Bitcoin Forum
May 09, 2021, 02:47:15 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 ... 410 »
741  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 14, 2019, 07:32:03 AM
I have 214 earned merits. Let's assume I have included 30 persons in my trust list. How will system choose my vote, I mean by which criteria, since I have capability of voting for 21 member. How someone from my 30 members will be excluded/included?

Right now only 1 person in your trust list is eligible at that point in the DT1 generation process (namely Coolcryptovator), so it doesn't matter. In the vast majority of cases, it's like this, where there is no contention at all. If there is contention, then the system tries to distribute the votes such that the greatest number of people would be included in DT1 at the end. If there's still contention (or if my algorithm behaves sub-optimally), then it's chosen randomly among the remaining options. But this is a bit rare: if DT1 was constructed now, no randomness would be involved, since all contention would be resolvable without it.

I think it will be choosen by either the members trust score or whom most of the people have included.
For example, if someone has 20 earned merits and includes 3 member in trust list, system will check among those 3 member who has been included by most others person. Assume, I have 20 earned merit and included A, B, C in my trust list. Anyone from this 3 will be excluded by-
Assume-
A- trusted by 20 members
B- trusted by 11 members
C- trusted by 15 members.
Then my vote will go for A and C, B will be excluded.
Is that correct, can someone confirm?


In that case your vote doesn't matter, since they're all above 10. If it was instead:

A- trusted by 20
B- trusted by 9
C- trusted by 9

Then your votes would go to B and C, since that would result in the greatest number of people in DT1.
742  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 14, 2019, 07:12:44 AM
I might help out and spend a day thinking about it but the explanation from the graph is a bit confusing.

Can you dumb it down even further? Just a short description of what are the inputs exactly, and how do you want the output. Better if it's just an example with 5 users or something.

G = (U, V, E) is a bipartite graph with edges from the left side, U, to the right side, V. There are N vertices in U and M vertices in V. A "capacity" function c: U -> Z is defined for every vertex in U. A constant integer "target value" T exists.

Candidate solutions are subgraphs S = (US, VS, ES) of G satisfing the following requirements:
 1. For each vertex u in US, the number of edges attached to u must be less than or equal to c(u).
 2. For each vertex v in VS, the number of edges attached to v must be greater than or equal to T.
 
Find an S such that the number of vertices in VS is maximal.

Example:


Note that this graph is depicted as directed, but that doesn't actually matter.

Note:

 - To satisfy requirement #1, you must exclude at least two of (u1, v1) or (u1, v3) or (u1, v4).
 - To satisfy requirement #1, you must exclude at least one of (u2, v1) or (u2, v2).
 - To satisfy requirement #1, you must exclude at least one of (u3, v1), (u3, v2) or (u3, v3)
 - To satisfy requirement #2, you must exclude at least v4 (since it cannot possibly get T=2 edges), and possibly more depending on the rest of S.

In a very na´ve greedy algorithm, you might just fill up vertices on the right from top to bottom until you can't do anything else. That'd give a candidate solution of:
(u1, v1)
(u2, v1)
This is a valid candidate solution, but it's non-optimal because it includes only 1 vertex in V whereas 2 are possible. In order to achieve an optimal solution, you need some backtracking, at least. In this case there are two equally-good optimal solutions:
(u1, v3)
(u3, v3)
(u2, v2)
(u3, v2)
or:
(u1, v1)
(u3, v1)
(u2, v2)
(u3, v2)

It becomes more complicated as the graph gets bigger.

Writing it down in this way reminds me a lot of the stable marriage problem, which gives me hope that it can be solved exactly.
743  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 14, 2019, 01:42:38 AM
So for example, someone with 518 earned merits would get up to 2 votes in the 250-merit criteria and up to 51 votes in the 10-merit criteria, if I'm getting this right.

Someone with 72 earned merits gets up to 7 votes in the 10-merit criteria and obviously none in the 250.

Right. Also, for these calculations you're not counted as trusting someone if the merit they've given you puts you below the 10- or 250-merit threshold.

The 250-merit thing happens at the very end (after the 10-merit one) when there are only about 50 people in consideration (currently), so 2 votes is not insubstantial there, and you're not that likely to actually be limited.

