The bear spirit is back and the unloading of bitcoins has started as the selling pressure grows. How's that unusual? The price has nothing to do with the fact that bitcoin's economy is constantly evolving. You're really looking at this from a very narrow point of view if you only care about the price.

Things were pretty nice today. Even had free time to play couple of games after studying. Relaxing day.

They say that seeing is believing but it's cases like that that make me doubt the fairness of real world casinos. There's no way this could have happened in a provably fair casino as the gambler would be able to prove his bet.

If bitcoin is very good for one then that thing is gambling. I have friends that gamble on occasion and after introducing them to bitcoin games they were amazed. The divisibility, ability to play several times in a second, provable fairness, extra low house edge are just amazing.

http://xtnodes.com/#testnet now shows blocks in the fork that highlights blocks that are larger than the previous block size cap 1 Mb.

Congrats to Bruno for the amazing digging. It's making headlines again lol 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/3s47la/homeless_people_run_bitcoin_exchanges/

Good question. I assume it's mostly due to lack of interest. In order to be able to test things on a network replicating bitcoin's one this network would need to have a decent number of participants. Starting an entirely new testnet out of the blue to test something temporarily likely wouldn't attract a decent amount of participants willing to put effort and resources into building it and maintaining for the tests. So the existing test net was used.

Is there any blockexplorer that reports on the fork? I'd assume that the blockexplorer would have to be running a testnet node compatible with the bip101 fork in order to be able to spot the blocks instead of seing them as invalid.

It doesn't affect bitcoin at all, the testnet is separate and as the name indicates, for testing purposes only. It's like a replica network but with useless worthless coins. Forking it will likely result to two chains being active, little more than an hour to find out what's going to happen.

No reason to create a new testnet though, this fork could be be temporary, there's no profit from throwing significant amounts of hash to a network with useless coins. In the event that two blockchains remain active at the same time services using the testnet will function normally under the non-fork blockchain.

Testnet hashrate is 6.3 Th/s, so it could be anyone. Such a hashrate could be coming from just a few machines.

We already see the overwhelming majority (~92%) of the hashrate coming from one source  (address: mqkpEhkPbbtnmqqy1Dobuvq9Wnaytc458k), bigger blocks will be allowed @ 2015-11-09 15:31:00 GMT which is less than 3 hours away as of posting this.

The current backlog is more than 300k transactions according to https://www.blocktrail.com/tBTC

Would you consider this a proper test, given that almost all of the testnet's hashrate is coming from a single source? Should we assume that the owner of the hashrate is honest?

It seems like there's an active effort to make bitcoin's testnet fork to BIP101. As seen on reddit:

What's interesting is that the hashrate that's causing seems to be coming from a single participant.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3s0uii/bip_101_has_activated_on_the_testnet_need_your/cwtkyka

What are your thoughts?

Given that the purchase is for a secure website, I could help. Escrow is a must though.

bump

Hey. I'd like to enroll.

I think this hypothesis was largely taken out of context.

Smallest withdrawal that can be made is 0.01 BTC, there's no fee.

Did zeushash seriously provide this shady HYIP with the emails of their customers?

Neg trust goes this way.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=306120

Posting in the meta while banned is not considered ban evasion. Mostly because this is the appropriate board to talk about bans.

Doesn't sound very sustainable lol.

What's does rise only mode mean?