My fingers clearly not on the pulse, i was under the impression that they were going to release the bASIC under new management until today. Had it been under new management i would of waited for the bASIC to be released, this clearly changes things.
How are you guys asking for refunds, direct contact with Tom/Dave or through CC companies?
My order number: 1254
Date order placed: 8/10/12
Outstanding refund for bASIC $1099
Just emailed Tom and Dave to see whats going on, as in btcFPGA forum, Dave said all CC refunds had been processed as end January.
Dave if you see this any update would be much appreciated, before i contact CC company about refund.
Contact your CC company immediately and start a chargeback for fraud. I mean how much warning signs do you need? Wait and there is a good chance you will never get a single penny. If you need a bold warning sign. WARNING WARNING WARNING
POTENTIAL LOSS OF FUNDS DETECTED. RECOMMEND EMERGENCY CHARGEBACK.
WARNING WARNING WARNING:  |
|
|
|
Why not just Money Supply. Money Supply = Monetary Base * Money Multiplier Since BTC lacks any significant fractional reserve the money multiplier is effectively ~1. Having M0 and nothing else seems "excessive" like making categories for categories sake. "Oh so the Bitcoin M(0) is xxxx USD, what about the total money supply?" "Yeah that is the same number". As of the time of writing the Bitcoin Money Supply was BTC10,763,075 (BTC). The valuation of the Bitcoin Money Supply was: $252,590,857.80 (USD) €189,036,724.66 (EUR) ¥23.45 billion (JPY) £159,908,199.53 (GBP) 231,676,334.77 Fr (CHF) A chart title could for example express this as "Valuation of Bitcoin Money Supply (in USD)" http://blockchain.info/charts/market-cap |
|
|
|
Exactly. When measuring the Euro money supply in dollar terms nobody (and I mean NOBODY) would say something as idiotic sounding as "the market cap of the Euro is $xxx trillion USD". Likewise market capitalization isn't used to refer to the value of all gold (gold supply) either. It is simply a completely wrong term that for some reason has stuck. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_capitalizationMarket capitalization (or market cap) is the total value of the issued shares of a publicly traded company; it is equal to the share price times the number of shares outstanding. As outstanding stock is bought and sold in public markets, capitalization could be used as a (proxy) proxy for the public opinion of a company's net worth and is a determining factor in some forms of stock valuation. Preferred shares are included in the calculation. |
|
|
|
MtGox really should increase their security policy. Since they are so crucial to the Bitcoin economy I consider them as one of the greatest vulnerabilities of the whole system.
Two-factor authentication should be required for every withdrawal over 1000 USD in 24 hours or the equivalent in BTC. Also, like the Blockchain wallet, they should add sms authentication. They should mail you a warning whenever someone logs in from a previously unused IP-adress and withdrawals should be restricted from this address for 24 hours.
For now I would recommend using Blockchain to store your Bitcoins. A paper wallet is fine as well, though slightly more inconvenient.