I assume both can be used in full, i.e. using the 250-votes doesn't reduce the number of available 10-votes (or maybe I should call them "ballots" to not confuse with the person getting the votes).

Right.
744  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 14, 2019, 01:07:02 AM
Each user's number of "votes" in the last two criteria will be limited to floor(earned_merit / (10 or 250, depending on the criteria)). If you trust more people than your limit, then you will vote for the people to whom your vote will be the most useful, more-or-less.

I wasn't able to find either an optimal or low-error-approximate solution to this problem. My current algorithm is sub-optimal in general and could produce results uncomfortably far from the optimal solution, but the current data doesn't actually present a scenario where it matters: my current algorithm is optimal with the current data. Long-term, if I can't find an algorithm that I'm happy with, I could make the trust lists ordered as some have suggested.

When building your trust list, I tend to encourage people not to worry about little details like this, and instead just think about the system in broad strokes. If this results in poor outcomes, then that's a problem on my end.

And I want to insist on my suggestion regarding trust: guest should see some trust.

The main reason that I went for this solution rather than forcing custom lists is that I would like to show some trust indicator to guests. But before doing that, I want to see whether these modifications can actually be made to work. If not, then I may go to the force-custom-lists solution, and that's incompatible with guests seeing any trust indicators.
745  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: LN annoyances on: January 13, 2019, 05:18:59 PM
If you're just accepting and issuing payments from the forum, you should only require a small number of private channels (~5, depending on the size of payments and how well-balanced the flows are) to gateway routing nodes. Routing nodes basically are the third-parties that "trustlessly proxy incoming LN payments" (and outgoing). Some more info about this can be found in this blog post: https://blog.lightning.engineering/posts/2018/05/30/routing.html.

There's really no reason for the forum to be doing routing, as each of the forum members should be creating channels to routing nodes as well (so that they can send and receive payments to and from anyone in the network), not just the forum node itself.

As far as DDoS protection, that's definitely not my area of expertise, but in the standard case, an LN node can filter traffic from IP addresses other than the ~5 routing nodes you have, and can also filter anything outside of a specific set of ports. Also, since you would be using private channels, the IP address of your node won't be visible to anyone other than your set of routing nodes, and you can also use Tor if you'd like to keep it private from them as well.

I didn't know that, thanks. I'll try to figure it out when I get time. It would be nice for this all to be handled automatically, though.

What LN software were you trying to use?

I was looking mainly at c-lightning because I don't want to use btcd and c-lightning's documentation seemed better-organized, but it looks like lnd might be better. (Also, after looking more closely, it might be possible to run lnd without btcd.)
746  Economy / Auctions / Advertise on this forum - Round 266 on: January 11, 2019, 10:53:29 PM
The forum sells ad space in the area beneath the first post of every topic page. This income is used primarily to cover hosting costs and to pay moderators for their work (there are many moderators, so each moderator gets only a small amount -- moderators should be seen as volunteers, not employees). Any leftover amount is typically either saved for future expenses or otherwise reinvested into the forum or the ecosystem.

Ads are allowed to contain any non-annoying HTML/CSS style. No images, JavaScript, or animation. Ads must appear 3 or fewer lines tall in my browser (Firefox, 900px wide). Ad text may not contain lies, misrepresentation, or inappropriate language. Ads may not link directly to any NSFW page. No ICOs[1], banks, funds, or anything else that a person can be said to "invest" in; I may very rarely make exceptions if you convince me that you are ultra legit, but don't count on it. Ads may be rejected for other reasons, and I may remove ads even after they are accepted.

There are 10 total ad slots which are randomly rotated. So one ad slot has a one in ten chance of appearing. Nine of the slots are for sale here. Ads appear only on topic pages with more than one post, and only for people using the default theme.

Duration

- Your ads are guaranteed to be up for at least 7 days.
- I usually try to keep ads up for no more than 8 or 9 days.
- Sometimes ads might be up for longer, but hopefully no longer than 12 days. Even if past rounds sometimes lasted for long periods of time, you should not rely on this for your ads.

