Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 474 results by 5w00p
Re: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency
⭐ Merited by explorer (2)
I think the Dev Team Least Likely to Phone It In and Produce Only Vaporware is:
XMR Dev Team
Thank you. Seriously, you don't even know.
Thank you XMR Dev Team.
danke schön
XMR Dev Team
Thank you. Seriously, you don't even know.
Thank you XMR Dev Team.
danke schön
Re: Didn't Monero have massive problems in terms of blockchain size?
I remember using Monero back in the day when it didn't even have a GUI. Anyway, I remember that it had some serious problems with the blockchain, it was too bloated.
What is the current situation now? I may invest but right now it's obviously overpumped and will correct.
What is the current situation now? I may invest but right now it's obviously overpumped and will correct.
Monero still doesn't "even have a(n official) GUI"
The blockchain size "bloat" issue was cured many months ago, when the developers converted the blockchain to database format and located it to reside on the client node's permanent storage, rather than crowd out the volatile memory (RAM).
In other words, the 64-bit Win client now needs only about 30MB of RAM.
Price speculation has a thread.
Whats the point of the video you shared? He doesnt even come up with a details and support his claim why is it way better to buy bitcoin then you're asking for a debate?
Maybe his point was to troll you like a gnomish bridge keeper might a small group of billy goats.
Yes its finally done, no more topics about who he was and how people are thinking about it.
I'm really happen with the fact that finally he stepped up and told he was the one that created the bitcoin(with others of course).
I'm really happen with the fact that finally he stepped up and told he was the one that created the bitcoin(with others of course).
Do you happen to the fact that finally we can be known to the truth and he told the one bitcoin to step up and be created (ofwith others course).
Re: Satoshi Nakamoto aka Craig Wright Can't Spell Signature. Craig's Career is #REKT
Does this charlatan ever miss an opportunity to try and bolster his authenticity as a "computer nerd" by making unneccesary, juvenile, and unfunny declarations about esoteric computer software choices?
Paraphrased Dipshit: "Insert it into vim, but not that I'm trying to start a holy war over editors, har dee harr harr so funny."
Who does that, except someone trying too hard to seem credible as "one of us nerdy geeky types." GTFO you fackin shitty actor.
Paraphrased Dipshit: "Insert it into vim, but not that I'm trying to start a holy war over editors, har dee harr harr so funny."
Who does that, except someone trying too hard to seem credible as "one of us nerdy geeky types." GTFO you fackin shitty actor.
Told my friends about it they didn't seem that interested or wanted my money at least I tried spreading it it's a lot harder than it looks.
Hey, you make a good point.
In my opinion, the issue at hand involves our programmed pattern of thought when it comes to access to information, and thereby, technology.
Our system of mass media, though it is a played-out cliche to speak of its control over people in our society today, cannot be easily de-throned as the ruler of most people's minds - especially when it comes to new and emerging technologies.
--- Conflagrate all that with issues of money, privacy, trust etc etc etc and this entire cryptocurrency thing is a hot-button issue, I can guarantee you that.
So, most people are just going to sit back and wait for a branded, logo-having COMPANY to tell them that what to do.
It is difficult for many or most people to understand that much of the commercial technology that they use everyday has its foundation in Open Source type of research and development. (I'm not excluding myself from these critiques)
We often want to be assured that there is a commercial entity, with resources at its disposal, standing behind the products and services we consume.
--- So, look at my avatar and signature. I come off like a paid shill for Monero. In reality, I just hope for increased adoption, in order to increase the value of my paltry holdings, via the Network Effect.
Do I really think any of this can survive in today's day and age? No. not really. Dystopian is my unfortunate outlook on the future. If the world was more utopian than dystopian, would Satoshi have had to stay unknown? I don't think he or she or they would have felt forced to do so.
And crap, I'm forgetting to mention the biggest issue of all: All money has been fiat for how long now? Bitcoin and the coins that have followed it are NOT FIAT.
~90% of people are going to lose their minds if you try to explain the history and concepts of money to them (and I'm not talking about the dumbed-down version of the history of money that they teach in primary schools). In their minds: All money is fiat money. Anything that isn't fiat money is going to confuse the crap out of them until mass media explains it (probably in ~30 second segments).
There is nothing proving any key was backdated. Starting in 2005/2006, it became clear that SHA1 was weak and that alternatives should be used.
So Satoshi knew SHA1 was weak, so he generated 2 keys. He used the weak key publicly, and didn't use the strong key. How does that make any sense to you?
Both keys were stored in a lockbox locked via a skeleton key hidden under a rock near Satoshi's front door of his home.
Wait... What?
Ha-ha, you just got GG'd.
Craig = Satoshi. You can't fake most of the facts, and most of those facts fit. AND the amount of innacurate information, exageration and FUD being propogated is growing so exponentially it is ridiculous. This is all just conspiracy theory nonsense and drama because "Satoshi" was more fun to believe in as a purely idealistic vision - than to look at through the lens of reality.
