[ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"

[BayAreaCoins]

<snip>
I have skimmed over some of mine, and clam has been claimed on them, which proves this ?!

Which exchange?

I'd lol so hard if you say Coinbase.

[dooglus]

Isn't this insanely beneficial for exchanges since they hold vast amount of addresses that their users used to deposit btc/ltc/doge ?
I have skimmed over some of mine, and clam has been claimed on them, which proves this ?!

It's insanely beneficial for exchanges and other services that didn't keep their wallets tidy.

I was running Just-Dice at the time of the snapshot, but regularly swept coins from deposit addresses to a single offsite cold storage address, so the Just-Dice hot wallet received very few CLAMs.

It's kind of a shame that the initial CLAM distribution rewarded those who practiced poor wallet maintenance. But what can you do.

[ajareselde]

<snip>
I have skimmed over some of mine, and clam has been claimed on them, which proves this ?!

Which exchange?

I'd lol so hard if you say Coinbase.

It's a serious thing, don't see whats funny there nor did i mention CB :/

Isn't this insanely beneficial for exchanges since they hold vast amount of addresses that their users used to deposit btc/ltc/doge ?
I have skimmed over some of mine, and clam has been claimed on them, which proves this ?!

It's insanely beneficial for exchanges and other services that didn't keep their wallets tidy.

I was running Just-Dice at the time of the snapshot, but regularly swept coins from deposit addresses to a single offsite cold storage address, so the Just-Dice hot wallet received very few CLAMs.

It's kind of a shame that the initial CLAM distribution rewarded those who practiced poor wallet maintenance. But what can you do.

It's a sad thing watching my deposit addresses being claimed, when 90% of my old ones have no clam's to claim , but still, i found ~20 that do.
Reading up on stacking now, but i'm not optimistic :/

cheers

[SuperClam]

<snip>
I have skimmed over some of mine, and clam has been claimed on them, which proves this ?!

Which exchange?
I'd lol so hard if you say Coinbase.

It's a serious thing, don't see whats funny there nor did i mention CB :/

Isn't this insanely beneficial for exchanges since they hold vast amount of addresses that their users used to deposit btc/ltc/doge ?
I have skimmed over some of mine, and clam has been claimed on them, which proves this ?!

It's insanely beneficial for exchanges and other services that didn't keep their wallets tidy.
I was running Just-Dice at the time of the snapshot, but regularly swept coins from deposit addresses to a single offsite cold storage address, so the Just-Dice hot wallet received very few CLAMs.
It's kind of a shame that the initial CLAM distribution rewarded those who practiced poor wallet maintenance. But what can you do.

It's a sad thing watching my deposit addresses being claimed, when 90% of my old ones have no clam's to claim , but still, i found ~20 that do.
Reading up on stacking now, but i'm not optimistic :/
cheers

This may be a controversial opinion - however, I have long argued that exchanges should distribute claimed CLAM to their users.

I would go so far as to suggest that exchanges had/have a responsibility to do so.

"Addresses", afterall, are nothing more than a cryptographic public key; despite the community commonly calling them otherwise.
These public keys are assigned to specific users and could be considered much the same as an after-hours drop box.

Unless an exchange specifically enumerated otherwise in their Terms-Of-Service, I think it is reasonable to assume that a customer might have a legal expectation that assets arriving at a cryptographic key assigned to them, be attributed to them.


But, alas, it is up to the specific user to request exchanges or other third-parties distribute.
You can lead a horse to water; but, you can't make them drink.

[BayAreaCoins]

It's a serious thing, don't see whats funny there nor did i mention CB :/

It is a serious thing.  I know you didn't mention CB.  Would you mind saying which exchange it was that you noticed your CLAMS being dug off?

But, alas, it is up to the specific user to request exchanges or other third-parties distribute.

^This 1000x over.

If I was you I'd be emailing the shit out of them and then providing public proof.

[dre1982]

Probably already asked a lot but can't find it that quick.

Is it safe to import a wallet which is still in use?

Importing a wallet basically makes a copy of it inside the CLAM wallet. So if anyone ever manages to get a copy of your CLAM wallet, they will also have access to any coins in any of the wallets you imported into it. The official version of the CLAM client itself doesn't take advantage of that, but someone managing to get a copy of your CLAM wallet could do, as could a rogue unofficial version of the CLAM client. So recommended standard practice is to empty and retire your wallets before importing them into the CLAM client.

ok thanks for answering. I will copy my funds to a new wallet.

[ajareselde]

It's a serious thing, don't see whats funny there nor did i mention CB :/

It is a serious thing.  I know you didn't mention CB.  Would you mind saying which exchange it was that you noticed your CLAMS being dug off?

