Please stop sending me PM's from multiple accounts.
You can block PMs here if he keeps it up. he is just someone hiding behind an alt account of known person in these forums most likely
A 5000 post shill account, that'd be impressive. propping up a small group of people to push trust ratings that are mostly fabricated or built on circular anonymous accounts that have never really transferred bitcoins to any real people
Oh really, remember when you worked with a guy with 10 circular anonymous accounts in order to prop up your agenda and attack targets you didn't like? I've cut down the quote because its huge post, but you can read more about the trust ratings they left for each other and their victims here. There are a few more accounts that were discovered before the post so the circle jerk is actually larger. I decided to plot out the trust ratings the shills have been leaving to each other regarding these events and see where the real "trust abuse" is going on. And surprisingly it really didn't take long as their ratings are just copy pasted in a circle jerk. *loads of ratings snipped*So that's 32 counts for the copy and pasted trust rating, started by Bicknellski and indulged in by nearly all the accounts crying trust abuse: "Standing up to dogies neg-reping & bullying tactics is commendable & deserves to be recognised. I consider this member & anyone else who does the same to be a trustworthy member of the community. Hopefully more members will do the same - well done!". I took the liberty of plotting the circlejerk of ratings they've been leaving each other:  |
|
|
|
if an account has been inactive for a while like 8 weeks, if it starts posting again can it get the 56 activity it could have got in the time or only 14?
It doesn't work like that, and for good reason. If it did work like that everybody could create 10+ accounts and then just let them sit for a year or so and start posting again and become a Sr. Member or similar instantly. You have to post during every 2 week period to get the activity increase. That was my interpretation of it at least. Each post is worth 1 activity, up to a cap of 14 which is reset every ~2 weeks. There is no banking of points or potential mentioned anywhere. |
|
|
|
I have the spades, that's the problem.  I send bitmain tech an email already and they told me that they reply soon regarding the PSU. Okay. Worst comes to the worst you may have to make your own cables with something like a DPS-2000. Get some nice 12AWG cables, a crimper and some space connections and you'd be good to go. I'm interested to your suggestion but I have no idea on how to do it, if you can help me or show me how to do it. DPS2000 + breakout board that converts gold finger to cables = https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=637595.0Get some 12 AWG wiring online + spade connectors. You could even cut them off the current PSU if you were desperate. +Get some 40-60mm fans to cool the PSU, they don't come with them. |
|
|
|
okay, so shouldnt this be reported to a mod or something, so they remove their trust?
The trust system is unmoderated, although special cases of spamming on it may get a user banned. |
|
|
|
I have the spades, that's the problem. I send bitmain tech an email already and they told me that they reply soon regarding the PSU. Okay. Worst comes to the worst you may have to make your own cables with something like a DPS-2000. Get some nice 12AWG cables, a crimper and some space connections and you'd be good to go. |
|
|
|
In that case will I be able to purchase from them?
You can purchase an alternative one on their site, but you'll have to check that you have a PCI-E version of the S4. If you have the type with spade connectors you'll have to ask Bitmain if they have spares of another PSU. |
|
|
|
|
Its not a phishing site per sais, but its a content stealing mirror. They mirror bitcointalk.org and inject ads into any traffic that google throws their way. Theymos could likely DCMA takedown them if required but it was discussed and decided not to previously.
|
|
|
|
|
Done, that should bring him to at least neutral. PM me when you want it removed.
|
|
|
|
It seems tysat and malevolent were removed as Bitcoin Discussion mods. Just me there now. Maybe time to add a couple new mods? I think the boards that don't have any dedicated staff could do with some (or some more Globals to cover them).
Surely its just temporary and they'll be readded once they're back? |
|
|
|
No, but making up stories about people based on zero evidence is. I should add he resides in Canada, which follows similar defamation and libel laws to the UK, which are extremely broadly enforced. When you start attacking nonprofits trying to become tax deductible charities, you start to attract lawyers working probono looking to make a name for themselves in the public eye.
Quickseller / Dogie do that all the time. Seem like there are plenty of people to pick on Techshare that are still doing it. That's you're speciality dude... people post pages of evidence, you post pages of you quoting your claims again. Vod will be back  I don't doubt it. He has little self control. Says the man flogging a dead horse. At least I am only beating one dead horse. You have an entire stable of them. You are beating a dead horse. Vod was at least removed from Badbear's default list as a direct result of your (Techshare's) valid complaint. One is not happy with that? You should be rejoicing. Vod has left the building for an extended vacation. I would give my right arm for dogie to get a vacation in a UK jail for 3 months. Time will tell as UK tax and mail fraud will take time to investigate. How many people are you fighting at once? Surely there'll come a point where when you're fighting every single person at once you'll realise that maybe its your actions which are the problem. You horse is rotting. My horse is still scamming people somewhere on some level.