I was looking over my MtGox account, and I don't see how to turn on 2 factor authentication. Can someone walk through the process really slowly? Login > Security Center Add YubiKey and/or Software Authenticator (Google Smartphone) Save Add the credential you just created to login, withdraw, and/or security center. |
|
|
|
|
Pen and paper. If you get really good you can get up to 1 mH/s
|
|
|
|
Strange I (well TC LLC) bought and sold a lot of Bitcoins in Jan the highest volume we have ever done. The upward price didn't cause a problem, the hoarders didn't cause a problem, people being greedy or scammy didn't cause a problem. So maybe you are just doing it wrong? bitcoin was in a bubble in 2011 it is in one now. If it keeps acting like this people wont use it. Bitcoin will act how it acts, nobody controls it. Your just pissing in the wind wanting Bitcoin to conform to your view of what is should be and how it should be. Even if you convinced most people there still is absolutely nothing all of them could do. Still if people stop using it then it won't be in a bubble. Problem solved.  |
|
|
|
We don't want another sprint to $30 or beyond followed by a crash... that'd be bad news. Why? Still even if you are right and it bad to have crashes, it is all but guaranteed we will see many (probably a dozen or more) giant crashes (30%, 40%, even 50%+) on the way to higher and higher money supply valuation. So it is all but guaranteed to be .... "bad" (your definition). |
|
|
|
It sounds to me like you are struggling to understand what ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm) is and how it works. Or more generally the concept of Asymmetric Cryptography (also known as public key cryptography). Really to start understanding Bitcoin one needs to have a very good understanding of the following concepts: Cryptographic Hash FunctionAsymmetric CryptographyDigital SignaturesCryptographic Nonce <- used in mining not transactions (Some wikipedia links to get the OP started). Note I didn't reference a specific hash function or the asymmetric cryptography algorithm used. It is important to understand in general terms what these are, how they work, and why they are used. For example why do we use a cryptographic hash instead of the original value? What does a digital signature prove? How can we verify the authenticity of a digital signature with the public key if it was signed by the private key? Then one should be familiar with the algorithms used: SHA-256 (cryptographic hash function)RIPEMD-160 (cryptographic hash function)ECC (Elliptical Curve Cryptography)ECDSA (ECC Digital Signature Algorithm) SECP256K1 (specific ECC curve used by BitcoinOne doesn't need to know for example the internal dataflow of SHA-256 but one does need to know what it is and at a high level how it works. Purpose? Block size? Hash size? None of these are Bitcoin specific and if someone doesn't have a fairly good understanding of them, then any explanation on Bitcoin really becomes a confusing mess of Bitcoin concepts AND the underlying cryptographic concepts. It would be like trying to learn double entry bookeeping without understanding arithmetic. It simply can't be done. |
|
|
|
|
Well... true but that doesn't explain the magnitude of the price rise.
Compare Bitcoin to gold, or a basket of commodities and it is still rising.
|
|
|
|
|
Simple version ... That is why we wait for confirmations.
Unconfirmed transaction should only be trusted as much as you trust the sender. If I send you a check, how do you know it won't bounce. If you trust me you can trust my check, if you don't then you can't and shouldn't. Also you need to put the amount and thus the risk in context. Selling a $5 steam game to someone on the forum? 0-confirm might be fine. Launching a network of Bitcoin ATMs which instantly dispense up to $1,000 cash upon a 0-confirm transaction? Well that is a good way to go bankrupt.
As Gabi pointed out there is nothing that prevents you from "hacking" your client (wallet). It is open source software. Trying to make it hackproof would just be "feel good security" and not prevent double spends as the protocol is open and anyone can make an alternative client even one designed solely for double spend attacks. Now in reality there are some technical challenges to successfully performing a double spend but they have nothing to do with your client. They have to do with how other nodes and miners handle unconfirmed transactions with the same input (double spend). To avoid a potentially false sense of security unless you have very detailed knowledge of how the network works and have a specific need to make delivery upon 0-confirm notification, you should treat unconfirmed transactions as untrusted.
|
|
|
|
Ah, I see your point, although I'd call it premature for them to resort to that just now. 2-3 weeks from now it might be a better idea, or about a week before whenever BFL starts shipping might be a better time for scorched earth policy on their botnets.
Botnets don't really lose nodes that fast and there really is nothing out there which is as profitable or consistent in revenue then bitcoin mining for botnets. Even if you knew difficulty wasn't going to put you out of the game for another two months it would make sense to start sacrificing nodes and maxing short term profits. |
|
|
|
Is there a chart like blockorigin.pfoe.be that calculates based on fewer than a 2016 block history? 2 weeks is a long time.
Remember mining has a random element to it. A small pool getting "lucky" and finding 5 blocks in the time they normally find one isn't that rare and would massively skew the results if looking at say last 144 blocks (~1 day). |
|
|
|
Not all companies gamble with funds they don't own... All companies are a gamble in the sense that businesses can (and do) fail even for legitimate reasons. As someone who would directly benefit from low cost funding I am still against it. Forum funds shouldn't be used to invest in third party companies either as debt or equity because they weren't donated for that purpose. |
|
|
|
After some more thought, i dont want to be part of any m of n. Last thing i need is for a large amount of btc to go missing, and i own a private key. Put me down as someone who would just take responsibility for a small amount of coins.
