Bitcoin Forum
January 18, 2020, 02:44:21 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »
1  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Is Bitcoin 'real money' to you? on: February 21, 2016, 04:46:13 PM
since i can and have bought real things with it i guess its as real as any other money
2  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Butterflylabs Huge SCAM on: February 21, 2016, 02:26:11 AM
So....

  • the FTC came in and stopped the company trading
  • The FTC then appointed a receiver who charged 7 figure sums a month, while not allowing shipments to customers
  • The FTC failed to prove what they wanted to.
  • The FTC bankrupts BFL.
  • The FTC 'wins' by getting them to pay $4000......
  • BFL loses its company in the process
  • Any and all customers are left with $0 or hardware

*slow clap*


most accurate summary i hve seen so far.

Yes.  People thought the FTC would step in and save the day.  Instead they showed why the people should have known the government is a useless leech and stole what remaining money the customers might have gotten back.

FTFY
3  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Butterflylabs Huge SCAM on: February 20, 2016, 03:43:04 PM
So....

  • the FTC came in and stopped the company trading
  • The FTC then appointed a receiver who charged 7 figure sums a month, while not allowing shipments to customers
  • The FTC failed to prove what they wanted to.
  • The FTC bankrupts BFL.
  • The FTC 'wins' by getting them to pay $4000......
  • BFL loses its company in the process
  • Any and all customers are left with $0 or hardware

*slow clap*


most accurate summary i hve seen so far.
4  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: BFL fucked us over again (redux) on: February 20, 2016, 03:39:09 PM

Quote
Against Butterfly Labs and Vleisides, the judgment is $38,615,161, which will be suspended upon Butterfly Labsí payment of $15,000, and Vleisidesí payment of $4,000. Against Drake, the judgment is $135,878, which will be suspended once she surrenders the cash value of all Bitcoins she obtained using company machines.

If I understand this correctly they pay less $20.000 in this settlement? What are the odds of criminal charges against them? Because this looks like a joke to me so far.

if you cant prove a civil case you have no hope of proving a criminal case. the ftc obviously was not confident they could prove a civil case so decided to settle instead of pressing on with only a a 'possibility' of winning and obvioulsy they didnt think the possibility too high or they wouldnt have settled they are the governement afterall they have unlimited resources to throw at it. in the end we are left with nothing and the ftc case drained any hope of getting any money or hardware out of bfl. ummm yay?
5  Economy / Digital goods / Re: Giving Away OkayFreedom VPN 1 Year/Premium [$29 Worth] Flat Keys .. on: December 29, 2015, 03:07:28 AM
I can has key, plz?
6  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: BFL fucked us over again (redux) on: November 08, 2015, 03:39:00 AM
We obviously knew there would be a settlement of some type. Usually with the FTC there is some promise to discontinue behavior that is publicly acknowledged, but I doubt all the good details will see the light of day.

I'm hoping for criminal trial of some sort so that if anything there are more facts put out. Plus it would be nice to see someone end up jailed for their role.

Did you now?

Now hopefully they newly alleged counts will be strong enough for an injunction.

I enjoy how the judge was like, "yeah some of what hey claim doesn't even meet the criteria of affirmative defense, but I'll allow it because I want to see there this thing goes."

i'm not picking on you rik. i would like to make  aformal request to the ones in this thread that keep posting with no useful information to please stop so that ghose of us that want to watch this thread for useufl updates can do so. Gleb, puroto libre, sbogovac searing and a bunch of others just add nothing but noise to this thread. some of them post (like gleb) what looks like useful information but it just turns out to be false and fake. i have yet to see anything gleb posted be acted upon or turn out to be true, same goes for purto libre. before you to tell me that i am wrong plese review your past posts where you say someting is true and it turns out not to be. it has not happened just once but many times. please, i am asking for the rest of us who really care, stop posting in this thread and leave it for real updates with honest and factual information and not speculatio nand made up "facts".
7  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: June 09, 2015, 10:06:24 PM
Those of you who are having no problems with the daemon:

Are you using it with p2pool?