Which highlights exactly why your claims are garbage and that you think you're on some holy crusade. You have zero evidence of anything wrong, so much that even after 9 months of digging you've still not found anything. The only thing you're doing (apart from wasting your own time) is legitimately putting yourself at risk of prosecution by the Indonesians. Libel is a criminal offence over there, with real jail time. |
|
|
|
We just can't forget the situation that Canary had created with the vast amount of people being in Depth 2.
CITM's trust list was very large when he was originally added to default trust, it's part of the reason he was added. That itself isn't a problem. This is what happened with several people on CITM's trust list. In fact IIRC, every person that used their default trust status nefariously was in CITM's trust list.
His trust list being very large was a problem itself because it comprised of entirely arbitrary people. It would be as if you (BB) just copy pasta'ed a list of 300 people from the members list entirely at random. And then it'd be worse, because those entirely random and non verified or evaluated members would have paid you for the add. THEN when confronted about it, you refused to do anything about it, continued and excluded anyone who call you out about it from your Depth 1 position. |
|
|
|
I frequently watch the modlog for any bans/deletions when an action does appear on there
Doesn't modlog only show nukes and not time bans? |
|
|
|
Reminder; this survey can be manipulated you know that right? How will you decide that who'll get into def trust? Service Ann: I'll get you 10 votes for only 0.1 BTC  Yes this survey can be manipulated, hence it is not to be taken seriously. Hence this thread could really do with a non serious tag: As this is a non serious thread and its been misunderstood by at least half of people, can we get a [non-serious] tag in the title please?
|
|
|
|
Yes, but as a former software developer I must say I am not too amused about that firmware... Actually I would say we would have been directly fired, if we delievered such issues... Why? If I leave my Windows based PC on a publicly visible IP, its going to get attacked like hell yet its not Microsoft's fault. Its no different here, if you put yourself at risk eventually someone nefarious will find you. |
|
|
|
Update:
Last night when I got home i found a tiny spec of purple in the epoxy. Yes there is still coolant in the c1. ....I really didn't want to drain it all. .....so I did another layer of the epoxy. This morning I don't see any purple coolant.
Based on the coolant loss when the hole did exist I need to put more in but don't have any left....it will be a few days so letting the epoxy set may help matters.
I'll upload a new image soon so ya'll can make fun of the epoxy application. :-)
I always find taping the epoxy helps it resist pressure that bit more, and duct tape is almost good enough to seal the leak as it is! |
|
|
|
I spent a few minutes trying to find my name in the big chart You're directly above the T in the giant DefaultTrust. Well I was just curious about my position on Depth 3 since there were quite a number of people there.
Head towards 5 o'clock from DefaultTrust down to DannyHamilton and Mitchell. You're in the centre of a triangle made up of those 2 and haploid23 further down. A lot of people are really resistant to default trust being expanded. I remember when philipma was added, there was immediately a thread in meta about how he needed to cull his list because some weren't worthy, and he consented. But he was added with that trust list already in place, so it obviously wasn't seen as a problem.
There is always an adjustment period when people are added into DefaultTrust. Many users would add people more liberally to their trust lists if not in DefaultTrust, and so cut down their lists when added. It makes sense because outside DefaultTrust you just have to decide if you want to see that person's ratings or not, but in DefaultTrust you have to decide if you're going to vouch for that person's ratings or not. Tldr, I think its more of an expected step rather than a problem. |
|
|
|
Anyway nobody seems that pumped for it perhaps a bad idea A candidate for a new subforum would typically be already spilling into and disrupting other subforums. If you can find that then maybe that would help the case. |
|
|
|
Can you build a ranking of most trusted to least trusted using only default trust depth 2?
If you mean using node size based on number of users trusting that person, then yes. Its a popularity contest though and doesn't give any weight to anyones ratings. It also gets a bit weird because Depth 2 people could trust people in Depth 1 which wouldn't have any affect 'IRL'. [It also wouldn't have any exclusions counted but nothing we can do]. If there is another variation I'm missing then let me know. - Full images are 40-50MB, click at your peril! These may or may not load depending on your browser.
- This trust network is constructed from all trust ratings rather than filtered down from DefaultTrust. This corresponds to ~Depth 11.
- Approximately 1600 users (could be a sender or recipient) and 400 trusts are excluded because they can't be linked back to the rest of the network by any route. They would appear as unconnected nodes, or nodes joined to other free floating nodes.
-snip-
If you want this to be updated in the future, you'll have to poke Theymos to provide a fresh dump, I can only manually do up to depth 4.
