, or it is hacker's? If it is theirs then you are very not likely to get your account back. Next time (or by this account) you should post a bitcoin address here fast.
BTW I've searched archive.org and found a sig. with ref link from 5th May. The only way to prove the account us yours is to prove the ref link is yours. However admins rarely accept this. So you're almost saying goodbye to the account:(
Lost my account on May 11. He immediately stake his address so yea that was his. I have an address posted but it can't be sign because it's an address of one of a local exchange site that I use as my main wallet for small transactions. I've learned my lessons tho. Anyway I already bid goodbye to that account but knowing that mods have access to the emails that was once in the account, I thought just maybe it could help. I have there all the emails of notifs of my account back then. you can still prove using the old address by sending a small transaction to a BTC address. you can try that BadBear most probably won't take that as a proof of ownership because it is easy to trick someone to send Bitcoins to an address. |
|
|
|
|
413
|
Other / Meta / Re: How can a member have an avatar?
|
on: August 19, 2015, 01:40:35 PM
|
No, when the forum was hacked in late 2013(?) the changing of avatars was disabled. Anyone with an avatar could not change their avatar however theymos would remove avatars upon request.
Huh forum was hacked before, never heard of it but why would theymos want to disable changing of avatars, I mean hacked accounts and avatars, don't see any connection between them. Avatar was disabled for security. It was(/is?) possible to hack forum via uploading files via 'upload avatar' feature. Read https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=306878.0. |
|
|
|
|
414
|
Other / Meta / Re: Everyone calling for Quickseller to end war on tsp; QS ignores thread for weeks
|
on: August 19, 2015, 01:24:27 PM
|
-snip-
Since you're here, I wonder if you'd like to comment on one of the other outstanding issues. For example, do you think it's okay that QS is using sockpuppets to leave me many negative feedbacks?
TC should maintain his trust list and remove any user who abuses his/her power. I don't want QS to be removed from default trust list because he does a good job and I think that's why TC is not willing to remove him. Maybe TC can talk with QS but the best he can do is either tell QS his opinion or remove QS from his trust list. Latter is probably not gonna happen. See below about QS' multiple feedbacks. I was asked to add another point that I noticed in a recent exchange about this.
Quickseller you left negative ratings with several of your alt accounts. While they are not on default trust, I think its still considered spam.
I agree. IIRC, his explanation was that tsp does not deserve a negative trust score because of that feedback but still deserves negative feedback. IMHO, if he thinks his score should not be affected, that means that action does not deserve a negative feedback. I suggest him to change negative feedback from QS to neutral and sum up other negative feedback in 1 neutral feedback and delete negative feedbacks. |
|
|
|
|
415
|
Other / Meta / Re: just make a "BitcoinXT" section somewhere on the forum.
|
on: August 19, 2015, 12:56:38 PM
|
Definitely no. The problem isn't XT nor the forum's policy. It is the users that are constantly opening threads for the same topics in the wrong subsection.
If BitcoinXT deserves a section for itself, doesn't DASH (just used as example, I'm not advocating it) deserve one too? Are you trying to tell me there are more posts about XT than about DASH (currently ~105k)?
To simplify, the main reason for which neither have or are going to have their section is because this is BITCOINtalk, not bitcoinXTtalk, nor DASHtalk.
Dash is an altcoin, XT isn't. XT is. |
|
|
|
|
416
|
Economy / Lending / Re: ★[No Collateral*]★[No Interest]★ Offering Micro-Loans To Everyone!
|
on: August 19, 2015, 11:41:08 AM
|
I was inactive! sent pm
amount : 0.05
re-payment : 0.055 pay before 20-08-2015
reason : Need to buy something with Bitcoins
Address : 14FRN5tih3jome9RaxdT2gqrrN6v95kjuW
collateral : my abitcointalk ccount
Amount: 0.60BTC
Interest:
Collateral: BTCTalk Account (Member rank ) twitter acc.(salek11),hackedforums acc
Reason: Pay Bills
Repayment Amount: 0.62BTC
Repayment Date: 07-9-2015 at the latest..