What distro are you running it on?

Thanks.

No.
Ubuntu.
8  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: June 08, 2015, 05:39:01 PM
Hello FallingKnife & Bryce Weiner,

There seems to be an issue with the Unobtanium daemon & p2pool merge mining. While using the daemon on Xubuntu 14.04 64bit I am not receiving any merge mine payments at all, but if I switch to using the QT wallet - payments resume as normal. I've tested this over a 4 day period, it is constant. I get no errors when compiling the daemon or QT wallet as well as no errors in my p2pool logs - everything appears to be working fine, but the payments are not appearing in my wallet when using the daemon. Both the QT wallet & daemon use the same startup command & wallet database. I've posted in the p2pool thread about the issue:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg11556398#msg11556398

I'm not sure if the issue is the same on other OS's.

Thanks.

EDIT: Issue raised on github.


Hi, welcome and thanks for reaching out to us. I'm emailing this Bryce, and also mentioned it to CaptChadd. I wish I was worth a satoshi when it comes to Linux.

There's more than one issue with the linux client, it continues to crash on my server.

The Linux daemon works fine. I have it running on several servers without any problems at all. I haven't tried any GUI interface for it, though, so maybe it has problems?
9  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: June 01, 2015, 03:05:00 AM
I have no doubt this has been covered before somewhere in the previous 400+ pages, but as search is disabled, it's not going to be easy to find.

I was recently sent an amount of of UNO, the first transaction to my wallet since 30-3-2015 ... The wallet would not synch (v0.9.5.0) ... I went in search of a solution and from the coin's website found the wallet had been updated to v0.10b together with a new config file.

I downloaded the windows version ... I run 32bit Win 7 ... Extracted the .zip and tried to run it ... This is what I received ... Don't understand what version of Win is the .exe designed for ?



Any help or advice would be appreciated

Next part ... using v0.9.5.0 with the latest config file I was able to get the wallet to mostly synch, however the amount of UNO I was sent has not appeared in my wallet as yet, even though the console is as shown



The current number of blocks never matches the estimated to fully synch ... I have deleted previous block info and re-synched still nothing.
The transaction is shown in block explorer ...http://explorer.coinpayments.net/address.php?chain=19&addr=uKFdGADVd6B8K7roUAQPu1kkFoF8PX5HEK

Anyone know what I should do ?

I'm having the same problem, MichaelNZ. It seems that the "developers" created a hard fork but didn't provide a Win 32 wallet along with it. That's completely mind-blowing to me, as Win 32 wallets were being used by many people I'm sure. Unless I'm missing something . . .

Wow... April 2015 and people still have 32 bit Windows? Just... why? That's like complaining someone isn't making an Apple ][gs version of the wallet, either. Where's my ProDOS Uno-wallet!!?>!




I KNOW!  It's like . . .  people are still using Windows!!?? Smiley

Man gotta game! Man gotta game!
10  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: June 01, 2015, 02:10:01 AM
I have no doubt this has been covered before somewhere in the previous 400+ pages, but as search is disabled, it's not going to be easy to find.

I was recently sent an amount of of UNO, the first transaction to my wallet since 30-3-2015 ... The wallet would not synch (v0.9.5.0) ... I went in search of a solution and from the coin's website found the wallet had been updated to v0.10b together with a new config file.

I downloaded the windows version ... I run 32bit Win 7 ... Extracted the .zip and tried to run it ... This is what I received ... Don't understand what version of Win is the .exe designed for ?



Any help or advice would be appreciated

Next part ... using v0.9.5.0 with the latest config file I was able to get the wallet to mostly synch, however the amount of UNO I was sent has not appeared in my wallet as yet, even though the console is as shown



The current number of blocks never matches the estimated to fully synch ... I have deleted previous block info and re-synched still nothing.
The transaction is shown in block explorer ...http://explorer.coinpayments.net/address.php?chain=19&addr=uKFdGADVd6B8K7roUAQPu1kkFoF8PX5HEK

Anyone know what I should do ?

