Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 2,171 results by Spekulatius
I figured I should post there here. Per the message I received from Spekulatius the hacker used the below email and IP address
Quote
I received the same PM , however welcome back @Spekulatius. ( I hope you're not coming to use again GMX or web.de). I simple gmail address with the 2FA it's the better solution and obviously secure .
Ok, changed it to a yahoo.de account. Hope thats secure enough
Feels good to be back
it is probably the spekulatius account https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=37537
data matches. is spekulatius confirmed to have been taken?He refused to confirm that he was able to confirm ownership which leads me to believe that he cannot do so.
Unfortunately, those PMs, even if they are really in your inbox, prove nothing.
I'm not implying that you are lying, or that Spekulatius is not compromised, but there's simply no proof.
All it shows is that Spoderman asked you how much you would pay for the Spekulatius account.
I could ask you how much you would pay for the theymos account, what would that prove?
PM's with spoderman:
[...]
Don't worry about it then, either way you are getting the account, all this verification nonsense isn't required for an offer.
If you give me a valid offer, i'll give you the account FIRST. That's my offer.
[...]
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=37537 - how much would you pay for this account?
Don't low ball me. Im not doing any negotiating either.
I'll go first so keep that in consideration when you offer your price
Thanks
Before I would be willing to make any kind of offer I would need confirmation that you can prove ownership of the account. This would mean a signed bitcoin message. If you only have a signed message transferring ownership to another account then that would be fine, however you would need to do the same with the 2nd account (either on or off the forum). Don't low ball me. Im not doing any negotiating either.
I'll go first so keep that in consideration when you offer your price
Thanks
If you give me a valid offer, i'll give you the account FIRST. That's my offer.
I was indeed hacked!
One day I read that my password was reset but didnt think it was anything to worry about, because an attacker would still have to get to me 2nd email account which my bitcointalk account is linked to, then I go check the next day anyway and BAM! Im locked out both of bitcointalk and of my email account. Turns out my email was hacked and used to send spam some days before my password here was reset. Fortunately I posted an address that I still control some time ago and could by signing it prove to theymos that I am the rightful owner, so he reset my email and password (thank god). It took about 2 days. So just to make it clear: I WOULD NEVER SELL THIS ACCOUNT! SPODERMEN IS EITHER HACKED OR AN ORIGINAL SCAMMER!
--> The only problem I have now is that my trust score was ruined during those few days and I have no idea who Spodermen scammed in my name to earn this reputation! What can I do to find out? Thx
Item #8a: The Bitcoin Bearwhale
by BillyMabrey
Item #8b: THe Bearwhale (overlay) [sic]
by BillyMabrey
https://imgur.com/a/6rk2e#Wz9NE11
by BillyMabrey
Quote
I was feeling a bit artistic and inspired by the now epic, "Bearwhale slaying" on October 6th.
Item #8b: THe Bearwhale (overlay) [sic]
by BillyMabrey
Quote
I used the candle chart from Bitstamp to design the composition.
https://imgur.com/a/6rk2e#Wz9NE11
I'm not quite following. What is the problem here. It looks like it synced up to me. Is it not synced?
The problem is that simplewallet.exe shuts down the nanosecond it finishes syncing. Bitmonero.exe keeps running without complaint, but I cant access my wallet this way.
After starting bitmonerod.exe it synchronizes with the network for some time till it tells me that it is synchronized and I can start up simplewallet.exe
You can try deleting/moving your binary wallet file (default name wallet.bin) and just keep your keys file (wallet.bin.keys), and then let simplewallet rebuild the binary file. If you're moving a wallet file from 32-bit to 64-bit this can definitely be an issue, also moving from *nix to windows I think.
make some backups btw.
Thx, I already did. Anyway my problem still persists, any ideas how to fix it?
My guess is that it is still finding a bin file somewhere. Post the log file again from simplewallet (redacting private stuff is fine, only the messages are important).
Thats the latest one (I cut a lot of lines out where it only processes blocks -> [...]:
Code:
2014-Aug-31 21:11:28.188406 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.567485 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.597487 Opened wallet: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.612488 Starting refresh...
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.657490 Block is already in blockchain: e7e865e736fad684a7d7f6cd5bef581bfe1050d6a533622c2431ec8e0d7f106e
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.660491 Processed block: <946ec45ee7c878c63a7c8e8d4fff28fc7585d0ba70a6a06cca8a9fad9c0a937d>, height 197737, 0(0/0)ms
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.736495 Processed block: , height 197738, 62(0/62)ms
[...]
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.868560 Refresh done, blocks received: 110, balance: XXX, unlocked: XXX
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.870560 Refresh done, blocks received: 110
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.871560 balance: XXX, unlocked balance: XXX
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.874560 **********************************************************************
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
**********************************************************************
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.567485 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.597487 Opened wallet: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.612488 Starting refresh...