I can't say for sure, i do know i made a direct auto withdraw to an exchange (dogecoin is in question) so it could be any of them , since they all changed deposit addresses.
I mostly used cryptsy bittrex and poloniex . If i find more info on it, ill post it here, but i definitely consider the issue unmoral from exchange sites who did cash in on clams.

cheers

[dooglus]

I can't say for sure, i do know i made a direct auto withdraw to an exchange (dogecoin is in question) so it could be any of them , since they all changed deposit addresses.
I mostly used cryptsy bittrex and poloniex . If i find more info on it, ill post it here, but i definitely consider the issue unmoral from exchange sites who did cash in on clams.

I expect it was poloniex then. They dug up all their CLAMs early on and held a giveaway to distribute the CLAMs to their users.

Check the timestamps when the CLAMs first moved. That will be a good way of telling whether it was poloniex or not, because I'm sure someone will know when they did their digging.

[dooglus]

"Addresses", afterall, are nothing more than a cryptographic public key; despite the community commonly calling them otherwise.
These public keys are assigned to specific users and could be considered much the same as an after-hours drop box.

Unless an exchange specifically enumerated otherwise in their Terms-Of-Service, I think it is reasonable to assume that a customer might have a legal expectation that assets arriving at a cryptographic key assigned to them, be attributed to them.

I don't see it that way.

Consider this example:

You owe me money, so I give you my address to send payment to. You send the money, it arrives at my address. If someone else eavesdrops on our transaction and sends another payment to my address for fun, that's free money for me. You have no claim on that payment. It went to my address after all, and is nothing to do with you.

I think the confusion comes when people think in terms of "my deposit address" at an exchange. The deposit address is nothing but a hash of a public key in the exchange's wallet. It's owned by the exchange, not the user, since the exchange are the ones in sole control of the corresponding private key.

You can argue that it's good PR for the exchange to share the free CLAMs that you gave them, but I really don't think you can make a good legal (or even ethical) argument that they have a duty to do so.

[ajareselde]

"Addresses", afterall, are nothing more than a cryptographic public key; despite the community commonly calling them otherwise.
These public keys are assigned to specific users and could be considered much the same as an after-hours drop box.

Unless an exchange specifically enumerated otherwise in their Terms-Of-Service, I think it is reasonable to assume that a customer might have a legal expectation that assets arriving at a cryptographic key assigned to them, be attributed to them.

I don't see it that way.

Consider this example:

You owe me money, so I give you my address to send payment to. You send the money, it arrives at my address. If someone else eavesdrops on our transaction and sends another payment to my address for fun, that's free money for me. You have no claim on that payment. It went to my address after all, and is nothing to do with you.

I think the confusion comes when people think in terms of "my deposit address" at an exchange. The deposit address is nothing but a hash of a public key in the exchange's wallet. It's owned by the exchange, not the user, since the exchange are the ones in sole control of the corresponding private key.

You can argue that it's good PR for the exchange to share the free CLAMs that you gave them, but I really don't think you can make a good legal (or even ethical) argument that they have a duty to do so.

You are looking it only from one side. One might argue that it's the same thing as sending funds to an escrow; so would it be morally correct for escrow to profit from my funds ?
The time of "claim" was 2014-07-31 btw.

Anyways, it doesn't matter really, since there's nothing we can do about it. All i wanted to say from the start is that it would be sort of better if exchange addresses were
ignored in the CLAM claims. But that's just one man's opinion i guess.

cheers

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

"Addresses", afterall, are nothing more than a cryptographic public key; despite the community commonly calling them otherwise.
These public keys are assigned to specific users and could be considered much the same as an after-hours drop box.

Unless an exchange specifically enumerated otherwise in their Terms-Of-Service, I think it is reasonable to assume that a customer might have a legal expectation that assets arriving at a cryptographic key assigned to them, be attributed to them.

I don't see it that way.

Consider this example:

You owe me money, so I give you my address to send payment to. You send the money, it arrives at my address. If someone else eavesdrops on our transaction and sends another payment to my address for fun, that's free money for me. You have no claim on that payment. It went to my address after all, and is nothing to do with you.

I think the confusion comes when people think in terms of "my deposit address" at an exchange. The deposit address is nothing but a hash of a public key in the exchange's wallet. It's owned by the exchange, not the user, since the exchange are the ones in sole control of the corresponding private key.

You can argue that it's good PR for the exchange to share the free CLAMs that you gave them, but I really don't think you can make a good legal (or even ethical) argument that they have a duty to do so.

The user doesn't owe the exchange money until a purchase is made on the exchange.  Until a purchase is made on the exchange, the BTC deposited at the exchange belong to the user.

[ajareselde]

"Addresses", afterall, are nothing more than a cryptographic public key; despite the community commonly calling them otherwise.
These public keys are assigned to specific users and could be considered much the same as an after-hours drop box.

Unless an exchange specifically enumerated otherwise in their Terms-Of-Service, I think it is reasonable to assume that a customer might have a legal expectation that assets arriving at a cryptographic key assigned to them, be attributed to them.

I don't see it that way.