Stats

Exact historical impression counts per slot:
https://bitcointalk.org/adrotate.php?adstats

Info about the current ad slots:
https://bitcointalk.org/adrotate.php?adinfo

Ad blocking

Hero/Legendary members, Donators, VIPs, and moderators have the ability to disable ads. I don't expect many people to use this option. These people don't increase the impression stats for your ads.

I try to bypass Adblock Plus filters as much as possible, though this is not guaranteed. It is difficult or impossible for ABP filters to block the ad space itself without blocking posts. However, filters can match against the URLs in your links, your CSS classes and style attributes, and the HTML structure of your ads.

To prevent matches against URLs: I have some JavaScript which fixes links blocked by ABP. You must tell me if you want this for your ads. When someone with ABP and JavaScript enabled views your ads, your links are changed to a special randomized bitcointalk.org URL which redirects to your site when visited. People without ABP are unaffected, even if they don't have JavaScript enabled. The downsides are:
- ABP users will see the redirection link when they hover over the link, even if they disable ABP for the forum.
- Getting referral stats might become even more difficult.
- Some users might get a warning when redirecting from https to http.

To prevent matching on CSS classes/styles: Don't use inline CSS. I can give your ad a CSS class that is randomized on each pageload, but you must request this.

To prevent matching against your HTML structure: Use only one <a> and no other tags if possible. If your ads get blocked because of matching done on something inside of your ad, you are responsible for noticing this and giving me new ad HTML.

Designing ads

Make sure that your ads look good when you download and edit this test page:
https://bitcointalk.org/ad_test.html
Also read the comments in that file.

Images are not allowed no matter how they are created (CSS, SVG, or data URI). Occasionally I will make an exception for small logos and such, but you must get pre-approval from me first.

The maximum size of any one ad is 51200 bytes.

I will send you more detailed styling rules if you win slots in this auction (or upon request).

Auction rules

You must be at least a Jr Member to bid. If you are not a Jr Member and you really want to bid, you should PM me first. Tell me in the PM what you're going to advertise. You might be required to pay some amount in advance. Everyone else: Please quickly PM newbies who try to bid here to warn them against impersonation scammers.

If you have never purchased forum ad space before, and it is not blatantly obvious what you're going to advertise, say what you're going to advertise in your first bid, or tell me in a PM.

Post your bids in this thread. Prices must be stated in BTC per slot. You must state the maximum number of slots you want. When the auction ends, the highest bidders will have their slots filled until all nine slots are filled.

So if someone bids for 9 slots @ 5 BTC and this is the highest bid, then he'll get all 9 slots. If the two highest bids are 9 slots @ 4 BTC and 1 slot @ 5 BTC, then the first person will get 8 slots and the second person will get 1 slot.

The notation "2 @ 5" means 2 slots for 5 BTC each. Not 2 slots for 5 BTC total.

- When you post a bid, the bids in your previous posts are considered to be automatically canceled. You can put multiple bids in one post, however.
- All bid prices must be evenly divisible by 0.02.
- The bidding starts at 0.02.
- I will end the auction at an arbitrary time. Unless I say otherwise, I typically try to end auctions within a few days of 10 days from the time of this post, but unexpected circumstances may sometimes force me to end the auction anytime between 4 and 22 days from the start. I have a small bias toward ending auctions on Fridays, Sundays, and Mondays.
- If two people bid at the same price, the person who bid first will have his slots filled first.
- Bids are considered invalid and will be ignored if they do not specify both a price and a max quantity, or if they could not possibly win any slots

If these rules are confusing, look at some of the past forum ad auctions to see how it's done.

I reserve the right to reject bids, even days after the bid is made.

Price flattening

At the end of the auction, after the winning bids are all determined, I will do a "price flattening" operation. This has no effect on which bids actually win. For each bid, in order of lowest to greatest price/slot, I will reduce each bid's price/slot to the highest value which is equal to or only the minimum increment greater than the next-lower bid. This allows you to bid higher prices without worrying so much, but you still mustn't bid more than you're willing to pay. Example:

Code:
This:
Slots  BTC/Slot  Person
    6      0.20       A
    1      0.16       B
    1      0.08       C
    1      0.08       D

Becomes:
Slots  BTC/Slot  Person
    6      0.12       A [step 4: reduced to 0.10+0.02=0.12]
    1      0.10       B [step 3: reduced to 0.08+0.02=0.10]
    1      0.08       C [step 2: same as the next-lowest, unchanged]
    1      0.08       D [step 1: the lowest bid is always unchanged]

Payment, etc.