BTC Address: 1E8wFbwrmLxM3ewVp4LspKTmQ7FdJyYLLe
Denied. |
|
|
|
|
418
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin Wallet Monitor
|
on: August 11, 2015, 03:15:01 PM
|
Anybody know of a good site and or software that can be used to monitor several HD wallets? I used to make use of this site https://beta.coyno.com but it seems like the site is no longer functional as balances are not updated. Not sure whether its just a temporary problem and or if this project is not going ahead anymore. What is nice about the site is that you can add the xpub key of several wallets and it then gives you a nice overview of your balances, transactions, balances over time etc... I've tried Blockonomics but you can only enter single addresses there. The site needs to be able to handle HD wallets. Any site out there you might know of ? With Blockonomics you can add multiple address, just separate with (,). They have a nice interface. I know but that will mean that I need to add a new address each time funds are sent to my wallet and everytime I send funds and have some go to a new change address I will have to add that change address as well. So all I'll be doing the whole day is add more and more addresses. With the site I mentioned you just add your wallets xpub key once and everything is done. The site monitors all addresses in your wallets that have any funds on them. So no need to constantly add new addresses as you use them, the site picks them up automatically. You can add xpub key to Blockonomics now. If you want to add more than one xpub key, you can separate them using comma or a whitespace. |
|
|
|
|
419
|
Other / Meta / Re: More Spammers
|
on: August 11, 2015, 03:04:17 PM
|
Crazy that people do this kind of crap. I've reported a number of them already, my successful report % doesn't seem to be going up though which is weird.
Your percentage will only change when a mod reviews your report and either marks it with a yes or no. It's not instant, but if you reported a bunch of those spam posts in the last 15 minutes or so expect your percentage to change in the next couple of hours as mods review the reports. It will take more time if you report a lot of posts. Math. The more reports you have overall, the larger the spread between percentage points. If reports were rounded off to 100ths, like 96.57% you would see it going up more often. Also could be getting some bad reports occasionally, probably won't be enough to drop your percentage visibly at this point so you wouldn't know.
Also, when you report something, it will immediately be added to your number of reports, however it won't factor into your percentage until dealt with by a moderator, and never will if the report remains in limbo (it happens).
I'm not talking about the number of reports being stuck but the percentage.
So maybe is it an error? I'm stuck at : You have reported 79 posts with 74% accuracy I doubt it. As BadBear said percentages move quickly when you have few reports and barely noticable when you have >1000 reports. IIRC hilariousandco is at >1900 reports probably more now. Lets assume 97.0000% of these are correct, thats 1843 correct and 57 not. In order to reach 97.5% (I assume thats when 98% will be shown) he would have to make 2223 total correct reports vs 57 bad. Thats 380 good reports without fail. For 79 posts with ~74.6835% assumed accuracy (59 good, 20 bad) you only need 1 good report (60/(60+20) = 75%) Lets assume 97.0000% of these are correct, thats 1843 correct and 57 not. In order to reach 97.5% (I assume thats when 98% will be shown) he would have to make 2223 total correct reports vs 57 bad. Thats 380 good reports without fail.
Accuracy is always rounded down IIRC, so it'll take even longer. People shouldn't worry about accuracy much, and certainly not single percentage points. |
|
|
|
|
420
|
Other / Meta / Re: More Spammers
|
on: August 11, 2015, 02:50:42 PM
|
I think its better to PM a Global Moderator and/or an admin who is online.
Most global mods (and mods in general) have their online status disabled, so it is difficult to say for which ones are online at a given time. It seems that this is a daily occurrence that hacked accounts are spreading malware. Refreshing their profile and checking last active time will give you an idea. It may not work all time though! -snip-
Well it will likely have a knock on effect. Spamming hundreds of posts on here will likely result in a few people clicking it out of interest and when they do they'll likely lose their account in the process.
Its interesting that not two accounts spam at a time, at least, I did not see it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
