Not a cage in the standard sense, but you could use fine mesh such as screen wire to get the desired effect, assuming the microwaves are in the 2.4Ghz range. For those experimenting with microwave oven parts, the recommended protection is a suit made of screen wire for your body, and a tin can with the sharp edges trimmed off and lined in soft fur to contain your man parts.  Microwave cannon This thing can do cool stuff like light up fluorescent bulbs from upwards of 10 feet away. |
|
|
|
looks like the serverhousings are from apc... are you working at apc ??  lol why? Plenty of datacenters that do colo will use APC because it's good stuff. Of course, private datacenters that don't need to worry about security or aesthetics can just go with a pile of Chatsworth racks that have no sides or doors and get better cooling and save more money. But customers that collocate like to have stuff the looks good even if it's more annoying to use. Then the VIPs on tours can be suitably impressed. |
|
|
|
One of the USB-to-Serial adapters seems to have failed, causing an FPGA to go offline, so I'll probably be getting back into one of the mini-rigs this weekend, just in case there are any additional video/picture requests.
That's interesting; so they are using USB hubs instead of the "X-link" board that we saw that has SATA connectors. I wonder if the SATA is for a different application or if USB was deemed more reliable or what. |
|
|
|
So Zhou, who had almost exonerated himself by showing lots of good faith information distribution to the victims of his incompetence and his partner's lies and obfuscation, admits that while he "doesn't work for them" and "hasn't had access since 2011" is still able to log into company accounts after two to four ownership changes?
Believe that?
And the entire brain trust behind the acquisition of Bitcoinica, in whatever uber venture capitalist/hostile takeover/white hat rescue ranger configuration they used pulled off stealing the company away from the minor that was running it on the basis of their vastly superior security protocols and ability to prevent the very technique used to allegedly steal from them 6 months after they announced their brilliant level of talent to change the entire Bitcoinica world.
Believe that?
And somehow there is a master hacker who can correctly guess an API key password to one single account within 5 tries, steals thousands of dollars in both bitcoin AND US dollars, that he is able to mask from the block chain, AND doesn't have the common sense to change the password or leave a back door so he can come back and clean out the rest of their account?
Believe that?
And that this wunder-kind hackzor, who can defeat lengthy random digit passwords, only chooses to violate one single account after successfully entering Mt. Gox? And doesn't touch a single dime other than the funds ear-marked for restitution to the folks fleeced by Zhou and his magic pyramid machine?
Believe that?
Why do we have cancer, hunger, losing football teams, sub-Saharan droughts and famine when there is pure genius like that on this planet? Seriously now, this amazing hacker would be able to solve pretty much any crisis or need just by blinking and twitching his nose they would have us believe.
Or we can call nonsense when we see it. You insult us by throwing pout the same bullshit story. You stole the money.
I'm not going to agree or disagree, but I will note down a few facts that you might not have been aware of. First, the API key WAS the password for LastPass, and apparently still is (!). Second, the withdrawal was done through the web interface and not via the API, because the MtGox password was stored in LastPass, which had it's password supposedly compromised. Third, the supposed breach did not occur until after the source code of Bitcoinica V1 was released. Fourth, the source code contained the API key (which was used as the LasTPass master password as per point 1). The conclusion being drawn is that the source release with the password caused the breach. In my opinion, this is believable, although extremely stupid (redact the source release, derp) and irresponsible (releasing something whose ownership is still disputed? Mega derp.) |
|
|
|
Dooglus is saying there's 2^160 public keys for the 2^256 private keys. In other words the mapping is not injective, meaning that more than one private key can map to the same public key.
OK I see - I thought the public key was still 256 bit and the public-key-to-bitcoin-address transformation reduced that to 160 bits. However, I looked at how it works again, and the bitcoin address is just the 160 bit public key written in Base58. EDIT: tired, need sleep BTW, what are the 4 alphanumerics that are left out of a Base58 address, and why were they left out instead of using a standard Base62 alphanemeric character set? (26 alphas x2 case + 10 numbers) |
|
|
|
me@host:~$ bitcoind -daemon
me@host:~$ tail -f .bitcoin/debug.log and stare... So mesmerizing! |
|
|
|
Any private key with the same bitcoin address will let you spend its money.
