|
21
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: This Feels Like the $100-$110 days.
|
on: March 07, 2014, 04:57:30 AM
|
I wouldn't mind some May 2012-like stability. It's nice to not need to check the price every day in order to have a good estimate of how many bitcoins something is worth.
were at July, not may (we hope). may preceded the crash to 66 Key word: 2012 |
|
|
|
|
24
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22]
|
on: March 06, 2014, 02:15:41 AM
|
Hi everyone, I'm having tons of fun with this, but need some help. With oclvanitygen, i made a .bat and added pause so I can actually read the thing for a moment.
I see it's recognizing my 3 GPUs and CPU just fine okay good. I have a AMD FX-9370 8-core 4.8 Ghz cpu, an R9 280x (another coming tomorrow yay) and two Asus 7870's. So I have plenty of power. In fact my cpu is solving tons of fun addresses with vanitygen64 so I have that all figured out.
What do I add to my .bat file to get it to "work" on say GPU 0, my powerful one? I can't seem to get oclvanitygen mining on anything. And the OP is super vague and missing all this info on what to tell oclvanitygen.
Thanks!
Try different devstrings. The -D option lets you select which computing device to run on. |
|
|
|
|
25
|
Other / Meta / Re: Marketplace trust
|
on: March 05, 2014, 03:39:59 PM
|
Can we please get some sort of reasoning behind there not being Trust displayed in the Newbie forums? This is one place that needs that system the most.
I know I've posted about it more than once, and no one will give a good explanation.
Thanks.
Still have this question, but I'm posting because I have another one: Is it possible to remove a single user from your trust circle? There's one that's added through someone I *do* trust, whose input I simply don't take seriously, and I'd rather not see them under "Trusted" feedback. Nothing personal against the user, I just don't find their ratings to be reliable. (e.g. Can I list them as -username instead on the Trust Settings page?) I have been thinking about this too. My trust in their integrity != my trust in their judgement. The same thing happens with bitcoin-otc. |
|
|
|
|
27
|
Economy / Services / Re: [BTC.sx] Get paid for your signature
|
on: March 03, 2014, 02:56:09 PM
|
Does this mean we don't get paid for last month? Or have just to be patient?  Wait and see. BTC.sx almost certainly held large amounts of Bitcoin and possibly USD in MtGox in order to execute automated transactions. |
|
|
|
|
32
|
Other / Meta / Re: Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures
|
on: February 28, 2014, 04:08:14 AM
|
Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.
The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.
This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity. While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad. But it also promotes spam. It's either one or the other. My point was you can't expect advertisers to pay on the basis of activity, because it has no relation to impressions. I can post twice a month and gain 28 activity. I can post 200 times a month and gain 28 activity. The advertiser would obviously prefer the latter, and short of a ruling from theymos, the latter is what will get paid for. |
|
|
|
|
33
|
Other / Meta / Re: Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures
|
on: February 28, 2014, 02:50:34 AM
|
Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.
The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.
This should discourage campaigns from paying by post and instead, paying for activity. While paying for activity would be nice, paying by post makes more sense, because one post is one ad. |
|
|
|
|
34
|
Economy / Web Wallets / Re: Blockchain.info - Bitcoin Block explorer & Currency Statistics
|
on: February 28, 2014, 01:11:42 AM
|
suggestion: on emailing a wallet backup, have a possiblity of GPG encryption.
It's past time to start insisting that all Bitcoin-related websites start supporting optional GPG encryption of notification emails. There's no excuse for not doing it, other than to make sure their users don't have any privacy. An email from Blockchain.info is certainly related to Bitcoin, and an AES encrypted file is as good as a GPG one. There's not much loss of privacy in Blockchain.info's emails, although I do agree with the general sentiment about other services. Wallet Backup
Attached to this email is an AES encrypted wallet backup which contains everything you need to restore your bitcoin balance. You can use it to restore the wallet at anytime at My Wallet or using the 3rd party MultiBit Desktop client.
Your wallet identifier is: [redacted]- (Unsubscribe) That's the full email, minus the identifier, and I just posted it on a public forum. Even the identifier doesn't get you much, although I've redacted it because it does provide some additional security to the password. Perhaps Blockchain.info could include the option to not send the identifier in the emails. |
|
|
|
|
36
|
Other / Meta / Re: Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures
|
on: February 28, 2014, 01:06:09 AM
|
Thanks for styling limitations theymos. Now I can Unignore most of the PD spammers.
The real problem is spamming, because of pay-per-post signatures. We should do something about it. I see a lot of people try to write +1000 posts in a month, so spam is inevitable. You don't have to write every thread you read.
You still can't argue with it being unfair towards the people who don't spam. Changing signatures only damages the community, banning spammers helps it. Also as stated above, the main advertising sites like primedice only pay for -constructive- posts. It's in their interest to not pay out for spam as it gives their service a bad name. Somehow I think the group of people who don't spam tends to correlate with the group that wouldn't run up against the new signature limits. |
|
|
|
|
37
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Can I sleep at night peacefully!?!!
|
on: February 27, 2014, 09:18:29 PM
|
I just tried sending 0.1 to a test wallet I made (should of tested before not after) and was successfully able to sweep the wallet on blockchain.info
i won't use blockchain.info to import the private key when i come to bring my savings back online but it was just to test....
can anyone recommend a wallet to use that i can import private keys?
The original client can import private keys through the debug console; I do it fairly often. https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.8.6/ |
|
|
|
|
38
|
Other / Meta / Re: Proposal: Disallow Ads in Signatures
|
on: February 27, 2014, 02:03:21 PM
|
This isn't going to help the problem at all.
Shouldve kept it like before... people are still going to make useless posts that have been posted before (repeating) and overall people are going to aim for high statuses and therefore spam.
Luckily the activity system means even 1000 posts in a day won't get you out of newbie status. |
|
|
|
|
40
|
Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Hi guys
|
on: February 27, 2014, 05:06:25 AM
|
Finally got an account here.
I hope all the bad guys who stole money from Mt. Gox users get kicked in the ass.
I believe it was Ghandi who said, "be the change you want to see in the world." In other words, grab your boots. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