You must pay for your slots within 24 hours of receiving the payment address. Otherwise your slots may be sold to someone else, and I might even give you a negative trust rating. I will send you the payment information via forum PM from this account ("theymos", user ID 35) after announcing the auction results in this thread. You might receive false payment information from scammers pretending to be me. They might even have somewhat similar usernames. Be careful.

[1]: For the purposes of forum ads, an ICO is any token, altcoin, or other altcoin-like thing which meets any of the following criteria: it is primarily run/backed by a company; it is substantially, fundamentally centralized in either operation or coin distribution; or it is not yet possible for two unprivileged users of the system to send coins directly to each other in a P2P way. The intention here is to allow community efforts to advertise things like Litecoin, but not to allow ICO funding, even when the ICO is disguised in various ways.
747  Economy / Auctions / Re: Advertise on this forum - Round 265 on: January 11, 2019, 10:52:17 PM
Auction ended, final result:
Slots BTC/Slot Person
5 0.16 blenderio
4 0.16 lightlord
748  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 11, 2019, 09:42:50 PM
Crap, I wish I had paid more attention in my CS classes. No recollection of max flow whatsoever. Google is extremely unhelpful. So what's the range for X and how does it depend on merit? Can it be negative? How big is N - that's only users who have custom trust lists, right? I feel like I'm missing something obvious here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_flow
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmonds%E2%80%93Karp_algorithm

Note that you can require a "minimum flow" per edge and still be the same problem, but that refers to requiring that much flow, where 0 is not allowed.

My intuition is that with my "0 or 10" requirement, it becomes the (NP-hard) knapsack problem. There are good approximations for that, though.



I was thinking that X = earned_merit intdiv (10 or 250), but I'm not sure.

N = all users who match the current truster criteria, either 10 or 250 earned merit. The "excluding merit sent by the trustee" thing couldn't be added here AFAICT, and would have to just limit users allowed into this step. M = the number of distinct users trusted by the users on the left side.
749  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 11, 2019, 09:32:54 PM
@theymos No comment on this suggestion? I have a nice graph too

It's an interesting idea, but I think that trust ratings and trust lists are fundamentally different concepts which shouldn't be mixed. Just because you had a good trade with someone doesn't mean that you trust their judgement generally. For example, your system would tend to strongly amplify long cons like pirateat40, I think.

Also, we're not going to moderate things like "did a trade actually occur, and with x value?".
750  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Grin | PoW Mining | Electronic transactions for all. Community driven. on: January 11, 2019, 06:39:08 PM
Hi guys, I have a question .
What does  mining on testnet means exactly? it means that the coins that i mine now till january 15th doesn't have any value and i cannot trade them on exchange? thanks !

Right, the testnet ("floonet") is just to test that you have everything ready for Jan 15. The floonet coins are worthless.
751  Other / Meta / Re: THEYMOS - FACTS BASED POST - only interested in hearing HIS OPINION . Thanks. on: January 11, 2019, 06:36:35 PM
My opinion is that I'm not going to waste time reading your huge, rambly, low-content posts which you post everywhere.

Skimming:
 - Dash is a shitcoin, like the vast majority of altcoins, but I've heard absolutely nothing which makes me think that it's a scam on the whole.
 - Lauda has engaged in some behavior which I consider unethical or sub-optimal, but she's also done several good things. It's not for me to decide how her actions weigh out on net.
 - Suchmoon is an excellent forum member.
752  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 11, 2019, 06:18:12 PM
I thought that I had a good idea for limiting each individual truster when handling the last two criteria: set it up as a circulation problem as below, and then find the maximum flow. The "user tX"s through whom flow passes would be the DT1s selected.



(The orders of the users would be randomized on each run.)

There are efficient algorithms for maximizing the flow in problems similar to this, which is why thinking about it in this way occurred to me. However, it turns out that the "exactly 0 or exactly 10" requirement on the rightmost edges makes finding an exact solution too difficult.