Ack, that's a good point. If you have an m-of-n, and some money is transferred, you can't usually tell who revealed the key parts. You would just know that it's some m of those n people. That might provide enough cover and plausible deniability for some of them to conspire. Nice catch. What? The multi-sig transaction would need to be signed by the m keys that authorize it. So if there is an unauthorized transactions transferring the balance of the coins to address xyz it WILL be signed by "m" keyholders and that will provide both the guilt of the keyholders and involved and exonerate the keyholders not involved. On edit: I see you were referring to a key sharing vs multi-sig. Yes secret sharing should not be used for this type of structure (where accountability is required). Multi-sig provides higher security and accountability. |
|
|
|
That point is of course quite true, however, it is basically illegal to send money through the mail for that very reason. In the US it isn't illegal to send cash in the mail. Never has been, just an urban legend. Now the USPS recommends you don't send cash in the mail unless you send it registered mail as it isn't insured but the same applies to other valuables as well. Bitcoin is not going to win any supporters if it just takes the attitude "sorry but you are just too stupid to use this" (this last was about attitude at not any sort of attack on the OP btw). I think the larger point is that MtGox has offered 2FA for what two years now. Despite the never ending stream of "my coins are gone" posts they all have one thing in common ... 2FA wasn't enabled. I don't think anyone said "too stupid" but if your house comes equipped with the ability to lock the doors but you choose not to and then get robbed well ... Now if MtGox provided no mechanism to keep balances safe that would be a different story but they do. Despite all the prior losses it seems people just refuse to accept that passwords are insecure. That is why 2FA exists. |
|
|
|
Not sure if there's a point to overcomplicating this thing with multi-sig, multiple people owning split keys, etc. You get a bit more security for a lot more headache, versus just having very few very trusted people hold the keys and send only the amounts you request.
Consider that if you have an n-of-m multisig address with $10,000 in it, you might only have the option to send the entire $10,000 at a time, and then store the unused portion in another m-of-n setup, going through all the requirements again.
Of course that is true of any Bitcoin transaction. You can only spend a full ouput never part of one. Luckily there is this concept of change and the change address can be the same address as the source. Still I think the point is that this is more like savings account not a checking account. The forum has ~5000 BTC in funds. All 5000 BTC aren't needed tomorrow even if the forum was buying a server, or hiring a developer. So some portion (say 3000 BTC) are put into mult-sig cold storage. It may be months or even years before the funds are needed. The day to day can be handled by theymos using the remainder of the funds and thus not need any involvement of the keyholders. If/when the operating wallet runs low, it can be reload via a one large multi-sig tx. If the operating wallet gets too large then more funds can be moved to the multi-sig cold storage. It probably would be good to do a test tx moving a token amount out of multi-sig storage every couple months to ensure no keys (or keyholders) have been lost. |
|
|
|
|
Let me guess.... no two factor authentication?
|
|
|
|
It's a weird concept to think about salaries with a deflationary currency. Instead of an "annual raise" you'd get an "annual cut"...
Imagine coming home from work and saying to the wife "Got my annual cut today, only 3%!"..."Congratulations!"
It IS weird to think that way but only because we are so accustom to the idea that prices always rise. What if the wife's response was "That's great the power company announced a 7% cut in our electric rates. More coins to put in cold storage". Ok maybe that isn't going to happen. |
|
|
|
|
I am assuming no 2FA enabled?
With password compromise usually it is
a) phishing attack
b) password re-use on another compromised site
c) keylogging
I am sure you realize it in hindsight but a 20 char lastpass passwords protecting a 6 char account password doesn't enhance security. Still I doubt you were brute forced as the account probably would be locked.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