Sort of like the whole Jesus concept. If Jesus really were to come back, today, the first thing religion would do is beat the crap out of him and nail him up to another cross all the while screaming hysterically that he was an fraud.
LOL - same thing going on here.... Seems tech weenies are still just a step evolved above the apes, even with all your loft idealistic talk. Your "Tech Jesus" has returned, and you scream to crucify him
Flippin monkeys. Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring. ROFL
LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria
Sort of like the whole Jesus concept. If Jesus really were to come back, today, the first thing religion would do is beat the crap out of him and nail him up to another cross all the while screaming hysterically that he was an fraud.
LOL - same thing going on here.... Seems tech weenies are still just a step evolved above the apes, even with all your loft idealistic talk. Your "Tech Jesus" has returned, and you scream to crucify him
Flippin monkeys. Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring. ROFLLOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria
Which Jesus ?
It's a known fact that there was many Jesus's
The Romans kept killing all of them one after another and they kept pulling another guy out
claiming this time we got Jesus ..again and again.
Not only that but the Egyptians had already made public records claiming the same thing 300+ years before Christ.
ALL OF IT !
The whole baby in a manjor scene to God to the arc of covenant.. ALL of it stolen from Egyptians !
There is soooo much that blows the religion out of the water.
Take the statements in the bible about camels.. well people went and check and there was no camels.
People are liars an ididiots and gullible.. and always have an agenda / selfish ulterior motive LOL
Tech Jesus ?
Naw i figure it was some dood who did stuff on the web or maybe multiple guys.
The kids in awe over their deity probably never accomplished anything on the web ever.
A lot of people have probably come here that are as famous as Satoshi.
And all of them put their pants on one leg at a time i imagine.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2kqhau
So, I am left wondering: How the hell did this "world's foremost computer security expert" get hacked?
People keep writing here that his computer got hacked, however, I can not read this in the wired-story. They mention that documents, e-mails and so on was leaked. This doesn't necessarily mean that any computer was hacked.
Normally, someone with an agenda leaks documents to the media. And normally, the journalist should know who leakes the material and otherwise discard it for they will not be sure what the answer to the question cui bono is.
Nathaniel Popper mentioned that the documents were offerd to him, too. So maybe he could shed some light on this.
Unfortunately, I must confess: When I first read the story in wired, it looked pretty convincing. But this is how journalism works: You have to write a story which is easily readable.
But we know that the material was offered to several media. Such a fact puts journalists under pressure to publish the story before anybody else will be able to do so.
Still the main question remains: Cui bono...
Fair enough, you do have a point. It seems I must admit to going to the "hacked" phrasing after reading it posted by others, without referring back to the source document, the Weird article.
However, I do also understand why others have used the word "hack" as the trove of emails and documents, in my opinion, would not likely be in the posession of a single third-party person.
ie, business documents, emails, tax/loan/whatever documents. I understand that a person may have friends and business associates, but how does one of the world's most sought-efter enigmas, who has maintained seemingly perfect opsec for YEARS, place all that SENSITIVE material into the hands of another person, especially given that this Dr. C.W guy has a law degree, so he doesn't even need "a lawyer" to sort through his business contracts.
Re: [2015-12-09] Time: The One Big Reason Why It Matters Who Invented Bitcoin
Did you read the caption below the photo? 
This one?
A pile of Bitcoin slugs sit in a box ready to be minted by Software engineer Mike Caldwell in his shop on April 26, 2013 in Sandy, Utah.
I can imagine that photo/caption combo would likely confuse a cryptocurrency neophyte, as it isn't made clear why an exclusively-digital currency would entail "minted" physical coins.
No one else, that I have read so far, is mentioning:
Dr. C. Wright can be verified as being an expert on computer security. S. Nakamoto has maintained his anonymity for about 6 years now.
It is therefore provable that both Dr. C. Wright and S. Nakamoto know how to practice excellent operational security.
So, I am left wondering: How the hell did this "world's foremost computer security expert" get hacked?
I believe that such a person would only experience a "leak" or "get hacked" if he wanted this to happen.
Smell male bovine excrement?
Dr. C. Wright can be verified as being an expert on computer security. S. Nakamoto has maintained his anonymity for about 6 years now.
It is therefore provable that both Dr. C. Wright and S. Nakamoto know how to practice excellent operational security.
So, I am left wondering: How the hell did this "world's foremost computer security expert" get hacked?
I believe that such a person would only experience a "leak" or "get hacked" if he wanted this to happen.
Smell male bovine excrement?
My new gigabyte windforce 980ti is hasing quark at 26.1 MHASH with the opensource (release 61 +) on factory clocks. x11 is at 12.7MHASH. Seems to draw around 250w. But I need to do a wall reading.
Too bad Quark payrates ain't like they were a few months ago, because that is a smoking fast hashrate.
But now that X11 is king on nice/westhash, at least with payrates as they are right at this moment, that 12.7Mhash isn't quite as impressive for a 980Ti. But not bad.
Sweet card.