I'm having the same problem, MichaelNZ. It seems that the "developers" created a hard fork but didn't provide a Win 32 wallet along with it. That's completely mind-blowing to me, as Win 32 wallets were being used by many people I'm sure. Unless I'm missing something . . .

Wow... April 2015 and people still have 32 bit Windows? Just... why? That's like complaining someone isn't making an Apple ][gs version of the wallet, either. Where's my ProDOS Uno-wallet!!?>!


11  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: May 31, 2015, 04:52:03 PM



I am prepared for all contingencies. I built the competing codebase here: http://thebitcoin.foundation/index.html and it is beautiful, clean code for what it is. This new "BitcoinXT" not so much.

This is the puritan MP foundation, right?
Are you associated with MP?



No, not "associated" with MP though I do find #bitcoin-assets to be quite entertaining.

Can you define what you mean by "entertaining?"
12  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: May 30, 2015, 10:57:22 PM

So he concluded that the Scrypt algorithm somehow gave a coin it's value? That doesn't even make sense and makes his conclusion suspect. Bitcoin dwarfs all other alt-coins combined in terms of pretty much all those factors and does not use the Scrypt algorithm, therefore the Scrypt algorithm has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Here's a link to the episode:  https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-bitcoin-game-18-jeremy-gardner-adam-hayes

He looked at "66 commonly traded altcoins against bitcoin".  So in his analysis, of those alts, Scrypt algo apparently did better over other algos. 

I'm not sure what time period he used, but you know crypto - much can change quickly (see $UNO hash rate).  I think he did solid work using the data he had available to him at the time.  From the sound of it there was visual info accompanying his presentation - I'd like to see the $UNO data.  As it is - I thought the info was very positive for Unobtanium. 

I very seriously doubt it had anything to do with the algorithm. Scrypt was the second successful algorithm to come out, so it has the majority of the non-SHA256 traffic and really the only one to have ASICs built for it. I can in no way see how the choice of algorithm makes a single tiny bit of difference to the miner, as miners will mine whatever is the most profitable with the hardware they have. I doubt many of the people (if any besides myself and a few others) in this thread can even describe any of the algorithms or how they work, so why would they care? They don't.

Anyway, that'd kind of off topic. I think he should have left the algorithm bit out of the whole thing, as it is a red herring and data puffery.
13  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Update to 0.10 Wallet - Merge Mine w/BTC! on: May 30, 2015, 10:10:41 PM

Meanwhile, lets just pause a minute to let the adrenaline settle. We can make the wallet pretty again, don't worry. In the mean time, lets appreciate the added blockchain security that has come with the 100x increase in hash Uno is getting, with more on the way. 



Meanwhile on Comkort exchange https://comkort.com/trade/un_btc there's still bid to buy around 12.5 $UNO @ 0.0118 BTC.

Also on Let's Talk Bitcoin, there was an interesting speaker from Texas Bitcoin Conference named Adam Hayes featured on The Bitcoin Game Ep. #18.  The site is down for now, but the topic was "What Factors Give Cryptocurrencies Their Value:  An Empirical Analysis".  He concluded that around 85% of (66 commonly traded) coin's value comes from 1.) High hash rate 2.) Lower block reward 3.) Scrypt algorithm.  His statistical analysis revealed that total coin supply and coin age were insignificant.  He also touched on immeasurables that can give coins value like "brand/community loyalty" as in the case of Dogecoin where he would expect the fundamental value to be less (due to higher block reward, I assume).

Let's see if $UNO 100x price increase will follow $UNO 100x hash increase in the future.   Cool 

So he concluded that the Scrypt algorithm somehow gave a coin it's value? That doesn't even make sense and makes his conclusion suspect. Bitcoin dwarfs all other alt-coins combined in terms of pretty much all those factors and does not use the Scrypt algorithm, therefore the Scrypt algorithm has absolutely nothing to do with it.
14  Other / Meta / Re: VOD should be removed from default trust for systematic abuse of his position on: May 30, 2015, 10:08:21 PM
This is ludicrous if you ask me.