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.657490 Block is already in blockchain: e7e865e736fad684a7d7f6cd5bef581bfe1050d6a533622c2431ec8e0d7f106e
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.660491 Processed block: <946ec45ee7c878c63a7c8e8d4fff28fc7585d0ba70a6a06cca8a9fad9c0a937d>, height 197737, 0(0/0)ms
2014-Aug-31 21:11:29.736495 Processed block: , height 197738, 62(0/62)ms
[...]
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.868560 Refresh done, blocks received: 110, balance: XXX, unlocked: XXX
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.870560 Refresh done, blocks received: 110
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.871560 balance: XXX, unlocked balance: XXX
2014-Aug-31 21:11:30.874560 **********************************************************************
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
**********************************************************************
After starting bitmonerod.exe it synchronizes with the network for some time till it tells me that it is synchronized and I can start up simplewallet.exe
You can try deleting/moving your binary wallet file (default name wallet.bin) and just keep your keys file (wallet.bin.keys), and then let simplewallet rebuild the binary file. If you're moving a wallet file from 32-bit to 64-bit this can definitely be an issue, also moving from *nix to windows I think.
make some backups btw.
Thx, I already did. Anyway my problem still persists, any ideas how to fix it?
Hi,
I just downloaded the latest version for Windows 64bit (v0.8.8.2) and pasted it over my older v0.8.5 install.
I left everything else in the folder, including my wallet.bin and wallet.bin.keys files (which I called "mein_wallet.bin" and "mein_wallet.bin.keys").
After starting bitmonerod.exe it synchronizes with the network for some time till it tells me that it is synchronized and I can start up simplewallet.exe
When I do, it synchronizes as well until it reaches the last block and shuts itself down with out warning. Restarting simplewallet.exe yields the same result.
This is the simplewallet.log print out:
I just downloaded the latest version for Windows 64bit (v0.8.8.2) and pasted it over my older v0.8.5 install.
I left everything else in the folder, including my wallet.bin and wallet.bin.keys files (which I called "mein_wallet.bin" and "mein_wallet.bin.keys").
After starting bitmonerod.exe it synchronizes with the network for some time till it tells me that it is synchronized and I can start up simplewallet.exe
When I do, it synchronizes as well until it reaches the last block and shuts itself down with out warning. Restarting simplewallet.exe yields the same result.
This is the simplewallet.log print out:
Code:
2014-Aug-31 14:41:37.393025 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 14:42:19.646442 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.131584 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552 e || !exists. THROW EXCEPTION: error::file_not_found
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552:struct tools::error::file_error_base<1>: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 Error: failed to load wallet: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:387 could not open account
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:1199 Failed to initialize wallet
2014-Aug-31 14:42:19.646442 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.131584 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552 e || !exists. THROW EXCEPTION: error::file_not_found
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552:struct tools::error::file_error_base<1>: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 Error: failed to load wallet: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:387 could not open account
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:1199 Failed to initialize wallet
Ok, I made some progress: In order to start up simplewallet.exe I made a shortcut of it, already containing the parameters like "--wallet-file=mein_wallet.bin", etc. I forgot to change the path in the shortcut's target field to the correct install directory of Monero, so it was looking for the .keys file in the wrong folder all the time (the folder where I unzipped the update in originally). Now the .keys file is found correctly and my account can be accessed but only for the fraction of a second after starting up simplewallet.exe because it shuts itself down right after catching up to the blockchain and I cant do anything there. The simplewallet.log reads:
Code:
2014-Aug-31 17:00:20.798096 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 17:00:21.659146 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 17:00:21.692148 Opened wallet: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 17:00:21.706148 Starting refresh...
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.287353 Block is already in blockchain: 88dcff2abdaa6d274230015bb81ffb2cc56be538c3fb07703636dfff6c8c89c1
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.287353 Refresh done, blocks received: 0, balance: XXX.XXX068362138, unlocked: XXX.XXX068362138
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.289353 Refresh done, blocks received: 0
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.290353 balance: XXX.XXX068362138, unlocked balance: XXX.XXX068362138
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.292353 **********************************************************************
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
**********************************************************************
2014-Aug-31 17:00:21.659146 Loaded wallet keys file, with public address: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 17:00:21.692148 Opened wallet: XXXXXXxXwmDs3R6rGkRHFJmjtk78KH87LsJSanmnxDF1xkyxeH3MeJZhZNdzNNF4DgYV8aGZoFFqNSfqVmhuUHhGyvvxgK
2014-Aug-31 17:00:21.706148 Starting refresh...
