|
10
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Scam Report: Projects
|
on: April 19, 2017, 02:30:27 AM
|
As for charges, that is the current/next step. Those decisions will be made in the coming days/weeks/months.
For the queue - the evidence was put into a larger 'computer analysis' queue.
I was blessed the case was given to a constable with the right combination of grit, perseverence, and commitment to justice.
A big reason for so many of the delays is that there is no precedent for what happened here. An Edinburgh department took a case for an American, within the realm of 'Nigerian prince fraud' scheme. As a rule of thumb, those don't get solved. They patiently took the time to gather and understand the evidence, ask the right questions, and push forward with the case.
This was a huge step in the case.
The next step is critical, as it has the potential to set positive precedents for future cases.
I'll keep this thread apprised of things as they develop.
Glad you kept going with this. Well done mate. |
|
|
|
|
16
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Litecoin halving and BTC price
|
on: August 16, 2015, 10:38:14 PM
|
|
I think LTC might get dumped immediately after the halving but then get bought up aggresively and we see a rally. I don't know if there will be much affect on BTC price.
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin has NOT forked, calm down and don't spread misinformation
|
on: August 16, 2015, 08:08:50 PM
|
-snip-
tl;dr it's just Bitcoin Core but with ability to have larger blocks, a bug fix, and two minor things that are useful for app developers.
Stop spreading misinformation. Let me show you what that "bug fix" is and those two minor things are: bug fix:If "relay the first observed double spend" were generally accepted as a bug with a clean fix available, it'd be fixed in Core; superficial searching says it got reverted as problematic and contentious but I don't know the whole story, nor do I have an opinion on the change. two minor things:One is for Hearn's Lighthouse project, and also got merged, found buggy, and reverted. Without those eyeballs, would the lack of testing have been addressed and the bug in getutxos have been spotted before it was widely rolled out? The other is adding back the bitnodes seed node that was removed for behaving in fishy ways, and adding a seed run by Mike Is XT basically going to be every patch Mike Hearn ever had refused by NACKs in Core? Where does that road take you as a user of XT? Cleaner and simplified version: - Automatic blacklisting controlled by the Tor project (AFAIK without their consent).
- Buggy block size validation.
- Lighthouse slave support.
- Incomplete/buggy double spend detection.
Conclusion: the block size has to be increased and XT has to be stopped.
Update: Yes. While I do support a block size increase (to what limit, is debatable), I am completely against XT. |
|
|
|
|
20
|
Bitcoin / Press / Re: [2015-08-15] Medium: Why is Bitcoin forking?
|
on: August 15, 2015, 10:16:26 PM
|
I refuse to upgrade just because Gavin says it should be so. Let the actual market decide, in terms of fees and such. I detest centralized decision making - and frankly have some suspicions about Gavin ever since he caved in to meet with the CIA.
I completely agree that we should not make changes just because Gavin says so. I also think that even if Satoshi were to reappear just to say that he was in support of larger blocks (which I believe was his original intention), it should still not be decided by vote of authority. I do believe that gradually raising the block size limit to accommodate a much larger user base on-chain is the approach which will be most beneficial and fair to everyone in the long run. However, that's just my opinion which is one of many. Allowing the market to decide is really all that CAN be done. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
