Hey guitaplinker. Can you check my posts and update the spreadhseet when you can? I should have made enough now but want clarification. Thanks in advance.
Updated the spreadsheet. You've made over 50 posts, but only 49 of them are considered constructive. I excluded a few of your post in this campaign thread, other sig campaign threads as well as a couple posts you made in the 777Coin thread with only your 777Coin username. Ah ok. I just made another constructive post in a viable thread so I think I should be ok and qualified now. When will this months campaign be going live as I think different users finish on different dates? Updated the spreadsheet. The campaign will just continue on, so when users are finished their month tonight, they'll have a chance to re-register for another month, or their slots will open up. So in short, the campaign will always be live, but different user's payments will be on different days, depending on when they signed up. |
|
|
|
Hey guitaplinker. Can you check my posts and update the spreadhseet when you can? I should have made enough now but want clarification. Thanks in advance.
Updated the spreadsheet. You've made over 50 posts, but only 49 of them are considered constructive. I excluded a few of your post in this campaign thread, other sig campaign threads as well as a couple posts you made in the 777Coin thread with only your 777Coin username. |
|
|
|
I have 49 qualifying posts according to the sheet, and I just made another 2 posts, so, am I qualified to claim the payment now?  I'm trying to update the spreadsheet every 24 hours now, until the 11th. (then everyone's campaign should be up for this month) I'll check out your posts now and update the spreadsheet in a few moments. EDIT: Spreadsheet updated, you have 50 or more qualifying posts now, so you're eligible for a full payment. I'll be sending devthedev a list of addresses and payment amounts on the 9th, 10th, and 11th so expect to see your payment come through on March 9th. |
|
|
|
Yes if you read some on the internet it has been called a scam pretty soon... three words, four if you count "probably" in one post surrounded by dozen of others saying everything was going fine, we who lost some or a lot in it have every f**ing right plus a duty to blame this kind of thieves.
Oh, definitely blame Jason, etc. Just don't blame bitcoin. Jason is the problem. Not bitcoin. People like "Jason" if he even exists to begin with use this site and bitcoin to promote and do what they do, just look at the members list and at the activity of the very member named Pbmining... it's just huge... and it definitely will make me stay away from both bitcoins and this site. Jason definitely exists.. I know he used fake names with the initals "JB" when being interviewed by crypto-news sites, but Jason Boyko is the name registered on his business registration, I don't think he'd lie about that. Plus, it was the name on his Facebook profile before he took it down, after it was publicly linked. |
|
|
|
|
If you have it already setup on your machine, just let it run for a few days and you should see your connections grow. Eventually you'll begin to seed while others download the blockchain. I ran a node for a few months awhile back, and it took a week or two for it to start seriously seeding, and then it was uploading a few GB per day.
Also, if you don't want the node to hog all your bandwidth, look into a bandwidth limiter as shorena mentioned.
|
|
|
|
A user made a script a couple years ago for bruteforcing wallets. Here's a link to his post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=85495.msg942171#msg942171I know it works with Qt wallets (I had to use it myself about a year and a half ago) but I'm not sure if it will work with Electrum wallets. Your other option is to ask Wallet Recovery Services if they can help you out. If it was a simple password (< 6 characters) then chances are they might be able to crack your wallet password and get you access to your funds. |
|
|
|
IIRC this happened to me a couple times as well. I just decided to shut off my VPN and the problem was fixed. If you're interested in using Electrum anonymously, look into using Electrum over Tor. |
|
|
|
The spreadsheet has just been updated with qualifying post counts. If you're a few posts short be sure to get those in before your campaign ends!
Does the 50+ mean I've made enough to qualify? Will the campaign be returning for another month and will we have to re enroll? Thanks. Yes, the 50+ means that you've made 50 or more qualifying posts this month, and you'll be paid the full amount for your usergroup at the end of this month. And yes, it sounds like this campaign will be returning next month, and you will be required to re-enroll if you're interested in participating in it again. |
|
|
|
Password protect your wallet. Or save your coins on some trusted exchanger site.
I'm curious, why on earth is a New Password requirement not part of the installation setup for every wallet in existence? I would think it should be automatic that whenever you install a wallet that it asks you to set up a password the first time you run it. The thought that people are downloading wallets and sending BTC to them and not realizing that anyone/anything accessing their PC can simply take the bitcoins, floors me. I think most wallets first prompt the user to create a password to encrypt the wallet with when it's first generated. I know Electrum does, and Trezor recommends that the user either enters a PIN, or a password. I'm not sure why wallets like Mycellium, or Bitcoin-Core don't recommend setting a password when the wallet is first created. |
|
|
|
|
The spreadsheet has just been updated with qualifying post counts. If you're a few posts short be sure to get those in before your campaign ends!
|
|
|
|
If you cannot sign a message for any reason then there is going to be a risk to the buyer that the account is hacked.
