Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 643 results by bahamapascal
Re: $50,000 Trading Contest on Uniswap and $1,000 Gleam Giveaway
Oh yes, I'm ready for this. Only Uniswap eh? The fees will hurt but I think I got this one
Yes only Uniswap. Means you stay in control of your funds throughout the entire time, no need to trust an exchange with your funds as in other trade competitions.
Fees of Ethereum indeed are a bummer at the moment. One more reason to look foreword to the Radix main-net. Full scalability is needed more then ever!
$50,000 Trading Contest on Uniswap and $1,000 Gleam Giveaway
The Radix Ecosystem is delighted to announce a $50,000 Trading Contest and $1,000 Bounty Campaign on Gleam.
It’s the very first Trading Contest hosted on Uniswap starting on January 15. A total of $50,000 will be given to the top 50 winners.
Also we are giving away $10,000 in our referral program.
We want everyone to find out about the Trading Contest and we need your support.
Help Radix revolutionize the unfair financial system and win prizes along the way! Earn prizes simply by being on social media and watching videos.
The more actions you do the higher the chances you win.
How to Enter
- $1,000 Bounty Campaign on Gleam: https://gleam.io/OSdDF/trading-competition
- $50,000 Trading Contest: https://getradix.com/trading-contest/
Learn More About Radix DLT
- Check out our websites - www.radixdlt.com & www.getradix.com
- Read our white paper - https://www.radixdlt.com/#white_papers
- Join us on Telegram - https://t.me/RadixSwarm
- Follow us on Twitter - https://twitter.com/RadixEcosystem
Please note that The Radix Ecosystem will never ask you to send funds to any address for this or any other contest![/u]
Please do not post your referral links on Bitcointalk. Any questions or comments should be directed to Radix Swarm Channel.
Re: CoinTracking - Gewinn/Verlust Portfolio und Steuer Reporting für digitale Coins
Wie genau eine ICO bei Cointracking eintragen?
Leider habe ich die Antwort auf diese Frage auch nach einer Suche hin gefunden. Wie genau trägt man einen Coin ein wenn man bei der ICO teilgenommen hat und dieser noch nicht in CT gelistet ist?
Ich habe nun mehrmals gelesen es als Trade zu hinterlegen. Doch was wähle ich bei der Währung aus, dass Kürzel gibt es in CT ja noch nicht? Und wie verbinde ich das später wieder wenn der Coin an einer Börse gelistet wird?
Ja, wäre echt eine interessante Sache!Leider habe ich die Antwort auf diese Frage auch nach einer Suche hin gefunden. Wie genau trägt man einen Coin ein wenn man bei der ICO teilgenommen hat und dieser noch nicht in CT gelistet ist?
Ich habe nun mehrmals gelesen es als Trade zu hinterlegen. Doch was wähle ich bei der Währung aus, dass Kürzel gibt es in CT ja noch nicht? Und wie verbinde ich das später wieder wenn der Coin an einer Börse gelistet wird?
Finde das tool super und nutze es seit einigen Wochen! Top!
Gruß
Sören
Ich habe meine ICO's immer als eigenen "Handelsplatz" eingetragen. Also zum Beispiel so:
Deposit 1,2 Bitcoin auf WAVES ICO
Trade 1,2 Bitcoin zu 7000 Waves
Und dann wann immer euch die Waves tatsächlich zugeschickt wurden einfach als withdrawl von WAVES ICO nach WAVES Wallet.
Keine Ahnung wie es mit Coins ist die es noch nicht gibt...vieleicht einfach genauso eintragen und dann später wenn es sie auf CT gibt einfach updaten zum richtigen Kürzel...so würde ich es jedenfalls jetzt Denken.
Re: CoinTracking - Gewinn/Verlust Portfolio und Steuer Reporting für digitale Coins
Hallo beisammen,
auch von mir erstmal ein großes Lob an CoinTracking! Ein super tool!