I might try to write an algorithm for finding an approximate solution to this, but I probably won't get to it in the near future. Anyone else want to give it a try? You might also be able to structure it as a knapsack problem or something else, but I haven't gotten around to thinking about that yet.
753  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] Grin | PoW Mining | Electronic transactions for all. Community driven. on: January 11, 2019, 05:20:22 AM
Excuse my noobishness on the subject but... isn't Cuckoo Cycle PoW ASIC mineable?
If not, what makes it different from ASIC mineable Cuckoo algos?
Would be a shame if after all this talks/threads about mining with GPUs and CPUs on day 1 resulted in total pounding of the network by ASICs.

It's using a modified Cuckoo Cycle algorithm called Cuckaroo which will be tweaked as necessary to remain ASIC-resistant. However, it's planned to phase in support for ASICs, with the goal of having an algorithm that's as easy for ASICs as possible so that everyone can buy ASICs, and nobody has an advantage.
754  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Why is the violence in France completely legitimate? on: January 11, 2019, 04:48:17 AM
I more-or-less agree with your grievances, but where's the strategy? I echo The Pharmacist's comments in the other thread in saying that this movement is looking mainly like a group of undirected terrorists, which is probably turning off a huge segment of the population who would otherwise agree with you. If people are more worried about having their homes firebombed by an anarchic mob than about abstract concepts like freedom of speech, then your movement is dead.

I suspect that the movement will lose size and popularity over time as Macron both cracks down and gives some concessions, until the remnants can be safely wiped out. To avoid this I think you'd need to create a sort of parallel government which can claim widespread support from the movement as a whole, and then compete with Macron's regime either within the current framework, or compete with the entire old government for legitimacy. Extremely difficult.

(Admittedly, I'm nowhere near France or even Europe, so my ability to accurately perceive the situation is limited.)
755  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 10, 2019, 08:25:53 PM
The number of users trusted by 100+-merit users is now over 700. I think that I may modify that to requiring 2 trusters with 250 earned merit.

Number of 10-merit trusters:
Code:
+------------------+----------+
| name             | trusters |
+------------------+----------+
| DefaultTrust     |      654 |
| theymos          |       81 |
| Vod              |       54 |
| Blazed           |       47 |
| hilariousandco   |       47 |
| Lauda            |       46 |
| The Pharmacist   |       45 |
| LoyceV           |       43 |
| suchmoon         |       42 |
| Mitchell         |       40 |
| gmaxwell         |       38 |
| dooglus          |       37 |
| minerjones       |       37 |
| OgNasty          |       35 |
| SaltySpitoon     |       33 |
| philipma1957     |       32 |
| Zepher           |       30 |
| Lutpin           |       29 |
| Hhampuz          |       29 |
| krogothmanhattan |       28 |
| DarkStar_        |       27 |
| qwk              |       26 |
| actmyname        |       26 |
| Cyrus            |       25 |
| TMAN             |       25 |
| marlboroza       |       23 |
| greenplastic     |       22 |
| owlcatz          |       22 |
| BadBear          |       19 |
| monkeynuts       |       19 |
| Lesbian Cow      |       19 |
| -ck              |       18 |
| Tomatocage       |       18 |
| SebastianJu      |       17 |
| John (John K.)   |       17 |
| ibminer          |       17 |
| achow101         |       17 |
| HostFat          |       16 |
| JohnUser         |       16 |
| BitcoinPenny     |       16 |
| KWH              |       15 |
| shorena          |       15 |
| chronicsky       |       15 |
| yahoo62278       |       15 |
| CanaryInTheMine  |       14 |
| DannyHamilton    |       14 |
| hybridsole       |       14 |
| wheelz1200       |       14 |
| zazarb           |       14 |
| satoshi          |       13 |
| vizique          |       13 |
| OldScammerTag    |       12 |
| smoothie         |       11 |
| NLNico           |       11 |
| TookDk           |       11 |
| hilariousetc     |       11 |
| Maged            |       10 |
| phantastisch     |       10 |
| yxt              |       10 |
| mprep            |       10 |
| DiamondCardz     |       10 |
| squall1066       |       10 |
| Stunna           |       10 |
| hedgy73          |       10 |
| EcuaMobi         |       10 |
| polymerbit       |       10 |
| Gavin Andresen   |        9 |
| TECSHARE         |        9 |
| fluffypony       |        9 |
| EFS              |        9 |
| yogg             |        9 |
| cryptodevil      |        9 |
| ezeminer         |        9 |
| Lafu             |        9 |
| casascius        |        8 |
| malevolent       |        8 |
| Blazr            |        8 |
| PsychoticBoy     |        8 |
| monbux           |        8 |
| TheNewAnon135246 |        8 |
| tmfp             |        8 |
| Kialara          |        8 |
| nullius          |        8 |
| anonymousminer   |        8 |
| ICOEthics        |        8 |
+------------------+----------+