Consider this example:

You owe me money, so I give you my address to send payment to. You send the money, it arrives at my address. If someone else eavesdrops on our transaction and sends another payment to my address for fun, that's free money for me. You have no claim on that payment. It went to my address after all, and is nothing to do with you.

I think the confusion comes when people think in terms of "my deposit address" at an exchange. The deposit address is nothing but a hash of a public key in the exchange's wallet. It's owned by the exchange, not the user, since the exchange are the ones in sole control of the corresponding private key.

You can argue that it's good PR for the exchange to share the free CLAMs that you gave them, but I really don't think you can make a good legal (or even ethical) argument that they have a duty to do so.

The user doesn't owe the exchange money until a purchase is made on the exchange.  Until a purchase is made on the exchange, the BTC deposited at the exchange belong to the user.

I agree. But on another note, the btc address itself belongs to exchange. And since you need both address and funds in order to receive CLAMS, the fair thing to do would be
to split 50-50. Or like dooglus said - the exchange could make it a PR thing and just share the CLAM with it's users; they make enough as it is imho.

cheers

[dooglus]

The user doesn't owe the exchange money until a purchase is made on the exchange.  Until a purchase is made on the exchange, the BTC deposited at the exchange belong to the user.

Once the user deposits coins to the exchange, the exchange owes the user those coins. The balance in the deposit address is irrelevant. The exchange will probably use the deposited coins very quickly to service the withdrawals of other users.

Sometimes people watch the balance on "their" deposit addresses and panic when the balance unexpectedly drops to zero. The fundamental mistake they are making is to think of the deposit address as being "theirs" at all. It's an address in the exchange's wallet, and the exchange is free to use it however they like.

Imagine someone getting upset when they deposit $20 into their bank account and see the bank give the same $20 bill to some other customer. When you deposit $20, the bank's liability to you grows by $20. But what they do with the individual bill you deposited is none of your business. It's the same with exchanges.

[dre1982]

How big is the chain? My computer is downloading for 2 days.

[ShapeShift.io]

ShapeShift has added a buy/sell feature to the real time market data website CoinCap.io! You can now buy or sell Clams straight from the market data website. Learn more about this here: http://bit.ly/1UVFZ7m

[RHavar]

Unless an exchange specifically enumerated otherwise in their Terms-Of-Service, I think it is reasonable to assume that a customer might have a legal expectation that assets arriving at a cryptographic key assigned to them, be attributed to them.

This is a rather perplexing position to take? A deposit address is quite simply: "Send bitcoins here, so I get them and know it was from you".

One particularly frustrating extension of what you said what a few other altcoin's do. They support bitcoin addresses as well, and users (or developers?) will send $altcoin to one of my deposit addresses. Then they'll go on to demand that I need to credit $altcoin to their account (which I don't support) or send the $altcoin back, and if I don't I'm a scammer. I've never yet sent one of these people their $altcoin back, as doing so would risk my entire HD wallet if a single private key is leaked by incorrect or malicious code, and in general it's just a waste of time.

Or another good example of it doesn't make sense, is this recently happened over at my site:

A user was intending to make a deposit, but still had in their clipboard another users deposit address (to send a tip?) and mistaken sent the funds to an other users deposit address. The facts or timeline wasn't disputed, but the user who was getting the incoming payment believed they were entitled to the money because it went to "their" deposit address.

But I instead manually credited the account of the user who sent the money, rather than the user who's deposit address was mistakenly used. You'll have a really, really hard time convincing me I did the wrong thing or the receiving user has a legal expectation to get that money.

[kingscrown]

guys...
if i make post about CLAMs on http://fuk.io - that goes to 1800 double email subscrived members, my 4,5k+ twitter and rest of socials.... can i count on small CLAMs tip?

asking because due to some failure i have deleted my clams .dat file that had alot...
i wanna promote this but would be cool to get some CLAMs to stack

[djhomeschool]

Love the bribery vibe... I'll post about it if you pay me!

[BayAreaCoins]

guys...
if i make post about CLAMs on http://fuk.io - that goes to 1800 double email subscrived members, my 4,5k+ twitter and rest of socials.... can i count on small CLAMs tip?

asking because due to some failure i have deleted my clams .dat file that had alot...
i wanna promote this but would be cool to get some CLAMs to stack

You can become an affiliate for www.ClamChecker.com.

It is totally free for your users to check for CLAMS and we provide different options for them to dig if they chose not to go the client route (we also provide a link to the Github for the client).

Our affiliate system pays .002 BTC each dig or .1 CLAM each dig (your choice.)  The affiliate pay is sent after each dig has 6 confirmations on it.

Simply type our domain as ClamChecker.com/YOURBTCorCLAMADDRESS.

For more details click the "Bitcoin Talk Thread" button in my signature.

Feel free to message me with any questions and look forward to working with you.

[dooglus]

How big is the chain? My computer is downloading for 2 days.

It's 646000 blocks, and 640 Mb.

You can download a bootstrap.dat file from here to speed up the sync process.