Nun hätte ich mal ne Frage an die Leute welche schon eine Steuererklärung gemacht haben. Und zwar, was genau soll ich dem Finanzamt geben?
Wenn ich den Steurbericht erstelle hab ich die Möglichkeit mir die "Detailed Calculation" ausspucken zu lassen oder auf "Load Report" zu gehen und mir dort verschiedenste Berichte an zu sehen.
Was davon ist nun Tauglich für das Finanzamt?
Danke schon mal im Voraus!
auch von mir erstmal ein großes Lob an CoinTracking! Ein super tool!
Nun hätte ich mal ne Frage an die Leute welche schon eine Steuererklärung gemacht haben. Und zwar, was genau soll ich dem Finanzamt geben?
Wenn ich den Steurbericht erstelle hab ich die Möglichkeit mir die "Detailed Calculation" ausspucken zu lassen oder auf "Load Report" zu gehen und mir dort verschiedenste Berichte an zu sehen.
Was davon ist nun Tauglich für das Finanzamt?
Danke schon mal im Voraus!
Wäre echt klasse wenn mir hier wer ein Tip geben kann.
Muss doch sicher viele geben die schon erfolgreich ihre Steuererklärung gemacht haben?
Wäre echt echt Dankbar!
Hab halt noch nie eine Steuererklärung machen müssen und will so gut vorbereitet wie möglich zum Steuerberater dann gehen.
Re: CoinTracking - Gewinn/Verlust Portfolio und Steuer Reporting für digitale Coins
Hallo beisammen,
auch von mir erstmal ein großes Lob an CoinTracking! Ein super tool!
Nun hätte ich mal ne Frage an die Leute welche schon eine Steuererklärung gemacht haben. Und zwar, was genau soll ich dem Finanzamt geben?
Wenn ich den Steurbericht erstelle hab ich die Möglichkeit mir die "Detailed Calculation" ausspucken zu lassen oder auf "Load Report" zu gehen und mir dort verschiedenste Berichte an zu sehen.
Was davon ist nun Tauglich für das Finanzamt?
Danke schon mal im Voraus!
auch von mir erstmal ein großes Lob an CoinTracking! Ein super tool!
Nun hätte ich mal ne Frage an die Leute welche schon eine Steuererklärung gemacht haben. Und zwar, was genau soll ich dem Finanzamt geben?
Wenn ich den Steurbericht erstelle hab ich die Möglichkeit mir die "Detailed Calculation" ausspucken zu lassen oder auf "Load Report" zu gehen und mir dort verschiedenste Berichte an zu sehen.
Was davon ist nun Tauglich für das Finanzamt?
Danke schon mal im Voraus!
Really exited to see the Whitepaper released! Have been waiting on this day since 2013 
I must admit I have a hard time getting my head around it though. So perhaps my question is already answered in the paper and I just didn't understand it...
So the Universe is split up in X shards. Each shard is a part of the network contain transaction information, right?
Now what happens if a bad actor (Bob) sets up a lot of nodes that store, say, Shard (2) of the network and by that stores all or at least the majority of that shard.
Now Bob sends a a payment to Alice in shard (3). Alice now asks a node serving Shard (2) if that transaction is valid. But as Shard(2) is controlled by Bob, can't he return false information and thus double spend transactions over and over?
I must admit I have a hard time getting my head around it though. So perhaps my question is already answered in the paper and I just didn't understand it...
So the Universe is split up in X shards. Each shard is a part of the network contain transaction information, right?
Now what happens if a bad actor (Bob) sets up a lot of nodes that store, say, Shard (2) of the network and by that stores all or at least the majority of that shard.
Now Bob sends a a payment to Alice in shard (3). Alice now asks a node serving Shard (2) if that transaction is valid. But as Shard(2) is controlled by Bob, can't he return false information and thus double spend transactions over and over?
Bob has a few challenges to overcome here:
Challenge 1
Bob can never be sure that he controls a shard or a set of them. He can't prevent anyone else from maintaining that shard, nor them being asked about Bob's transactions.