Why should VOD be the dictator of when someone gets to ask for a loan ?

Say if his father has an accident next day and exhausts his savings / insurance and asking for a loan on Jam is the ONLY choice he is left with, VOD can come in and label him as a scammer, like WTF ?

Its like appointing VOD the authority from where Save has to get 'Permission' before asking for a loan (here or anywhere).

Yes I ve been here for a while and I have seen how much scammers have tormented the people on this forum and on Jam. But what the hell ? Why are people gonna get a rating BEFORE a scam happens ?

This shit is so Minority Report...

Like I said, "trust" is the issue here.

The trust is fine. I don't have any problems with VOD leaving negative trust to people for whatever reason he wants... (well, I do actually, but that's an entirely different argument). The problem is that he's in the DefaultTrust. If DefaultTrust went away, there wouldn't be an issue, but since it's here and VOD has clearly shown he's abused his position numerous times (and continues to abuse it) he should be removed from DefaultTrust, which is really the root of the issue here. He's demonstrated time and again that he's unsuitable to be given the power of DefaultTrust, yet he continues to wantonly abuse it and no action is taken.
15  Other / Meta / Re: So now that all our info is out there, let us delete our accounts. on: May 25, 2015, 08:33:08 PM
It's simple. Delete all of your posts and messages. Change your password to a random one which you aren't going to remember. Effectively, deleting your account. Not that it makes much difference if we are assuming that the hacker has a full dump of the site. As he will have that information regardless if you delete your account or not.

Have you ever tried to delete posts on this forum?  It takes forever for each one. If you have hundreds or thousands of posts, it would be an impossible task. You'd need to write a script to do it or something.

It takes a few seconds for each post. besides, you don't have thousands of posts. If you did you would be unlikely to want to delete all of them. Allowing people to delete content with ease wouldn't benefit the forum. There would be a lot of information missing, malicious users would be abusing it and theymos would likely have to restore a lot of content deleted by malicious users.
I believe if you delete your posts, they are still in the forum's database, are they not?

Yes they are. They are just shadow deleted and can be viewed by Admins or anyone with the proper permissions.

It actually is an interesting legal data retention issue that I imagine is going to surprise Theymos one day. Someone will post something sensitive, it will be deleted, but Theymos will still technically be in possession of it and some legal entity will find out about it and all sorts of legal hilarity will ensue.
16  Other / Meta / Re: So now that all our info is out there, let us delete our accounts. on: May 25, 2015, 08:22:46 PM
It's simple. Delete all of your posts and messages. Change your password to a random one which you aren't going to remember. Effectively, deleting your account. Not that it makes much difference if we are assuming that the hacker has a full dump of the site. As he will have that information regardless if you delete your account or not.

Have you ever tried to delete posts on this forum?  It takes forever for each one. If you have hundreds or thousands of posts, it would be an impossible task. You'd need to write a script to do it or something.

It takes a few seconds for each post. besides, you don't have thousands of posts. If you did you would be unlikely to want to delete all of them. Allowing people to delete content with ease wouldn't benefit the forum. There would be a lot of information missing, malicious users would be abusing it and theymos would likely have to restore a lot of content deleted by malicious users.

So because _I_ don't have thousands of posts, it's irrelevant? As for "If you did you would be unlikely to want to delete all of them" you are wrong, plain and simple. There are many people with hundreds and thousands of posts that would like a simple way to delete them.

This forum is a cesspit and I no longer want any of my personally identifying information associated with it, which is why I use this account for general banter and bullshit I don't care too much about. I made the mistake of signing up with my normal user name a long time ago and participating in this forum at that time. I no longer want any of that information associated with this forum, but there's no easy way to go about deleting it. Many of us old schoolers feel the same way and most of the important people have left this forum long ago or use throw away accounts like I do. We'd rather not be associated with the scam infested troll shitfest this place has become, but we're kinda stuck.
17  Other / Meta / Re: So now that all our info is out there, let us delete our accounts. on: May 25, 2015, 08:03:05 PM
It's simple. Delete all of your posts and messages. Change your password to a random one which you aren't going to remember. Effectively, deleting your account. Not that it makes much difference if we are assuming that the hacker has a full dump of the site. As he will have that information regardless if you delete your account or not.

