Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 928 results by bitcoinbear
This suggests a passive allowance status, i.e. "it's not forbidden." More inviting would be an active allowance from a statute or court ruling. It's still good news, but we should make the distinction.
Re: Bangladesh Central Bank: Cryptocurrency Use is a ‘Punishable Offense’
This is sad.... Bolivia, Ecuador and now Bangladesh, some of the poorest nations in the world, so unfair to it's people! 
Make something to yourself become just a bit harder
Make something to yourself become just a bit harder Re: Bangladesh says Bitcoin users could be jailed for up to 12 years
This is something I am painfully aware. We like bitcoin, and we use them, and expect them to take over the world (or so we hope). But the side effect of this would be to take away the power of governments to print money. Many people like this. Printing money has always been used (also) to fund wars. You take this away, and wars will be harder and smaller. More like the middle ages wars, were a war was not a global nation effort. Although of course technology is also responsible for the global nature of war. So if bitcoin takes away some power from the us or russia or china... Well that's ok.
But printing money is generally a tax, and it is a tax that hits especially the people who hoard the money, and do not put it to any use. If your money is invested, and there is inflation, you will likely get your money back. But keep it under the mattrass and it will lower its value. And where has this value gone? In a sense it has gone to the government that printed the money.
It is easy to say that the money printed has not been put at good use. But if you just look at the difference between countries with double digit inflation and failed states you will notice that failed states do not have a working government. There are warlords. Rape and violence are rampant, double digit inflation are terrible places to be, but are better than failed states, as somehow are still working.
So, as I am worried for Italy that with the Euro has lost the power to print money to get out of debt, so I think that bitcoin is great.... but might force governments to be good administrators of their digital gold. And politicians (elected or otherwise) statistically are NOT good administrators. So I am worried, and I understand Bangladesh.
But printing money is generally a tax, and it is a tax that hits especially the people who hoard the money, and do not put it to any use. If your money is invested, and there is inflation, you will likely get your money back. But keep it under the mattrass and it will lower its value. And where has this value gone? In a sense it has gone to the government that printed the money.
It is easy to say that the money printed has not been put at good use. But if you just look at the difference between countries with double digit inflation and failed states you will notice that failed states do not have a working government. There are warlords. Rape and violence are rampant, double digit inflation are terrible places to be, but are better than failed states, as somehow are still working.
So, as I am worried for Italy that with the Euro has lost the power to print money to get out of debt, so I think that bitcoin is great.... but might force governments to be good administrators of their digital gold. And politicians (elected or otherwise) statistically are NOT good administrators. So I am worried, and I understand Bangladesh.
Re: [BCN] Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012
Hey guys. I was thinking about BCN promotion and PR a little bit these days. I think Bytecoin need some bright event connected with it and it doesn't even matter would it be positive or negative. We're living in the world where so many thing happen and we cant pay attention to each of them so we take a look just to the brightest and most rememberable ones, those which make some resonanse.
All of you heard that story with celebs nude icloud photos leaked. As I know there's no proof of this happened because of icloud, but still millions of people started think that this apple service is not so secure and their data isn't in 100% safety.
So my point is that BCN needs that kind of resonant story, which would prove its' total security and anonymity and make it thousands times more often mentioned than other altcoins. Again, doesn't matter positive or negative story (I mean connected with drugs-story like Silk Road or something positive).
All of you heard that story with celebs nude icloud photos leaked. As I know there's no proof of this happened because of icloud, but still millions of people started think that this apple service is not so secure and their data isn't in 100% safety.
So my point is that BCN needs that kind of resonant story, which would prove its' total security and anonymity and make it thousands times more often mentioned than other altcoins. Again, doesn't matter positive or negative story (I mean connected with drugs-story like Silk Road or something positive).
Since the dev team is in the shadow we hardly can discuss their strategy. But I hope they have some pr-section.
Re: [BCN] Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012
TO SUM UP:
Part 1 - Mysteries and Puzzles Behind the CryptoNote Technology (1/3)
Some general info about CN technology and BCN and the team
Part 2 - Mining Groups in the Blockchain (Part 2 of 3)
About groups who have been mining BCN since the beginning
Part 3 - Keeping it Quiet CryptoNote Special Conclusion (Part 3 of 3)
Article about future vision in brief.
Really interesting article. The mysteries and puzzles behind CryptoNote and Bytecoin are fascinating. There really are so many unanswered questions regarding Cryptonote and Bytecoin. Other than the technology itself, this is what Bytecoin is all about.