Say Bob constructs an Atom(x) which Alice receives. If there are any nodes that Bob doesn't control, they will also receive Atom(x), either from one of Bob's nodes, or from Alice's or someone else. Bob can't prevent these nodes from receiving it, because he has got to broadcast it to Alice somehow.
Bob later presents Atom(x') which conflicts with Atom(x). Bob can not be sure that nodes that aren't his don't have Atom(x). If they do, when they receive Atom(x') from Carol, they can inform Carol that it is not legit..with proof of Bob's previous transaction.
Challenge 2
Bob will have to manipulate his commitments in order to fool Carol and anyone that may have Atom(x'). He would have to create Atom(x) to Alice first, somehow let Alice know about it without Atom(x) information leaking to the network. Later present the Atom(x') to Carol, then submit Atom(x) and the commitment information for him to "prove" Alice was first....double spending x.
Alice might also be part of the ploy.
This is quite the challenge for a number of reasons:
If Bob places Atom(x) into a commitment and makes that commitment known, he is then very likely to be asked to verify that commitment at a future time by a node he doesn't control; Such as when connecting to it, submitting Atoms to it, or when part of a Temporal Proof Provisioning with it.
If Bob doesn't verify any commitments he has submitted when asked, then the node he is connected with will not accept anything from him, nor send anything to him until he does.
If Bob creates two commitments, one which he keeps to himself containing Atom(x) for later use and another without it which he presents to the network. When he eventually presents the original, it will break his commitment sequence in the network.
Recall from the paper that a commitment references the previous one.
Say Bob creates C(2) which contains Atom(x) and keeps it to himself. To preserve his commitment sequence, C(2) contains a reference to C(1).
Bob then creates Atom(x') that is sent to Carol. He can't create C(3), because if he does, he has to reference C(2) which contains Atom(x). To preserve his commitment sequence and for it to be accepted, C(3) also has to contain a reference to C(1).
Later when Bob presents C(2) to prove the existence of Atom(x) BEFORE Atom(x'), there will then be TWO commitments from Bob that reference C(1).
The only way for that to happen is if Bobs nodes are either faulty, or he has manipulated his commitments. Nodes do not modify what they have unless there is verifiable proof that they should. Bob can not have 2 commitments that reference C(1), therefore it can not be proven that Atom(x) was first.
Challenge 3
Because Tempo operates with relative time, not absolute time, nodes stick to a "I'll keep what I've witnessed unless proven otherwise" and even then, their logical clocks still count up.
For example, say Node(A) witnessed an Atom(x') at LogicalClock(5), then it received a conflicting Atom(x) that supposedly happened before. It doesn't matter what the time stamp on those Atoms are, it will always reference its local ledger first to discover information that it can verify against. For Atom(x) to be proven to be before, then it must have in it's ledger some information about Atom(x) where the logical clock value is less than 5. If it is proven that Atom(x) was first, and is accepted by Node(A), its logical clock will still increment and it will keep a record of Atom(x').
This is where commitments come into play and why reliable gossiping is important, as a node never "takes anyones word for it".
For Node(A) to alter its ledger, accept Atom(x) and disregard Atom(x'), it must have a commitment containing Atom(x) in a Temporal Proof that it saw BEFORE Atom(x'). If, when Atom(x) is presented with commitment "proof", the node can not find the commitment hash in its ledger that should have been previously submitted, it assumes that Atom(x) was created in a faulty manner.
Because of the inability to tamper with the commitment sequence, Node(A) will not have such a commitment, otherwise it would discover Bob's scam.
The paper details that Node(A) will also contact a number of its neighbours to perform a more intense order determination. This will also fail, as none of those nodes will have any commitments in their ledgers either that match the supposed "proof".
Bob could continue to create a sequence of Atoms, TPs and commitments independently, even sniffing legit Atoms from the main-net in order to try and increase the viability of his "proof" and then submit them all in one go. It is still detectable that Bob was faulty or dishonest as no node will have any commitments from Bob since before Atom(x') and Atom(x) were created. Which indicates a high likelihood that he was not part of the main-net at that time and should have ceased processing Atoms.