Have you ever tried to delete posts on this forum?  It takes forever for each one. If you have hundreds or thousands of posts, it would be an impossible task. You'd need to write a script to do it or something.
18  Other / Meta / Re: So now that all our info is out there, let us delete our accounts. on: May 25, 2015, 06:06:27 PM
Yes, the option to completely delete my account would be very welcome. Maybe also add the option to export all data, too.
19  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Linux Expert Needed on: May 20, 2015, 01:17:29 AM
If you are going to mine Bitcoin, why wouldn't you choose a merge pool? They can either afford to have lower fees or higher payouts. It makes sense.
I am having fun mining at mmpool right now, enjoying my Uno dust. Smiley
Exactly! It would be nice to get BTC Guild and Slush's Pool on the $UNO train too!
Sure, more pools would be great. We'll get there.

Lets try to help Xpool get up and running first, though.

Uno is about to lose it's support from Xpool because of a crashing daemon.  I'm not able to resolve it. They compile the daemon but after a few hours it crashes. Bryce thought maybe they needed to update pre-reqs to bitcoin 0.1, but that answer didn't sem to help.

If you can help, please head over to Cryptocointalk and assist Cracker.

https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/1418-unobtanium-uno-information/?p=182706

Thanks,

He needs to post some error logs or something before anyone can even begin to diagnose the problem.
20  Other / Meta / Re: VOD should be removed from default trust for systematic abuse of his position on: May 19, 2015, 04:04:04 AM
Olive branch number?

Seems like there is a solution.

What will it take?

proof that you are in fact protected by the staff and other high ranking trust members.

Give the pretender act a rest Dr. Phil. You are the perpetrator here, just like Armis was, and I will do my best to make sure everyone knows you are a perpetrator and not a protector like you would love everyone to believe. The only way this will ever be resolved is with you removing your abusive rating on my trust completely or with you removed from the default trust.

Then stop lying about me?  We're going around in circles and I don't think it's useful to anyone on this forum.

If you ever overcome your personal demons and want to be my friend - send me a PM (you've never been blocked).

You'll need to keep bumping this thread yourself.  Peace brotha.   Smiley

I think Vod has the right to leave negative feedback if he deems it appropriate. It is up to tecshare to try to convince him otherwise which seems he has been unable to successfully accomplish.  Kind of hard to persuade someone of anything while you're simultaneously attacking them.



I'd agree with you if VOD were not in DefaultTrust... but as it is, if you're in DefaultTrust you have a disproportionate amount of power compared to those who aren't. As such, you should be held to a higher standard, which VOD is clearly not. This highlights exactly why DefaultTrust is such a sham and a good-old-boy network of self congratulating and promoting scammers.


good point but then shouldnt tecshare be trying to convince badbear or theymos rather than arguing with Vod?  

Yes, possibly... however both of them are notoriously impervious to logic and what's best for the community. When you're in the goold-old-boy network, it's almost impossible to get someone inside to vote themselves or their cronies out (and really, why would you?). The problem is not really VOD, the problem is DefaultTrust. It needs to go away. That will solve much of the problem with trust system (not that the trust system is that great to begin with, but it is what it is). DefaultTrust shouldn't exist, but since it does, those in it should be held to a much higher standard than the average user. When you have someone that abuses DefaultTrust like VOD does, then it's a major problem. When you have people protecting the abusers, you really have no recourse and you're stuck, as Tecshare is, which is unfortunate.

The DefaultTrust keeps a lot of people from commenting on this forum and/or from espousing viewpoints that don't agree with the elite in DefaultTrust for fear of retribution, which makes the community that much poorer due to the terrorizing the people in DefaultTrust do to those they don't agree with.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!