Number of 250-merit trusters:
Code:
+-------------------+----------+
| name              | trusters |
+-------------------+----------+
| DefaultTrust      |       63 |
| Vod               |       26 |
| hilariousandco    |       25 |
| The Pharmacist    |       24 |
| LoyceV            |       22 |
| suchmoon          |       21 |
| theymos           |       20 |
| gmaxwell          |       16 |
| Lauda             |       15 |
| actmyname         |       15 |
| DarkStar_         |       15 |
| philipma1957      |       14 |
| SaltySpitoon      |       13 |
| Mitchell          |       13 |
| Blazed            |       13 |
| Lutpin            |       12 |
| marlboroza        |       12 |
| dooglus           |       11 |
| Zepher            |       10 |
| ibminer           |        9 |
| TMAN              |        9 |
| Hhampuz           |        9 |
| krogothmanhattan  |        9 |
| OgNasty           |        8 |
| qwk               |        8 |
| KWH               |        8 |
| hilariousetc      |        8 |
| mprep             |        7 |
| Cyrus             |        7 |
| achow101          |        7 |
| owlcatz           |        7 |
| monkeynuts        |        6 |
| minerjones        |        6 |
| yahoo62278        |        6 |
| John (John K.)    |        5 |
| Anduck            |        5 |
| Tomatocage        |        5 |
| BadBear           |        5 |
| DiamondCardz      |        5 |
| shorena           |        5 |
| JohnUser          |        5 |
| tmfp              |        5 |
| Lafu              |        5 |
| ICOEthics         |        5 |
| HostFat           |        4 |
| Maged             |        4 |
| squall1066        |        4 |
| DannyHamilton     |        4 |
| Welsh             |        4 |
| NLNico            |        4 |
| yogg              |        4 |
| greenplastic      |        4 |
| cryptodevil       |        4 |
| OldScammerTag     |        4 |
| xandry            |        4 |
| LeGaulois         |        4 |
| Jet Cash          |        4 |
| Gunthar           |        4 |
| xtraelv           |        4 |
| phantastisch      |        3 |
| -ck               |        3 |
| malevolent        |        3 |
| BCB               |        3 |
| Stunna            |        3 |
| TookDk            |        3 |
| EcuaMobi          |        3 |
| Lesbian Cow       |        3 |
| wheelz1200        |        3 |
| BitcoinPenny      |        3 |
| chronicsky        |        3 |
| nullius           |        3 |
| Halab             |        3 |
| iasenko           |        3 |
| coinlocket$       |        3 |
| asche             |        3 |
| anonymousminer    |        3 |
| satoshi           |        2 |
| sirius            |        2 |
| allinvain         |        2 |
| nanotube          |        2 |
| casascius         |        2 |
| Pieter Wuille     |        2 |
| Raize             |        2 |
| Meni Rosenfeld    |        2 |
| grue              |        2 |
| bitpop            |        2 |
| BurtW             |        2 |
| tysat             |        2 |
| SebastianJu       |        2 |
| zvs               |        2 |
| Phinnaeus Gage    |        2 |
| Blazr             |        2 |
| Dabs              |        2 |
| Xian01            |        2 |
| babo              |        2 |
| BigBitz           |        2 |
| buysolar          |        2 |
| Micio             |        2 |
| vizique           |        2 |
| Ticked            |        2 |
| Timelord2067      |        2 |
| dArkjON           |        2 |
| BayAreaCoins      |        2 |
| minifrij          |        2 |
| TheNewAnon135246  |        2 |
| hybridsole        |        2 |
| arulbero          |        2 |
| AT101ET           |        2 |
| MadZ              |        2 |
| Avirunes          |        2 |
| redsn0w           |        2 |
| TripleHeXXX       |        2 |
| pazor_true        |        2 |
| Rmcdermott927     |        2 |
| bitkilo           |        2 |
| dazedfool         |        2 |
| iluvbitcoins      |        2 |
| sapta             |        2 |
| HagssFIN          |        2 |
| generalt          |        2 |
| Fakhoury          |        2 |
| zazarb            |        2 |
| ezeminer          |        2 |
| BtcCrazy1         |        2 |
| SFR10             |        2 |
| zoose             |        2 |
| rickbig41         |        2 |
| gt_addict         |        2 |
| HCP               |        2 |
| DJ1554            |        2 |
| duesoldi          |        2 |
| Kryptowerk        |        2 |
| MySeriousFaceIsOn |        2 |
| micgoossens       |        2 |
| Xal0lex           |        2 |
| o_e_l_e_o         |        2 |
| Coolcryptovator   |        2 |
+-------------------+----------+