The fact that he didn't stop, also suggests a fault or dishonesty.
Because Tempo operates with relative time, not absolute time, nodes stick to a "I'll keep what I've witnessed unless proven otherwise" and even then, their logical clocks still count up.
For example, say Node(A) witnessed an Atom(x') at LogicalClock(5), then it received a conflicting Atom(x) that supposedly happened before. It doesn't matter what the time stamp on those Atoms are, it will always reference its local ledger first to discover information that it can verify against. For Atom(x) to be proven to be before, then it must have in it's ledger some information about Atom(x) where the logical clock value is less than 5. If it is proven that Atom(x) was first, and is accepted by Node(A), its logical clock will still increment and it will keep a record of Atom(x').
This is where commitments come into play and why reliable gossiping is important, as a node never "takes anyones word for it".
For Node(A) to alter its ledger, accept Atom(x) and disregard Atom(x'), it must have a commitment containing Atom(x) in a Temporal Proof that it saw BEFORE Atom(x'). If, when Atom(x) is presented with commitment "proof", the node can not find the commitment hash in its ledger that should have been previously submitted, it assumes that Atom(x) was created in a faulty manner.
Because of the inability to tamper with the commitment sequence, Node(A) will not have such a commitment, otherwise it would discover Bob's scam.
The paper details that Node(A) will also contact a number of its neighbours to perform a more intense order determination. This will also fail, as none of those nodes will have any commitments in their ledgers either that match the supposed "proof".
Bob could continue to create a sequence of Atoms, TPs and commitments independently, even sniffing legit Atoms from the main-net in order to try and increase the viability of his "proof" and then submit them all in one go. It is still detectable that Bob was faulty or dishonest as no node will have any commitments from Bob since before Atom(x') and Atom(x) were created. Which indicates a high likelihood that he was not part of the main-net at that time and should have ceased processing Atoms.
The fact that he didn't stop, also suggests a fault or dishonesty.
Brilliant! Thanks a lot for your detailed reply.
The main parts I initially missed where that atoms are signed by the owner and as such if one node has a record of the atom, it is verifiable that it is ledig (I some how had a model in mind where the majority of the nodes have to agree that a transaction happened). As well as that the commitments are chained together.
Reading your reply and again the whitepaper helped a lot. Thanks!
Does a node have to keep record of its commitments (or rather the data/atoms used to build them) for ever, or can it start deleting old atom data after a given time/LogicalClock time?
Really exited to see the Whitepaper released! Have been waiting on this day since 2013
I must admit I have a hard time getting my head around it though. So perhaps my question is already answered in the paper and I just didn't understand it...
So the Universe is split up in X shards. Each shard is a part of the network contain transaction information, right?
Now what happens if a bad actor (Bob) sets up a lot of nodes that store, say, Shard (2) of the network and by that stores all or at least the majority of that shard.
Now Bob sends a a payment to Alice in shard (3). Alice now asks a node serving Shard (2) if that transaction is valid. But as Shard(2) is controlled by Bob, can't he return false information and thus double spend transactions over and over?
I must admit I have a hard time getting my head around it though. So perhaps my question is already answered in the paper and I just didn't understand it...
So the Universe is split up in X shards. Each shard is a part of the network contain transaction information, right?
Now what happens if a bad actor (Bob) sets up a lot of nodes that store, say, Shard (2) of the network and by that stores all or at least the majority of that shard.
Now Bob sends a a payment to Alice in shard (3). Alice now asks a node serving Shard (2) if that transaction is valid. But as Shard(2) is controlled by Bob, can't he return false information and thus double spend transactions over and over?
Is reusing the same address to receive IOTA still not recommended?
Depends on how you define "reusing".
You may receive Iotas as many times as you wish to the same address without any loss of security.
But as soon as you make an outgoing transfer you should no longer use the address to receive Iotas.