Sorry to butt into this thread, but can someone explain how signing the message from the account would verify that OP was the original owner? Is there anything stopping him from changing the bitcoin address on the account to his address, and then signing from that, if the account was hacked? (not accusing you of anything OP, just curious on how this proves the original account owner) It does not prove that the seller is the original owner, but it does generally prove that the account is not hacked, or at least not hacked since the address was posted. Say for example that an account posts a specific address on Jan 1 2015, and the post is never edited. It would be reasonable to believe that the owner of the account controlled the private keys to that address when the address was posted. Therefore as long as the post is not edited you can reasonably say that the account has not been hacked since Jan 1 if they can sign a message from that address. With a lot of time passing and a lot of posts being made since such post had been made, then it would be reasonable to say that the account was not hacked. It would be possible for the account to have been sold by then as the seller could include the private keys with the account when it is sold, but buying a sold account really is not a big deal (as long as it is not hacked) Ah ok that makes more sense then. I thought you guys were referring to the address on the user's profile. (ex. the address on record for my profile is 16MxMGxEvJeTdzajMS74QLHgi8NZD3opbm) Had me wondering because I figured there wasn't any way to see when that address had been set and such. Thanks for filling me in! |
|
|
|
If you cannot sign a message for any reason then there is going to be a risk to the buyer that the account is hacked.
Sorry to butt into this thread, but can someone explain how signing the message from the account would verify that OP was the original owner? Is there anything stopping him from changing the bitcoin address on the account to his address, and then signing from that, if the account was hacked? (not accusing you of anything OP, just curious on how this proves the original account owner) |
|
|
|
Also, as of today this campaign has a new rule. Any posts made in the "Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns" thread won't be counted towards a user's 50 posts per month. This rule will be added to the original post in a few moments. You should maybe implement that rule at the end of this term or take it into account if someone doesn't make the full 50 after having those posts disqualified. I think it would be unfair to change the rules half way through the campaign and deny someone payment as they may not know about it. Sorry, I should have been a little clearer. The rule is coming into effect today. That means that if users in this campaign have posted in the Signature overview thread in the past, those posts will be counted. However, any posts made in that thread from this point on won't be counted. I'll be changing the title of this thread as well to let people know that there are new rules for this campaign. |
|
|
|
avatar?
It doesn't have one - he's selling the account that this thread was posted with. |
|
|
|
Yes we do! Below are the rules for posts to be counted: - Posts must be in English
- Posts shouldn't be spam posts, or other useless posts
- Posts in other signature campaign threads won't be counted
Also, as of today this campaign has a new rule. Any posts made in the "Overview of Bitcointalk Signature-Ad Campaigns" thread won't be counted towards a user's 50 posts per month. This rule will be added to the original post in a few moments. |
|
|
|
so the early birds who reached full ROI anyway should get even more? fuck the later customers who need recover the most? wut do u really sit there plinkin at?
I'm not trying to say that at all. In fact, I believe he actually stopped sales right around the time the formula changed to "A - B = C" so then there should be either very few people who paid for contracts under the new payment scheme, or none at all. I'm showing people that he has broken his contract with (possibly) all customers. |
|
|
|
Does passing out pennies actually protect him from legal action? Or is that just an effect of human nature?
Technically it does protect him somewhat. Like any good scammer, he changed the terms of the contracts. You can see the new formula here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=418183.msg9743464#msg9743464A - B = C
Payouts "C" are now whatever PBMining wants them to be. Anyone who bought contracts after that change are screwed. What about people who purchased contracts before that? When they purchased the contract, there was the following term involved: Hash power efficiency will never change from what it is now, even if we have technical issues. Our insurance covers you so that you will always receive the proper payments. So technically, it looks like he broke his own contract with early purchasers. |
|
|
|
Can i join in the camp
Campaign is still full. Watch this thread from March 9th to the 13th or so, a spot might open up around then. |
|
|
|
I'm believing PBM is scam. But I invest almost 2000 USD until today to PBM. So I hope to don't disappointed. And I have a question. If It is scam, so why it still send a small amounts like 0.07 USD per a week to us? It s weird.
One theory could be that he was massively overselling the small amount of mining actually being done until he was found out and doxxed. He owes money to some people who will break his legs unless he pays them back by mining what he can, and they are allowing him to pay a little dust to everyone else to avoid him being shut down by someone suing him, before they get their money back.. I'm fairly certain there was no mining going on with PBMining. If there was, he might have been running a few block erupters, seeing as that was the only physical equipment he was selling on eBay. Plus, you couldn't run much in the location that his business is registered at. Definitely not hundreds of terahashes. Did you go there ? You make me curious ^^ If I was canadian I will definitely go there and check the place. No I didn't go there. However, if you look up the address on Google Maps, you'll see that it's run out of a small house. I don't think you could host much hardware there due to physical space restrictions, as well as power consumption restrictions, unless he had upgraded the house's power system. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it seems to be back up for me as well now.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