The pictures are quite excellent, great work! It has taken me a while to find myself on depth 3 especially on the layered one. I did notice however that it does not display special characters such as the one that Mitchełł uses. Now I'm interested to what members are on depth 9 or 10? However opening that image is going to take a while. If anyone is desperate then I can find their nodes on each of the graphs and I'll give you directions. Yes it won't show special characters properly and thankfully they're quite rare. I could manually replace them but I don't think its worth it. Your best off downloading the larger graphs as most likely they'll fill your browser cache or just refuse to display (right click -> save link as). Those images are pretty cool-looking. Does anyone see anything in them that would suggest specific changes to the default trust list? I was trying to look for "islands" of not-default-trusted people that aren't just created by one person, but nothing stood out. I wonder if it'd be good to increase the default depth to 3 -- a lot of the graph isn't trusted by default.
It looks okay at the moment. *pokes theymos* Hey, this wasn't a honk if you like graphs incitation to poke, there was meant to be a reason  . |
|
|
|
Those images are pretty cool-looking. Does anyone see anything in them that would suggest specific changes to the default trust list? I was trying to look for "islands" of not-default-trusted people that aren't just created by one person, but nothing stood out. I wonder if it'd be good to increase the default depth to 3 -- a lot of the graph isn't trusted by default.
With default Depth 3, pink, purple, dark and light blue are all in DefaultTrust. Ratings from the darkest green people would count towards trust scores. I don't think arbitrarily including another rung of ratings is a good idea because if we think there are problems now, we'll have 20x the problems. No one's trust lists are geared towards that and ratings left in that tier probably weren't left or have been vetted with the intention of being rate altering. From the obscene Depth 11 graph, there are some conclusions we can make and exceptions which would need to be removed. The pattern you really want to see is like OgNasty or Blazedout419 - its just a shitstorm of lines without its own downstream cloud. They're also centrally located which suggests increased crosslinking. Unique lists (downstream clouds) shouldn't exist because it means they're the only person trusting those users, which by virtue of being trusted would be expected to have multiple vouches. Its not an inherently evil situation but its a bad flag and is a precursor for abuse. SilentSonicBoom has that excessively large cloud of unique followers, as does PsychoticBoy, Sampy, Maidak, Fakhoury, Mars78 and Cryptology. Some of these users are already in DefaultTrust and so the same negative affect is happening to providing others trust score affecting ability. CanaryInTheMine (who sold trust ratings) and Bicknellski (who is circlejerking trust) both have obscenely large trust lists which don't correlate with anyone else. They'd both require their own threads to consider exclusion by a higher tier if not already. Swapping back to the Depth3 graphs is more useful as we can solely look at those being added to DefaultTrust rather than also those who's trust ratings would also be included. Yifan Hu is the most useful. This highlights the cloud island problem more. There are several members with 20+ unique members behind their trust lists which isn't a great indicator that those trusts are useful. Those individual islands are then going to compound down another tier and be SO easy to abuse / sell accounts into DefaultTrust. Everyone wants DefaultTrust to expand, but arbitrarily including another rung is not a good idea. The forums struggle to mediate Depth 1-3 rating disputes, nevermind Depth 1-4. There would also be significantly more lobbying as if the guy who trusts the rating won't remove the rating leaver, they'll go up another rung and try again and again. As we've seen over the last few months, not everyone is resilient to lobbying by potentially malicious people and will remove people from their trust rating to stop the posting. I believe the solution is to promote some of those larger names up a tier if they're willing to maintain their lists, and others to fill their places. That means we're self vetting additions rather than adding everyone and hoping we can retrospectively fix those additions. The depth 11 graph would appear to suggest a promotion of the following promotions, although this is entirely based on a popularity contest from all tiers of users so will need additional checking. It also doesn't include the quality of their trust lists although generally placement can speak to that. Depth 2 up to 1 (dark blue up to purple):| John (John K.) | - I'm not sure low activity is a reason to kick him off. It made sense when he was inactive, but not any more now he is about. | | Vod | - He's trusted by a hell of a lot of people anyway. | | DannyHamilton | | | Mitchel | - He has a symbol in his name and it ruined my graph so maybe not. | | Dabs | - Small downstream cloud but doesn't seem excessive | | Sirius | | | BCB | | | casascius | | | gmaxwell | | | Gavin Andresen | | | Thick as Thieves | | | DeathAndTaxes | | | nanotube | | | Blazedout419 | | | phanastisch | | | SebastianJu | | | -ck | | | dogie | | | Luke-Jr | - Although IIRC he has quite a unique trust list taste | | allinvain | | | Blazr | | | Stunna | |
Depth 3 up to 2 (light blue up to dark blue):Shouldn't have to add anyone manually, they'll get promoted inherently. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