Exchanges will hate this? And users deposit address will change every time also, because exchange need to collect into hot/cold wallet.
For the end user: The GUI wallet automatically changes address when you spend IOTA funds.
For the exchanges: I see no trouble, since each user will have separate deposit address and during withdrawal the IOTAs leave the exchange each time from a different address.
@IOTA experts: correct me if I'm wrong
Correct, the GUI wallet automatically transfers remaining IOTA to a new address if the user makes a transfer.
Same I suppose the Exchanges will do. For Cold wallet they just need to keep track of the new deposit addresses, but that should not be to hard to do.
Wonder how exchanges will handel snapshots and regeneration of addresses though...but I think Dominik sad that this can be solved with index values or something
Is reusing the same address to receive IOTA still not recommended?
Depends on how you define "reusing".
You may receive Iotas as many times as you wish to the same address without any loss of security.
But as soon as you make an outgoing transfer you should no longer use the address to receive Iotas.
Where i can find Neighboring Nodes ?
Can someone post it here ?
Don't tell me about slack, i don't understand what is it )
If you can't join slack, then its best you wait for the official light wallet release.Can someone post it here ?
Don't tell me about slack, i don't understand what is it )
Coming this or next week probably.
IRI runs fine ages now, but I just got an error trying to run the GUI. First time/version this has ever happened, btw.
Fresh install, old db deleted, updated java, node.js, etc. Please let me know what I am missing:
Code:
A JavaScript error occurred in the main process
Uncaught Exception:
Error: /tmp/.org.chromium.Chromium.GP4ELP: invalid ELF header
at Error (native)
at process.module.(anonymous function) [as dlopen] (ELECTRON_ASAR.js:173:20)
at Object.Module._extensions..node (module.js:583:18)
at Object.module.(anonymous function) [as .node] (ELECTRON_ASAR.js:187:18)
at Module.load (module.js:473:32)
at tryModuleLoad (module.js:432:12)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:424:3)
at Module.require (module.js:483:17)
at require (internal/module.js:20:19)
at bindings (/opt/IOTA Wallet/resources/app.asar/node_modules/bindings/bindings.js:76:44)
Uncaught Exception:
Error: /tmp/.org.chromium.Chromium.GP4ELP: invalid ELF header
at Error (native)
at process.module.(anonymous function) [as dlopen] (ELECTRON_ASAR.js:173:20)
at Object.Module._extensions..node (module.js:583:18)
at Object.module.(anonymous function) [as .node] (ELECTRON_ASAR.js:187:18)
at Module.load (module.js:473:32)
at tryModuleLoad (module.js:432:12)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:424:3)
at Module.require (module.js:483:17)
at require (internal/module.js:20:19)
at bindings (/opt/IOTA Wallet/resources/app.asar/node_modules/bindings/bindings.js:76:44)
Edit: Ubuntu 16.10 64-bit
Try restarting, that often solves the problem.
Otherwise you can also wait for the next pre-release or for the official release. The current light-wallet is still in testing / development and has some bugs.
Selling 90Gi at 0.017BTC/Gi. Escrow via Yassin. I can only communicate on btt since i got banned on slack. Also note that trading on btt is free!
Iotas are stored on a full working node and can be sent fast.
Iotas are stored on a full working node and can be sent fast.
You can always make a new account on slack.
And I don't think that Yassin offers free escrow service on btt any more.
And i didn't speak in the slack for month so how could you warn me about anything ?
Generally I keep out of these kind of discussions, but in this case I will post my point of view on this issue. First of I want to note that I do appreciate the escrow service you provided to the community.
Also I have nothing personally against you and I am sure you did not mean to come across as a troll, but at times your attitude did not come over as very positive.
Regarding the above quote, you where not very active on slack, that would have been true. But You did post from time to time, and it often was borderline trolling.
Last time was on the 28th, which is still in history: http://imgur.com/a/6hjfL
If you take look at what you wrote, you might notice that it was not a very positive conversation.