Apple has now become another gate keeper in online payments. Only apps can use it for online purchases, and only the apps Apple allows will be available to their users. You would be far more restricted now than you were before you started using it.
Re: Bitcoin promoter to face five years in prison for conspiring to sell Bitcoin
He did not really conspire to launder, but with so little requirements on such a site, it was bound to happen, maybe he was actually ignorant to this?
"The email said: Quote from: satoshin@gmx.com Michael, send me some coins before I hitman you." Not the fbi then?
Why wouldn't the hacker though - presuming it was hacked - not use it to profit by say falsely telling a reporter he was to sell the million coins after having shorted btc everywhere instead of making a death threat??
Why wouldn't the hacker though - presuming it was hacked - not use it to profit by say falsely telling a reporter he was to sell the million coins after having shorted btc everywhere instead of making a death threat??
Re: Blowing the lid off the CryptoNote/Bytecoin scam (with the exception of Monero)
I have carefully read this publication several times and, you know, Ive got the impression that someone is trying hard to impose upon us his point of view. Someone wants us to think in a certain way.
Ive tried to look at the whole situation as a bystander and posted below there are conclusions Ive come to:
1. It's obvious that someone is trying to discredit the CryptoNote technology along with all the CN-based coins.
CryptoNote team has published official statement yesterday https://cryptonote.org/news/archive
Do you see this bold text? Think about it.
2. Someone tries to cause distrust and enmity between Monero and other CN-coins. "Divide et impera" is an old maxim.
"with the exception of Monero" in the subject of this tread proves it better than everything else.
The question is: who is that "someone"? I have some thoughts on topic, but I don't want to publish them until I have enough evidence.
Ive tried to look at the whole situation as a bystander and posted below there are conclusions Ive come to:
1. It's obvious that someone is trying to discredit the CryptoNote technology along with all the CN-based coins.
CryptoNote team has published official statement yesterday https://cryptonote.org/news/archive
Quote
Greetings to all the members of the CryptoNote community and those who are interested in the technology. This message is our response to the recent developments and speculations within the CN community. Before we get to the point wed like to reassert our firm commitment to the long-standing philosophy behind CryptoNote. Everything we do is for the sake of technology, and we take great joy as we progress towards our goal.
The initial efforts at CryptoNote development go back as far as 4 years. Some great minds were involved in its creation. More than two years ago the first implementations of CN technology were unleashed on the world of cryptocurrencies and from that moment forward the community that was forged around our vision and values grew exponentially.
What is currently going on within the CN community hardly resembles the harmonious state of mutual respect and synergy that once ruled over the CN coins. Someone clearly is instigating hostility. Moreover, the CryptoNote website has recently been exposed to illegal access by malicious users, which is absolutely unacceptable. Some data stored on cryptonote.org have been vandalized and is now temporary unavailable until the internal investigation is completed.
Having thoroughly reviewed the situation around certain CN currencies, the CryptoNote team would like to issue the following statement:
It is the official position of CryptoNote that our technology has been created to bring positive changes into the current financial system by providing tools that have never existed before. The technology is what concerns us the most. We are not to be distracted or misled by the speculative rumors and strongly suggest you to follow suit.
CryptoNote is not a cryptocurrency and has not been designed to be one. The only CryptoNote currency that the CryptoNote team officially endorses is CryptoNoteCoin, which has zero commercial value and serves educational purposes only.
We consider all the name-calling and finger-pointing that has taken place on certain internet discussions as inappropriate and harmful to further development of the CryptoNote technology.
Over the years CryptoNote has had to overcome a great number of obstacles but those striving so desperately to deter the advance of new technologies are doomed to fail. We are strong believers in the power of innovation and there is no way to stop the CN development.
Discussion thread: https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=265&p=883#p883
The initial efforts at CryptoNote development go back as far as 4 years. Some great minds were involved in its creation. More than two years ago the first implementations of CN technology were unleashed on the world of cryptocurrencies and from that moment forward the community that was forged around our vision and values grew exponentially.
What is currently going on within the CN community hardly resembles the harmonious state of mutual respect and synergy that once ruled over the CN coins. Someone clearly is instigating hostility. Moreover, the CryptoNote website has recently been exposed to illegal access by malicious users, which is absolutely unacceptable. Some data stored on cryptonote.org have been vandalized and is now temporary unavailable until the internal investigation is completed.
