Well, that all depends on the nature of the 'hack', doesn't it?

BTCe has a duty to take reasonable care of the deposits you send to them. That includes protecting them from fraudulent activity, such as hacking.

There have been several people already who have said they suspected SQL injection attacks, which is possible judging from the number of people who have so far come forward, to find their email addresses and passwords changed, without getting an email notification or confirmation message, which is supposed to prevent unauthorized people from getting their hands on your funds.

If those protections turned out to be flawed, and didn't protect the owner of the account in the manner they were intended to? Then the failure is BTCe's responsibility, and it is their duty to make it right with the customer, including, yes, refunding the customer out of their own pocket if necessary.

On the other hand, if the 'hack' (not really a hack, but whatever) consisted of the 3rd party obtaining the customer's login credentials, in various ways that were out of the control of BTCe's system (3rd party keyloggers, for example), not having email confirmations enabled, or the mail host the customer is using itself gets hacked, then the responsibility falls on the customer failing to protect his/her credentials, and BTCe has no duty to replace them with their own funds.

So, all this boils down to, is where the vulnerability was.

With the number of people so far who have claimed to have the email confirmations on withdrawls enabled, who didn't get a confirmation, and the withdrawls were executed, that implies BTCe was at fault. Also, if the cracker/phisher was able to change the personal data (like the email linked to the account) to a new address without any kind of intervention/confirmation via the old address, that also implies some fault with BTCe for the failure of their security.

My account wasn't one of the hacked ones, so I can only go by what others have recently posted, I have no first-hand info to base any of this on, so don't know the specific nature of the 'hack'.

In either case, however... only replying with a list of IP addresses and no other information? Tacky... very tacky... and BTCe is going to have to do better than that, even if they have no culpability in the problem.

-- Smoov

Think someone should try to decentralize the internet so if part of it goes down, the rest of it stays up and keeps on working...

oh... wait... nvm... :trlf:

-- Smoov

Put a fan pointed directly at your screen... you're mining so hot that the text is glowing...

-- Smoov

The way P2Pmining did it, the site would keep track of merge mined payouts by your BTC address, internally.

To get your payouts of the other coin, you would change your other coin payout addresses, by signing the message using your BTC mining address, which only you can do successfully, which is how the site knew it was you, and a valid change.

-- Smoov

Chart pulldown -> Chart settings

lower left side, Graph Type

-- Smoov

If I remember right (it has been a long time since I set it up), they were in the exchange's local time (tho I think a couple converted to UTC)

You can adjust that in the individual graph's settings with an offset to your local time.

-- Smoov

perhaps "delisted" would be a better tag

-- Smoov

Well, if you don't want to do it at BTC-e, you can also trade them at Vircurex too. Not sure if there are other exchanges trading it as well.

-- Smoov

Which exchanges do that?

-- Smoov

"completion of investment" is when you have been repaid your deposit plus the bonus.

That is done automatically to the address you gave for payments to go to.

-- Smoov

Pyramining isn't buying stocks tho, so, the whole comparison fails.

The terms are available to anyone who wants to read them, before you participate.

By participating, you agree to those terms.

Welcome to real life.

-- Smoov

The litecoin p2pool network listens on port 9327, not 9332.

-- Smoov

Ok... change the username being passed to p2pool.

adding "/1000" would change the minimum share difficulty you're trying to find, to diff 1000 shares. This option would be the one to slow down how fast you're finding shares. Since payouts take the target difficulty into account, finding fewer high-diff shares would pay out the same as many low-diff shares.

So, say with LTC right now, you're seeing "Share difficulty: 0.640942", and you add "/2.5" to the end of your username, you should start seeing the 'new work for worker!' lines listing your "Share difficulty: 2.500000"... if the pool diff goes higher than that, then you'll follow the pool diff, so it is whichever is higher.

adding "+0.01" would change the other difficulty. Your new work for worker is showing "Difficulty: 0.000009" for example. This is the level of work your miner is sending back to p2pool for speed calculations. If you add "+0.01" to your username, then p2pool will be asking for 0.01 diff shares back for speed stuff, instead of the dynamic one it sends.

Both of those can be used independently.

Also, there is a cap on the + that p2pool will use. I forget exactly how much, but if you set it too high, p2pool will ask for its own maximum from the miner, based on what the Share diff is at the time you start mining. This isn't much of an issue, you'd still be using a much higher miner diff than before.

Using + is _not_ a mathematical operation like the person a few posts above suggested. "+" is just a flag, same as "/", for p2pool to look for to parse out the number being passed to it, so don't use + or / in your username unless you are intending to use the options.

So...
 "/####" is target share difficulty
"+####" is target miner difficulty

Lemme know how they work out for you now.

-- Smoov

Go into settings (upper right corner), then pick the Layout tab, and un-check "Show only BTC rates".

-- Smoov

I'm starting to see odd behavior.

extra spaces within the prices shown, looking like "0.0048 8507".

Please get that out of there, it makes for lousy copy/pasting, which I do _constantly_.

Don't play games with the raw numbers, please.

-- Smoov

Well, the downside of p2pool mining is that your payouts come frequent and small, so you're trying to send a transaction with a lot of dusty inputs to make up that amount.

That makes your transaction take up more space, and pushes your fee up.

-- Smoov

And, as long as you guys are looking into the order book, the reversed pairs are having trouble too.

For example, TRC/BTC and BTC/TRC... they both show the graph properly reversed, and on the right side, the bid/ask/last/vol summaries are showing properly, but on both sides of that pair, the order books are still being shown with the values for trading TRC priced in BTC, instead of having it trading BTC priced in TRC on the BTC/TRC side.

-- Smoov

Nope, doesn't sound shady...

The fees are less than I would ever expect to have to deal with when moving fiat around. I would hardly call them "huge". If they are huge to you? Then you have bigger financial problems to worry about than a ~2 USD fee for withdrawing BTC/LTC. They could always just remove all of those withdrawl fees, and bump up their trading fees instead like another exchange I could name.

Sure they could probably list those on the section of the FAQ that shows the trading fee, but not having it there doesn't make it shady. They still list it in the withdrawal section instead of just taking it without telling you what it is (which actually _would_ be shady)

Seriously, man... get some perspective...

-- Smoov

and just what is it that's shady?

-- Smoov

When they say transaction fees, they mean for trades, not deposit/withdrawls.

When withdrawing coin, the fees are specified at the time of withdrawl.

As for fiat deposits/withdrawls, a lot of that has to do with what the service facilitating those fiat transfers, charges themselves.

Also keep in mind, this is a russian site. English translations may not be perfectly accurate the way we would use the terms.

-- Smoov