Is this true though? I thought the public key was present in the blockchain, and having 2 public keys that resolved to the same bitcoin address would probably cause the quintessential swirling vortex of doom, but shouldn't allow the coins to be spent. This assumes that there are 2^256 public keys that go with those 2^256 private keys. |
|
|
|
|
Personally, I never trust an infected computer ever again. All kinds of shit happens that's easy to miss and will cause future problems. If you hold any significant amount of bitcoins, it would be a good idea to move tem to a known secure computer. And I mean move the encrypted wallet without first decrypting it, since you can't be sure there isn't a lingering keylogger or some shit like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Meanwhile, the Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDI got 78MPG, but was never (as far as I know) available in the US. It had a 3-cylinder turbodiesel with direct injection.
|
|
|
|
Is it possible to split them up?
I would be interested in one 1x to 16x
//DeaDTerra
I have a pair of those that I just recently found, so they aren't already in the package with the other 2. Since I don't know whether they both work, I can send them both to you for the price of 1. How does 10 bucks sound, with slow shipping? |
|
|
|
live in shitfuckistan Mother Russia
why i do pay any extra for insurance??? BFL sent me parcel and hi will pay for insurance. And... i did pay BFL 88$ for @International Priority@, but in post documents i see 47.5$. maybe 30.5 for insurance? And... Maybe me fogot for my Single and paiments for 2 Jalapeno?  I don't know whether international shipments are insured or not, but I doubt it. I don't even think my shipment within the US was insured. |
|
|
|
What happens if you just run "bitcoin-qt bitcoin:somerandomaddress" from the command line (while Bitcoin-Qt is already running)?
I get the same error: Huh. What happens if you drag-and-drop a bitcoin URI link onto the Bitcoin-Qt window? That works, but it is a bit of a PITA. Also, you have to drop it in the big blank area, it won't work if you drop it anywhere else such as in the address field. |
|
|
|
|
Weren't you the guy that has already posted about this somewhere else? If so, my recollection of the situation is that you live in shitfuckistan Mother Russia, and didn't pay any extra for insurance. If your postal service likes taking things out of packages during shipment, there isn't anything that BFL can do to fix it.
|
|
|
|
What version of Bitcoin-Qt are you using?
0.6.3 What happens if you just run " bitcoin-qt bitcoin:somerandomaddress" from the command line (while Bitcoin-Qt is already running)? I get the same error:  |
|
|
|
What version of Bitcoin-Qt are you using?
0.6.3 |
|
|
|
I thought the installer for bitcoin-qt took care of the URI registration, but the standalone won't do it. It's an NSIS installer, so it would be easy to extract the code and create a patcher that updates the registry without doing anything else.
only bad thing that is only for windows not Mac  I tried it just for fun, but for some reason the string doesn't get passed properly, or else Bitcoin-qt doesn't yet know how to handle URIs. This is the code I used: OutFile bitcoin-register-URI.exe
InstallDir $PROGRAMFILES\Bitcoin
Section Main SEC0000
WriteRegStr HKCR "bitcoin" "URL Protocol" ""
WriteRegStr HKCR "bitcoin" "" "URL:Bitcoin"
WriteRegStr HKCR "bitcoin\DefaultIcon" "" $INSTDIR\bitcoin-qt.exe
WriteRegStr HKCR "bitcoin\shell\open\command" "" '"$INSTDIR\bitcoin-qt.exe" "$$1"'
SectionEnd It works, except that when you click a link bitcoin-qt complains that it is already running and then exits. |
|
|
|
What did you have to pay for those each in preorder?
Why would he have paid anything different than what everyone else is paying? |
|
|
|
|
I thought the installer for bitcoin-qt took care of the URI registration, but the standalone won't do it. It's an NSIS installer, so it would be easy to extract the code and create a patcher that updates the registry without doing anything else.
|
|
|
|
|
Won't stop a bullet to the neck.
|
|
|
|
Nope, faster but in smaller chunks. They also actually do run their own internal pool for load balancing and failover.
faster? Sorry, Im just trying to wrap my head around the idea. How exactly does that work? If we assume that they are hopping around to other pools, that means that you aren't waiting on any one individual pool to make a block; you could potentially be collecting on blocks as they are generated by each pool, if you have submitted hash power to more than one pool. Obviously since you are not submitting all the hash power to one location, the payout will be reduced from each pool, but it will come more regularly since no single pool can generate all the blocks. It reduces variance that way. Here is a topic that Meni Rosenfeld wrote up that has lots of good math to say why this works: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78031.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