Having thoroughly reviewed the situation around certain CN currencies, the CryptoNote team would like to issue the following statement:
It is the official position of CryptoNote that our technology has been created to bring positive changes into the current financial system by providing tools that have never existed before. The technology is what concerns us the most. We are not to be distracted or misled by the speculative rumors and strongly suggest you to follow suit.
CryptoNote is not a cryptocurrency and has not been designed to be one. The only CryptoNote currency that the CryptoNote team officially endorses is CryptoNoteCoin, which has zero commercial value and serves educational purposes only.
We consider all the name-calling and finger-pointing that has taken place on certain internet discussions as inappropriate and harmful to further development of the CryptoNote technology.
Over the years CryptoNote has had to overcome a great number of obstacles but those striving so desperately to deter the advance of new technologies are doomed to fail. We are strong believers in the power of innovation and there is no way to stop the CN development.
Discussion thread: https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=265&p=883#p883
Do you see this bold text? Think about it.
2. Someone tries to cause distrust and enmity between Monero and other CN-coins. "Divide et impera" is an old maxim.
"with the exception of Monero" in the subject of this tread proves it better than everything else.
The question is: who is that "someone"? I have some thoughts on topic, but I don't want to publish them until I have enough evidence.
Seems to me that someones blowing his gaskets trying to smear the CN tech up and down. Hexah deserves some credit on this one, even Monero has gotten its share of the shit pie here. Making it look like a pinnacle of the CN technology ready to take on Bitcoin is just outright ridiculous.
It all smells like the competition is playing out its tricky scheme on us. I dont want to engage in the finger-pointing here (enough has been done so far) but isnt it like Darkcoin hates us all. Those guys have never been particularly picky about their methods.
Shall we do some ass-kicking on their thread in retaliation?
Re: Blowing the lid off the CryptoNote/Bytecoin scam (with the exception of Monero)
I was impressed by the amount of work you've put to compile everything in one place. While checking your claims regarding CryptoNote whitepaper, I noticed the same XMP timestamps and other evidence that you posted.
However, there is one thing that you did not check-out when I tried to repeat your experiment. Van Saberhagen's public key on CryptoNote website cannot be used to validite the PDF. While checking, I got this message:
Some new surprising information was found on Bytecoin's website. It hosts a very similar whitepaper v.2, which turns out to be different if you study it carefully. What's more, van Saberhagen's public key matches on CryptoNote and Bytecoin websites. It seems that Bytecoin may hold a genuine Saberhagen whitepaper as it can be verified with the published public key - however since his identity remains unknown, we can only speculate.
I then decided to continue with experiment by comparing the paper found on Bytecoin with the one CryptoNote's website. For easier references I'll call them bcn-whitepaper and cn-whitepaper. The bcn-whitepaper will always goes first on the pictures unless explicitly stated otherwise.
When opening the bcn-whitepaper we can see the article structure.
Which is not the case for cn-whitepaper.
Opening the PDF we notice the valid signature inside:
The signature date on bcn-whitepaper is almost the same as on cn-whitepaper but slightly differs in size. This by itself, points that further discrepancies may exist between the two whitepapers. I decided to continue my investigation by studying the signature details (bcn - to the left, cn - to the right):
Everything looks quite the same with the exception of the SHA and MD5 fingerprints. Moving on to the XMP properties, we can see that they are also different.
Bcn-whitepaper holds perfectly clear signatures. The CreateDate is 2013 as it should be. The pdfTeX version x.x.13 also existed. There is totally nothing strange about these tags. Unlike the whitepaper from CryptoNote website that was studied before.
Apparently, Bytecoin's whitepaper is quite consistent in terms of timelines.
The remaining question is which whitepaper may have been the genuine one.
I would assume that having exactly the same van Saberhagen's public keys posted on both websites, it would not be unlikely that it really belongs to Saberhagen - particularly since both keys validate the bcn-whitepaper.
Also, upon a careful examination of Bytecoin's whitepaper I found a watermark, which is usually hard to identify. Here it is in the whitepaper (just after the Appendix):
Most may be unable to see it because it is non-selectable, can't be copied and is transparent. You might be able to see it as a small highlighted field (e.g. if you open it with Chrome).
It turns out that the watermark appears in the tooltip for that field. Here is the tooltip's content:
This is a PGP key perfectly matching public van Saberhagen's key published on both websites.
Hence, there is a PGP signature hidden in the Bytecoin's whitepaper, but there is no such watermark in the one found on CryptoNote's website.