I will quote and comment on your slack posts:
Quote
the guy i hold iota for is tired of waiting
and i'm tired of having iotas
and i'm tired of having iotas
Quote
No working wallet
First of, you made a wrong statement. Iota has a working wallet (Nostalgia). Its not super user friendly, but there are many tutorials and its very well funktional.Secondly, stating that you are tiered of Iota dose not come across very positive.
Quote
last i ask for help i didn't received it
Not sure where or when you asked, but in general every one gets helped if they ask in slack.I also PMed you after I saw this comment and offered you to help. But you never answered my PM, btw.
In reply to that,dom sad if you need help you can ask now. And your reply was:
Quote
No i'm doing a fresh install on VM. I will not waste (more of) my time to try to resolve my previous problem
This is really not a friendly way of declining an offer to help. To me that came across very rude.Fore me that is borderline trolling. But just borderline as I presume it was not your intention to come across as you did. And that was not the only inzident that you where a bit offending.
So that David PMed you, confronting you with that, is IMO not wrong at all. And if you would have just clearly and friendly sad that it was not your intend to troll, but that is was meant to be neutral statement,
I am sure this would not have endet in drama.
@Those that don't understand why this drama always happens:
In the case of the seccour banning, you might want to read above to see the story how I see it. Different perspectives of a situation are always good for the bigger picture IMO.
So why always all this drama? Iota slack is a place where rude comments are not accepted at all. Or comments that are just negative and in no way productive. Imagine being in a room With Google CEO and people alike. Trolling, or offensive attitude will not be seen there, and if it is, be sure that that person won't enjoy the luxury of hanging out with the CEO much longer.
Be friendly and constructive, and you will NEVER get in to a problem with the Iota team.
As a matter of a fact, it isn't to long ago that I had some critic/doubts about the iota project. So I told David stuff that bothered me (in a friendly way)...and got a very professional answer, that solved my issue I had. Reason I mention this is because many here just see the fights and might get a wrong impression.
Again, if you are friendly/Constructive you will never get any problems with the Iota team!
I didn't even bother taking dom help the 28 because the last time i was in need of his help he didn't even care helping me, same for Cfb and i did ask multiple times.
I didn't answer to your PM because at the time you send it i was doing something else and didn't have time to solve my problem that i have for months now.
If you think it's trolling you should look at the definition. I was just tired of that shit because every time i try to install that wallet or to make it work it doesn't. And when weeks or months ago i was asking multiple times for help about the error i was getting they didn't even bother helping me. So why would i even speak in a positive way ? Since when i do, no one help ?
It wasn't a wrong statement since i was speaking about myself.
And i didn't care about being rude because they were when i was asking for it.
And David PMing about it is wrong because it wasn't even concerning him ? Do i have to refer or explain all my statement to David ? Yeah i didn't welcome his PM in a friendly way because the first thing he did before sending me the PM was accusing me of being a troll here on bitcointalk. Without even asking for an explanation of my comment in PM before. And no it would have not end the drama because as his post on bitcointalk prove it, he didn't even try to ask for explanation, he was sure that i was a troll. Just look his first PM : "So did you finally decide to out yourself as a troll ?" - The finally say it all. That was his opinion about me.
" Be friendly and constructive, and you will NEVER get in to a problem with the Iota team. " - I know some people that were friendly and constructive and got into troubles.
" As a matter of a fact, it isn't to long ago that I had some critic/doubts about the iota project. So I told David stuff that bothered me (in a friendly way)...and got a very professional answer, that solved my issue I had. Reason I mention this is because many here just see the fights and might get a wrong impression. " - Good for you. You did that in public or PM ? Because one word wrong in public and you will be flag as a troll.
Anyway, before i wasn't getting help from the team, now i will not even be able to ask. Maybe one day i will have a working wallet so i can give back the IOTA to some people. But no, i can't, because i need other people node's IP. To bad people share that on Slack.