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.287353 Block is already in blockchain: 88dcff2abdaa6d274230015bb81ffb2cc56be538c3fb07703636dfff6c8c89c1
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.287353 Refresh done, blocks received: 0, balance: XXX.XXX068362138, unlocked: XXX.XXX068362138
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.289353 Refresh done, blocks received: 0
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.290353 balance: XXX.XXX068362138, unlocked balance: XXX.XXX068362138
2014-Aug-31 17:00:25.292353 **********************************************************************
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
**********************************************************************
I redacted the first digits of my public address and balance for privacy reasons.
Hi,
I just downloaded the latest version for Windows 64bit (v0.8.8.2) and pasted it over my older v0.8.5 install.
I left everything else in the folder, including my wallet.bin and wallet.bin.keys files (which I called "mein_wallet.bin" and "mein_wallet.bin.keys").
After starting bitmonerod.exe it synchronizes with the network for some time till it tells me that it is synchronized and I can start up simplewallet.exe
When I do, it synchronizes as well until it reaches the last block and shuts itself down with out warning. Restarting simplewallet.exe yields the same result.
This is the simplewallet.log print out:
I just downloaded the latest version for Windows 64bit (v0.8.8.2) and pasted it over my older v0.8.5 install.
I left everything else in the folder, including my wallet.bin and wallet.bin.keys files (which I called "mein_wallet.bin" and "mein_wallet.bin.keys").
After starting bitmonerod.exe it synchronizes with the network for some time till it tells me that it is synchronized and I can start up simplewallet.exe
When I do, it synchronizes as well until it reaches the last block and shuts itself down with out warning. Restarting simplewallet.exe yields the same result.
This is the simplewallet.log print out:
Code:
2014-Aug-31 14:41:37.393025 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 14:42:19.646442 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.131584 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552 e || !exists. THROW EXCEPTION: error::file_not_found
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552:struct tools::error::file_error_base<1>: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 Error: failed to load wallet: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:387 could not open account
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:1199 Failed to initialize wallet
2014-Aug-31 14:42:19.646442 bitmonero wallet v0.8.8.2(0.1-g1b8a68f)
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.131584 ERROR ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552 e || !exists. THROW EXCEPTION: error::file_not_found
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 ..\..\src\wallet\wallet2.cpp:552:struct tools::error::file_error_base<1>: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.132584 Error: failed to load wallet: file not found "mein_wallet.bin.keys"
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:387 could not open account
2014-Aug-31 14:42:22.135584 ERROR ..\..\src\simplewallet\simplewallet.cpp:1199 Failed to initialize wallet
You know, speaking of Isreal, this propaganda piece really struck me as making a good point, but was hugely unpopular in the UK. I get that it can be uncomfortable, but it's meant to be. Regardless of what city it depicts, it makes a good point. As someone living in Houston, if Mexico was to fire missiles at us (especially if it went on for years), an invasion would seem entirely valid.
I get that the war is horrible, but I have trouble blaming Isreal myself. Am I missing something here?
I get that the war is horrible, but I have trouble blaming Isreal myself. Am I missing something here?
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/Backchannels/2014/0716/Gaza-militants-rockets-Fewer-less-accurate-than-last-Hamas-Israel-conflict-video
An interesting article, questioning the effectiveness of Israel's "Iron Dome" missle defense shield and giving account of Hamas's rocket accuracy. I didnt double check the validity of this source. By the looks of this statistic it seems as if Hams's rocket firings achieve not much more then scaring the Israeli population. From wikipedia:
Quote
Since 2001, Palestinian militants have launched thousands of rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip as part of the continuing ArabIsraeli conflict. As of July 2014 the attacks have killed 28 people,[1] mostly civilians, and injured more than 1900 people, but their main effect is their creation of widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life among the Israeli populace
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel#2014This is not to neglect the death toll of 24 innocent Israeli lives, that have been wiped out in this way, but to put in perspective what the Israeli reaction looks like and how many civilian casualties the IDF's massive bombardement and targeted air strikes of urban neighborhoods has caused among the Palestinians, the bully in this case seems to be the Israeli government.
Comparing only the loss of lives on both sides, the picture looks very one sided indeed:
Israel: 64 soldiers killed, 2 civillians / Gaza: 1500-2000 killed (mostly civilians; even according to IDF sources at least half of them civilians)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict
P.S.: I came across a collection of both pro Israel and pro Hamas propaganda posters, see for yourselves:
https://imgur.com/r/PropagandaPosters/WICQoyg
Re: [ANN][BBR] Boolberry [ANONYMOUS | CRYPTONOTE | ADDR ALIASES | NO IPO/PREMINE]
Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread
Announcement: Over the past few weeks, we've been doing a lot of work on the fee algorithm that Counterparty uses, and now transactions are effectively much cheaper than before. In particular, 'send' transactions can store all of their Counterparty metadata in a 40-byte OP_RETURN output, and you can now specify the exact fees paid for each transaction, as well as the default fee-per-KB amount, dust sizes, and so on. Multi-sig outputs need not be used, so no difficult-to-spend funds need to be sent back to your self at all.