Are these 2 documents anyhow different apart from that? I've checked with adobe document compare tools, and it seems that they're either complete copies, or have very minor indistinguishable differences like the following three. These formulas appear to be the same, but not to the compare tool:
My Conclusions
1. It is very likely the Bytecoin website hosts the genuine whitepaper.
2. The whitepaper published on CryptoNote's website may be a forgery. There is no PGP watermark and the author's PGP public key can't be used to validate the whitepaper.
3. Someone has duplicated the genuine whitepaper line by line for them to look the same - but failed at capturing some of its hidden elements.
4. Now let's move to whitepaper v.1 on CN website. As there is no signature to validate this whitepaper, the only relevant test is watermark. If it's inside, then the asumption on CryptoNote's conspiracy may hold. However, whitepaper v.1 doesn't have this watermark.
5. The problems with latex compilator problems, XMP meta tags, and invalid links may point to a forgery attempt, not van Saberhagen's actual activity.
Unclear questions for further research
1) What and why did we find two strange whitepapers on the CryptoNote website? A number of options may be valid. I assume it could be a mistake, a social engineering trap, hacked website or someone's attempt to discredit the technology? Who knows.
I'll point CryptoNote that they may have a wrong whitepaper. Maybe they will care to comment or take actions.
However, there is one thing that you did not check-out when I tried to repeat your experiment. Van Saberhagen's public key on CryptoNote website cannot be used to validite the PDF. While checking, I got this message:
Some new surprising information was found on Bytecoin's website. It hosts a very similar whitepaper v.2, which turns out to be different if you study it carefully. What's more, van Saberhagen's public key matches on CryptoNote and Bytecoin websites. It seems that Bytecoin may hold a genuine Saberhagen whitepaper as it can be verified with the published public key - however since his identity remains unknown, we can only speculate.
I then decided to continue with experiment by comparing the paper found on Bytecoin with the one CryptoNote's website. For easier references I'll call them bcn-whitepaper and cn-whitepaper. The bcn-whitepaper will always goes first on the pictures unless explicitly stated otherwise.
When opening the bcn-whitepaper we can see the article structure.
Which is not the case for cn-whitepaper.
Opening the PDF we notice the valid signature inside:
The signature date on bcn-whitepaper is almost the same as on cn-whitepaper but slightly differs in size. This by itself, points that further discrepancies may exist between the two whitepapers. I decided to continue my investigation by studying the signature details (bcn - to the left, cn - to the right):
Everything looks quite the same with the exception of the SHA and MD5 fingerprints. Moving on to the XMP properties, we can see that they are also different.
Bcn-whitepaper holds perfectly clear signatures. The CreateDate is 2013 as it should be. The pdfTeX version x.x.13 also existed. There is totally nothing strange about these tags. Unlike the whitepaper from CryptoNote website that was studied before.
Apparently, Bytecoin's whitepaper is quite consistent in terms of timelines.
The remaining question is which whitepaper may have been the genuine one.
I would assume that having exactly the same van Saberhagen's public keys posted on both websites, it would not be unlikely that it really belongs to Saberhagen - particularly since both keys validate the bcn-whitepaper.
Also, upon a careful examination of Bytecoin's whitepaper I found a watermark, which is usually hard to identify. Here it is in the whitepaper (just after the Appendix):
Most may be unable to see it because it is non-selectable, can't be copied and is transparent. You might be able to see it as a small highlighted field (e.g. if you open it with Chrome).
It turns out that the watermark appears in the tooltip for that field. Here is the tooltip's content:
This is a PGP key perfectly matching public van Saberhagen's key published on both websites.
Hence, there is a PGP signature hidden in the Bytecoin's whitepaper, but there is no such watermark in the one found on CryptoNote's website.
Are these 2 documents anyhow different apart from that? I've checked with adobe document compare tools, and it seems that they're either complete copies, or have very minor indistinguishable differences like the following three. These formulas appear to be the same, but not to the compare tool:
My Conclusions
1. It is very likely the Bytecoin website hosts the genuine whitepaper.
2. The whitepaper published on CryptoNote's website may be a forgery. There is no PGP watermark and the author's PGP public key can't be used to validate the whitepaper.
3. Someone has duplicated the genuine whitepaper line by line for them to look the same - but failed at capturing some of its hidden elements.
4. Now let's move to whitepaper v.1 on CN website. As there is no signature to validate this whitepaper, the only relevant test is watermark. If it's inside, then the asumption on CryptoNote's conspiracy may hold. However, whitepaper v.1 doesn't have this watermark.
