It could also just as likely be someone who bought a shitload of BTC when it bottomed out at $460 (or had a shitload from when they were like $1) and would be happy taking profit at $600 because they want to go buy themselves a new ferrari or something.

I'm not sure how having that giant order there cause "psychological manipulation"? All I see is someone being hopeful they'll be able to sell 1000BTC @ $600... if the price ever gets that high again.

Like everything to do with BTC trading... it is all speculation.

You can expect a rough road if you fail to properly read, research and use common sense.

Don't invest in cloud mining, don't invest in coin doublers, don't invest in ponzi schemes, don't invest in HYIPs, don't leave all your bitcoins sitting on an exchange or in a wallet you don't control.

Do read up on how BTC works, things like fees, transaction confirmation times, proper security protocols etc

ps. No such thing as easy money...

Probably the best advice I'll get all week... definitely better than the advice I was getting from the toxic teenagers playing Overwatch last night who suggested I do things with various animals and/or my mum

Also, I can't wait for the EPL... I usually do a lot better predicting those games. But you are right, I think maybe I should focus on just 2 or 3 games at most... rather than spamming all of them with bets...

Another 50% of picks... for an overall loss of "lots"... I can't even be bothered to figure it out today... hahah my "wins" just aren't covering my bets...

i sure did... and I sure wish I hadn't... hahaha oh well... easy come... easy go...

All aboard the "give me teh stolen BTCs puhleeeez" express  

1FBqXqTXnF4XVH7bYkMjtvKPALHSrnc6UR

Assuming the OP can be bothered reading as far as page 138 

ok... I couldn't stay away 

• JK Nomme Kalju v Osmanlispor - ML Osmanlispor (1.57)
• Spartak Trnava v Austria Wien - DNB Austria Wien (1.36)
• Spartak Moscow v AEK Larnaca - ML Spartak Moscow (1.30)
• Dinamo Minsk v Vojvodina Novi Sad - DNB Dinamo Minsk (1.71)
• Brondby IF v Hertha Berlin - DNB Hertha Berlin (1.49)
• Sassuolo v Luzern - ML Sassuolo (1.59)

The payout for the DrawNoBets are a bit poor... but this lot of Europa match ups has already proven very unpredictable, so I'll play it safe with some DNBs just in case they have teams trying to protect away goal leads etc.

Fingers crossed for better result than my champions league picks! 

Yeah... I couldn't believe the Shaktar Donetsk and Anderlecht results... crazy. If I hadn't of taken the AS Monaco as DrawNoBet... I might have broken even. Oh well...

Follow my tips? Not if you want to make money! hahhaha you'd be better doing the opposite of what I do... hahaha Seriously... I should stick to buying lottery tickets or something

Kinda tempted to just ignore the Europa games... otherwise my bankroll might disappear 

I'm fairly sure that oclvanitygen doesn't work on Intel HD graphics... that is CPU graphics. You need a discrete GPU card like nVidia or AMD Radeon for oclvanitygen to work

From the wiki:

Such a shame... I was hoping this would go ahead... but it looks like no one is interested enough to participate.

Thanks for at least offering to get this going hilariousandco... maybe next time.

I guess I can always just try parlaying 0.01 a week on a sportsbook instead

I should have called this HCPs picks of Fail... hahahaha... some more unexpected results... 4 wins, 4 loses... for an overall loss of 25%

I obviously have a great future as a football tipster  

Nevermind, now I can just go lose money on Europe league stuff 

I know I shouldn't do this... but I'm bored and I had a good day... and tomorrow will be even better because I sign contract for new job starting on Monday... so I'm riding a wave of awesome...

So without further ado... HCPs picks of awesome!  

• FC Copenhagen v Astra Giurgiu - ML FC Copenhagen (1.30)
• Hapoel Be'er Sheva v Olympiacos - ML Olympiacos (1.99)
• Young Boys v Shaktar Donetsk - DNB Shakhtar Donetsk (1.43)
• Red Bull Salzburg v Partizani Tirani - Under 3.5 (1.90) - I blame BitcoinSupremo for this one
• Anderlecht v Rostov Fk - DNB Anderlecht (1.45)
• AS Monaco v Fenerbahce - DNB AS Monaco (1.28) - Terrible return, should probably have just manned up and taken ML @ 1.79
• Celtic FC v FC Astana - ML Celtc FC (1.81)
• Legia Warszawa v AS Trencin - ML Legia Warszawa (2.08)

no doubt I got the DNBs and MLs around the wrong way and my MLs will be draws... and my DNBs will be outright wins where I would have got way better returns from taking MLs... c'est la vie!