This transaction is an example of a modern send transaction that cost only US $0.01 in fees, with a $0.03 output to the destination. It was constructed and broadcast with the following command: counterpartyd.py send --source=SOURCE --destination=DEST --quantity=1 --asset=XCP --encoding='opreturn' --fee=.00002, and it was confirmed almost immediately. If you're moving lots of assets around, or sending one asset to many users, you can use this script to automate the process and keep costs as low as possible.
This transaction is an example of a modern send transaction that cost only US $0.01 in fees, with a $0.03 output to the destination. It was constructed and broadcast with the following command: counterpartyd.py send --source=SOURCE --destination=DEST --quantity=1 --asset=XCP --encoding='opreturn' --fee=.00002, and it was confirmed almost immediately. If you're moving lots of assets around, or sending one asset to many users, you can use this script to automate the process and keep costs as low as possible.
So we are less likely now to be kicked out of Bitcoin protocol by its devs?
Appendix I* #1: Psychotronic Space War 9D
*(non-Bitcoin Chartart)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603842.0
*(non-Bitcoin Chartart)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603842.0
@ flower1024: It would be interesting to compare the graphs you have worked out (thx alot, very nice!) with those available for Bitcoin. Since much more certainty exists about the influencing factors to Bitcoin's blockchain and history, a comparison between the two would be quite telling to whether Bytecoin has indeed been growing organically, like Bitcoin; and may also reveal other stuff we can not yet infer.
Despite the impressive job you have done, Id like to remind you that your conclusions, to date remain hypothesises, until further cemented by additional evidence. For example, at least I have not seen compelling evidence that real people have created those myriads of transactions during Bytecoins stealth phase and not a couple of different bots as result of some experiments. We also know very little about the actual developers and their intentions. If the early tx activity is indeed the product of efforts to increase anonymity for later users or just the result of initial interest and network activity or the attempt to set up field conditions for further testing is unknown. I hope we see more of you and other researchers in the field! Looking forward to it.
Despite the impressive job you have done, Id like to remind you that your conclusions, to date remain hypothesises, until further cemented by additional evidence. For example, at least I have not seen compelling evidence that real people have created those myriads of transactions during Bytecoins stealth phase and not a couple of different bots as result of some experiments. We also know very little about the actual developers and their intentions. If the early tx activity is indeed the product of efforts to increase anonymity for later users or just the result of initial interest and network activity or the attempt to set up field conditions for further testing is unknown. I hope we see more of you and other researchers in the field! Looking forward to it.
but which coin in your opinion would be the most attractive to somebody who is new to this?
The ones that have highest visibility (talk, advertisement, exchanges, coinmarketcap.org, etc) by the time they look for better-then-Bitcoin alternatives times the prospect of higher valuation and/or other features that may appeal to the potential investors (like anonymity, adoption, logo, etc.).
If their aim is to find a better speculation vehicle, the competition is broader then only among the anonymity minded coins.
In any case, user friendly GUI and use experience will definately help to attract fresh blood.
Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread
What will happen if someone puts up an illegal asset? Has anybody raised that question yet?
Lets say somone anonymous creates an asset that infringes on some companies copyrights, called "Facebook" or "Nintendo" for example?
Or if I create an asset that makes money with illegal activities like DDOS blackmail or sale of drugs. Would a SilkRoad-asset be allowed to exist and is there any way to remove it? What is the official policy of the devs if they have regarding those cases?
Lets say somone anonymous creates an asset that infringes on some companies copyrights, called "Facebook" or "Nintendo" for example?
Or if I create an asset that makes money with illegal activities like DDOS blackmail or sale of drugs. Would a SilkRoad-asset be allowed to exist and is there any way to remove it? What is the official policy of the devs if they have regarding those cases?
Re: [ANN][BBR] Boolberry [ANONYMOUS | CRYPTONOTE | ADDR ALIASES | NO IPO/PREMINE]
Here's some animation made from the Boolberry logo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tix3Q0rLeWo&feature=youtu.be
I credit Bitcrea for providing the logo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tix3Q0rLeWo&feature=youtu.be
I credit Bitcrea for providing the logo.
Nice, thx!
I might correct that to:
The broader distribution of else-equal coins will make the difference.
Fairness does not matter.
The broader distribution of else-equal coins will make the difference.
Fairness does not matter.
Thx. I would agree in so far as fairness is less significant for a positive outcome as broad distribution but I think it does matter though. Think of the negative perception. If anything is premined or stealth mined to a significant percent (greater the 5%) nowadays it carries a stigma. (I recommend this good read: http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins) Few coins stick out in this dimension of competition, such as Monero or Counterparty (where everybody including the devs burned their Bitcoins in order to get XCP). Bitcoin would not pass so easily today as it did in 2009, simply because there was no competition back then.