If DT1 was reconstructed now with that modification:
Code:
theymos
HostFat
dooglus
gmaxwell
OgNasty
SebastianJu
qwk
mprep
Cyrus
monkeynuts
ibminer
TMAN
Lauda
TookDk
Mitchell
vizique
Blazed
greenplastic
Lesbian Cow
suchmoon
achow101
owlcatz
JohnUser
minerjones
BitcoinPenny
yahoo62278
zazarb
LoyceV
actmyname
The Pharmacist
DarkStar_
marlboroza
Hhampuz
krogothmanhattan
756  Other / Politics & Society / Re: €9 Million Worth of Monero Demanded as Ransom for Norwegian Billionaire’s Wife on: January 10, 2019, 03:07:16 PM
I wonder if the ransomer will be stupid enough to treat XMR as an absolute black box, and go immediately sell it on an exchange. Because if the ransomee combines data with the exchange, they can basically prove that the funds came from the ransom in that case.
757  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 10, 2019, 01:25:09 AM
Unless major problems come up, I'm going to reconstruct DT1 again using the published criteria on Monday, so set up your trust lists before then. After that I'll probably switch to doing it near the beginning of each month.
758  Other / Meta / Re: [Feature Request] "Last edit" to be shown as text instead of a rollover. on: January 10, 2019, 01:08:15 AM
Found & fixed it now, thanks.
759  Other / Meta / Re: [Feature Request] "Last edit" to be shown as text instead of a rollover. on: January 10, 2019, 12:59:13 AM
I added it for mobile devices only using CSS media queries, but it seems to only work on the very newest browsers.

Seems a little broken? They all have times of 0 I guess you’ve noticed this though.

Does it still do that? I never saw that.
760  Other / Meta / Re: DefaultTrust changes on: January 10, 2019, 12:14:35 AM
New page with info on the DT1 live "voting": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtview

But probably far less who will actually update their lists. Having said that, 10 people with 10 merits (and 1 with 100) trusting you is not a particularly high bar to be set. I would worry about potential scammers either buying or trading merits their way on to DT.
If I'm not mistaken, 200 sMerit is enough to create 10 DT1 members: Send 20 Merit to 10 accounts, send 10 times 10 Merit to the last account, and give all of them this Custom trust list:

All of the "DT1s" would also have to be of Member rank, which isn't trivial.

Anyway, there are many conceivable ways to abuse the system, but if it happens, you can just shoot me a PM and I'll fix it, probably in less than 24 hours. To do it in a way that's non-obvious, where I wouldn't blacklist the accounts, would require tons of time and sMerit, and is unlikely. I'm inclined to let the current criteria go for a while and see if "unknowns" actually start habitually getting into it, in which case changes would be needed.

Anyone knows if this counts as an -1 score on everybody on DT list if you are on DT1?

It doesn't. The algorithm would never work that way.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 ... 410 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!