I decided to stay away from Steaua Bucuresti v Sparta Praha and PAOK v Ajax... because they just seem to close to call... and I don't like the odds on the overs/unders... might look at double chance home/away for those 2

Ahhh OK... excellent. I'm just a naturally skeptical person, so when people show pretty graphs that 1. I don't understand and 2. don't really explain what I'm looking at, I get curious

I have faith that Electrum is still a relatively secure wallet... Alll this means is that Multibit is "a bit more" secure when it comes to someone trying to brute force my wallet file should it get stolen.

You could also try "TahiRuaToruWha"... Tah Hee, Roo ahh, Tor roo, Fah.... This translates as "One, Two, Three, Four"

(Note: "wh" is pronounced as an "F" sound... so place names like Whakatane and Whakapapa usually get a laugh from foreigners for obvious reasons )

Ok, so if I am correctly understanding what you are saying... is that 2 rounds of SHA256 is a lot "faster" to compute than Scrypt 16384,8,1... so that, as it currently stands with current technology and methodologies, you can test passwords faster against an Electrum "wallet.dat" than you can against a Multibit HD "wallet.dat", because you can hash the input password faster.

Is that correct?

NOTE: I am not disputing your findings... I was just curious as to the how and what that graph was depicting... and if it is as I have asked, this is indeed useful information to know.

This is correct... after you put in the amount you wish to send, on the "confirmation" screen... you get to see what fee the system has calculated for your transaction before you send it... you can also cycle through the fee levels (Low-prio, economic, normal, priority) by tapping the box...

see here: http://imgur.com/a/35oLU

It doesn't give you the exact transaction size... and it doesn't give fine grained control... having said that, I've used "low prio" for all my sends so far and they usually get confirmed within an hour or 2... I think the longest wait so far was 93minutes... but YMMV

Also, as mentioned, the fees are an inexact science and don't really guarantee any sort of confirmation time frame... just because you put a "priority" fee on a transaction, it doesn't obligate the miners to process your transaction in the next block... or ever.

I believe that 2nd legs tend to be more likely to end in a definite result... as it really is the "do or die" stage. Teams either need to protect their lead, or attack to earn the win and progress to the next round.

It just gets a little complicated with "away goals" coming into play... and you'll have teams that will settle for a draw when it means they will win on away goals.

Having said that... this lot of match ups has already produced some unexpected results... and the bookies look nervous... the odds are crazy for most of the games... like 2.3 home and 2.6 away... they only game with clear favourite according to bookies is Dundalk v. BATE Borisov... and they're paying ~1.9!!?!

Sent you my suggestion via PM... so no-one can go and register it on twitter/reddit before you get a chance to decide if you like it or not.

If you decide to use it, please let me know and I'll send you my address

You're comparing apples with rainbows there...

The values are not even remotely related to one another... how many floating point calcs you can do in a second, is not a number you can directly compare to the chances of 1billion users (who each have 10 addresses) having an address collision!!?!

Bear in mind... people aren't saying it isn't possible... as the odds are >0... they're just soooooooooooooooooooooo very tiny... that if it does happen, well... that's just "Bad Luck™"

Seriously, my advice is to vote with your BTC... stop betting/gambling on the site... wait for all your bonuses/lossbacks etc to get paid into your account... then just withdrawl the lot and don't bother playing there anymore.

It seems they are not going to change their systems to accommodate your style or level of deposits/playing/cashouts... and they're fairly up front about that. If you want 10+BTC payouts, your account will be locked. It sucks, but they make the rules, so you either deal with it, or go somewhere else. Otherwise, you'll just get stressed out every time your account locks and you can't play and/or withdraw.

Quite why a tiny credit locks your account from withdrawing, I don't know... you really need to figure out where those mystery deposits are coming from? As several of us have noted, they look like some sort of pool payout... like referral bonus maybe? Anyway, again, that is the system that NitrogenSports uses... if it is a problem, then again, you need to find another provider.

So, my suggestion is to stop playing on the site... stop depositing on the site... contact their support and ask them politely to arrange for the contents of your account to be withdrawn to an account of your choosing and then just  take your Bitcoin elsewhere...

Good luck!


EDIT: I'd just like to add, that I don't think they're scamming you... it just seems that their "safety" systems are somewhat strict and interfering with your use of their site.

Ahhhh ok... That makes sense.

I went through my history, and was trying to track down how it was choosing the unspent inputs... At first I thought it was just using the oldest, regardless of optimisation... but then I noted that it had "skipped" a couple... so I figured it was trying to be clever. Just wasn't sure of the exact methodology and I was too lazy to read the source today (had a property inspection so was busy cleaning  )

Thanks for the clarification.