For your exemple with Google CEO... He will not even loose his time registering to Slack. The community the IOTA team ask money too during the ICO is not about CEO's and shit. It's just normal people from all backgrounds, all countries and that speak all kind of languages. If you want to hangout with CEO's and big corporate go ask for money to a VC next time. Don't betrayed those gave you the money and help your community.
Well I respect your way of thinking, can't say I agree with it though.
To answer your question:
"- Good for you. You did that in public or PM ? Because one word wrong in public and you will be flag as a troll."
It was in a privat channel with several other participants. I saw no reason to drag the issue I had into public, as long as it isn't impotent for every one. I am confident though that the reply would have been the same.
I think its best if we leave it as is, as we both seem to have a different way of thinking.
And last but not least, if you need help with setting up the wallet to make your transfers, my offer to help you still stands. Just PM me.
And i didn't speak in the slack for month so how could you warn me about anything ?
Generally I keep out of these kind of discussions, but in this case I will post my point of view on this issue. First of I want to note that I do appreciate the escrow service you provided to the community.
Also I have nothing personally against you and I am sure you did not mean to come across as a troll, but at times your attitude did not come over as very positive.
Regarding the above quote, you where not very active on slack, that would have been true. But You did post from time to time, and it often was borderline trolling.
Last time was on the 28th, which is still in history: http://imgur.com/a/6hjfL
If you take look at what you wrote, you might notice that it was not a very positive conversation.
I will quote and comment on your slack posts:
Quote
the guy i hold iota for is tired of waiting
and i'm tired of having iotas
and i'm tired of having iotas
Quote
No working wallet
First of, you made a wrong statement. Iota has a working wallet (Nostalgia). Its not super user friendly, but there are many tutorials and its very well funktional.Secondly, stating that you are tiered of Iota dose not come across very positive.
Quote
last i ask for help i didn't received it
Not sure where or when you asked, but in general every one gets helped if they ask in slack.I also PMed you after I saw this comment and offered you to help. But you never answered my PM, btw.
In reply to that,dom sad if you need help you can ask now. And your reply was:
Quote
No i'm doing a fresh install on VM. I will not waste (more of) my time to try to resolve my previous problem
This is really not a friendly way of declining an offer to help. To me that came across very rude.Fore me that is borderline trolling. But just borderline as I presume it was not your intention to come across as you did. And that was not the only inzident that you where a bit offending.
So that David PMed you, confronting you with that, is IMO not wrong at all. And if you would have just clearly and friendly sad that it was not your intend to troll, but that is was meant to be neutral statement,
I am sure this would not have endet in drama.
@Those that don't understand why this drama always happens:
In the case of the seccour banning, you might want to read above to see the story how I see it. Different perspectives of a situation are always good for the bigger picture IMO.
So why always all this drama? Iota slack is a place where rude comments are not accepted at all. Or comments that are just negative and in no way productive. Imagine being in a room With Google CEO and people alike. Trolling, or offensive attitude will not be seen there, and if it is, be sure that that person won't enjoy the luxury of hanging out with the CEO much longer.
Be friendly and constructive, and you will NEVER get in to a problem with the Iota team.
As a matter of a fact, it isn't to long ago that I had some critic/doubts about the iota project. So I told David stuff that bothered me (in a friendly way)...and got a very professional answer, that solved my issue I had. Reason I mention this is because many here just see the fights and might get a wrong impression.
Again, if you are friendly/Constructive you will never get any problems with the Iota team!
Quote
The IOTA Javascript Library
As part of our effort in making IOTA developer friendly and easy to use, we
are happy to announce today that the first of the proposed libraries is ready
for public testing!
The official github repo can be found here:
https://github.com/iotaledger/iota.lib.js
Source: https://medium.com/iotatangle/the-iota-javascript-library-65ba22945711#.vcxsqwhpzAs part of our effort in making IOTA developer friendly and easy to use, we
are happy to announce today that the first of the proposed libraries is ready
for public testing!
The official github repo can be found here:
https://github.com/iotaledger/iota.lib.js
Re: BYTEBALL: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments
Byteball: Exclusive Interview with developer tonych in English:
https://altcoinspekulant.wordpress.com/2016/10/06/byteball-exclusive-interview-with-developer-tonych-in-english/
https://altcoinspekulant.wordpress.com/2016/10/06/byteball-exclusive-interview-with-developer-tonych-in-english/
Nice interview. Thanks!
Some useful information here:
Quote
If you don't see your address in the snapshot:
a) Make sure that your address is 81, not 90 chars long
b) Make sure that your address is *supposed* to have a balance (if you have made transactions already, it is likely that this address was already emptied)
c) Check on Tangle.guru to see if there's a balance
d) Only after all of this, contact us and tell us that something is wrong.
a) Make sure that your address is 81, not 90 chars long
b) Make sure that your address is *supposed* to have a balance (if you have made transactions already, it is likely that this address was already emptied)
c) Check on Tangle.guru to see if there's a balance
d) Only after all of this, contact us and tell us that something is wrong.
when will the manual claims be processed?
I haven't get mine so my address isn't in the snapshot.
btw my provided adress is 90 chars long.
A second snapshot will be released, guess tomorrow (not sure) with manual claims included
Hi, I now see the "mistake" I made. I clicked on topup. But one has to use "load Card" which is at the verry top.
Those seem to be two different things.
Now it worked!
How long dose it take untill the funds are actually on the card? I take it it won't happen on weekends?
card load with BTC is instant
Thats awesome!
Hi, I ordert a card a few month ago as my old ANX Card is soon expiring. Now yesterday I wanted to load some funds to the card and got a message that I need to upload documents for KYK.
But when I ordert the card, and also still today, you clearly state that there is a 2,500 limit for loading the Card if unverified.
I am a bit reluctant to send some company, that is constantly having tech problems and I know nothing about who they are, my Passport and other documents.
So is there a way to charge the card without sending those documents?
But when I ordert the card, and also still today, you clearly state that there is a 2,500 limit for loading the Card if unverified.
I am a bit reluctant to send some company, that is constantly having tech problems and I know nothing about who they are, my Passport and other documents.
So is there a way to charge the card without sending those documents?
It depends on how you wanted to load some funds , I have the card and I never had to provide any documents. However , when I click "Top-up" on the card , they will ask me to provide real information's.
So for now , the only way to load the card without providing info is by sending BTC then load the card or by linking the card to your PayPal account and send from PayPal to the card.
Sending the bitcoin to where? You mean you sell bitcoin and then load the money with PayPal on to the card?
to load your card with BTC via our service, you don't need to verify the account if you don't want to.
If you want to use other loading options (bank transfer, alternative payment methods), then you need to verify the account - that is the requirement of the issuing bank.
Hi, I now see the "mistake" I made. I clicked on topup. But one has to use "load Card" which is at the verry top.
Those seem to be two different things.
Now it worked!
How long dose it take untill the funds are actually on the card? I take it it won't happen on weekends?
Hi, I ordert a card a few month ago as my old ANX Card is soon expiring. Now yesterday I wanted to load some funds to the card and got a message that I need to upload documents for KYK.
But when I ordert the card, and also still today, you clearly state that there is a 2,500 limit for loading the Card if unverified.
I am a bit reluctant to send some company, that is constantly having tech problems and I know nothing about who they are, my Passport and other documents.
So is there a way to charge the card without sending those documents?
But when I ordert the card, and also still today, you clearly state that there is a 2,500 limit for loading the Card if unverified.
I am a bit reluctant to send some company, that is constantly having tech problems and I know nothing about who they are, my Passport and other documents.
So is there a way to charge the card without sending those documents?
It depends on how you wanted to load some funds , I have the card and I never had to provide any documents. However , when I click "Top-up" on the card , they will ask me to provide real information's.
So for now , the only way to load the card without providing info is by sending BTC then load the card or by linking the card to your PayPal account and send from PayPal to the card.
Sending the bitcoin to where? You mean you sell bitcoin and then load the money with PayPal on to the card?