5. The problems with latex compilator problems, XMP meta tags, and invalid links may point to a forgery attempt, not van Saberhagen's actual activity.
Unclear questions for further research
1) What and why did we find two strange whitepapers on the CryptoNote website? A number of options may be valid. I assume it could be a mistake, a social engineering trap, hacked website or someone's attempt to discredit the technology? Who knows.
I'll point CryptoNote that they may have a wrong whitepaper. Maybe they will care to comment or take actions.
Would be great to see a similar comparison for Monero vs Boolberry if someone is up for it.
I have a dream: BBR and XMR devs become one team
bonero
Moonberry?
Marsberry?
Amphibian told that it's fixed now. 
The site appears to be up, but the servers are apparently down. I keep getting "Failed to get donor block". Tried from two different machines/ips, with the same problem.
How easy is it to set-up one of these servers yourself? Is it just a matter of passing some command line to the daemon to accept external connections?
I'll talk to amphibian as soon as he comes online.
About the node establishing, as far as I know it's not that difficult, you just have to comment a few lines in code and start deamon differently (can't remember how lol). If you want I can ask that too.
solominer.org appears to be down? Is everything OK?
Also: is there anything we can do to increase the likelihood of a solominer server for Monero?
Thanks for all your hard work.
Also: is there anything we can do to increase the likelihood of a solominer server for Monero?
Thanks for all your hard work.
Amphibian told that it's fixed now.
About the XMR server - you should try to contact it's developers, we already tried once, with no luck unfortunately.
Re: [FCN] Bounty 1000 FCN and 0.7 BTC for the Open-Source merged mining pool
Update: we are in big need of open-source pool. And not even a merged mining one - simple open-source FCN-only pool will suffice.
So the reward is 300 FCN and 0.2 BTC
With any updates or suggestions PM me or amphibian
So the reward is 300 FCN and 0.2 BTC
With any updates or suggestions PM me or amphibian
Re: [FCN] Bounty 1000 FCN and 0.7 BTC for the Open-Source merged mining pool
Today Minergate.com pool introduced merged mining option! You can mine FCN with any CryptoNote coin you want.
It's a first MM pool implementation there is and we're very grateful for it!
All open-source lovers can mine using cpuminer-multi (a.k.a. minerd) on Minergate.
Please use this addresses as your --url
FCN+BCN: fcn-bcn.pool.minergate.com:5558
FCN+MRO: fcn-mro.pool.minergate.com:5559
FCN+QCN: fcn-qcn.pool.minergate.com:5560
FCN+duck: fcn-duck.pool.minergate.com:5563
There is a one problem tho which is going to be resolved any time soon: if you're sending stale share to the minergate you're going to get "Unknown job id" error. To fix this error you should stop/start the mining.
Remember that open-source merged mining pool bounty is still on the table.
It's a first MM pool implementation there is and we're very grateful for it!
All open-source lovers can mine using cpuminer-multi (a.k.a. minerd) on Minergate.
Please use this addresses as your --url
FCN+BCN: fcn-bcn.pool.minergate.com:5558
FCN+MRO: fcn-mro.pool.minergate.com:5559
FCN+QCN: fcn-qcn.pool.minergate.com:5560
FCN+duck: fcn-duck.pool.minergate.com:5563
There is a one problem tho which is going to be resolved any time soon: if you're sending stale share to the minergate you're going to get "Unknown job id" error. To fix this error you should stop/start the mining.
Remember that open-source merged mining pool bounty is still on the table.
Re: [FCN] What would you change/introduce to FCN to make it more valuable?
Great news folks!
Today Minergate.com pool introduced merged mining option! You can mine FCN with any CryptoNote coin you want.
It's a first MM pool implementation there is and we're very grateful for it!
Today Minergate.com pool introduced merged mining option! You can mine FCN with any CryptoNote coin you want.
It's a first MM pool implementation there is and we're very grateful for it!
Forgot to mention.
All open-source lovers can mine using cpuminer-multi (a.k.a. minerd) on Minergate.
Please use this addresses as your --url
FCN+BCN: fcn-bcn.pool.minergate.com:5558
FCN+MRO: fcn-mro.pool.minergate.com:5559
FCN+QCN: fcn-qcn.pool.minergate.com:5560
FCN+duck: fcn-duck.pool.minergate.com:5563
There is a one problem tho which is going to be resolved any time soon: if you're sending stale share to the minergate you're going to get "Unknown job id" error. To fix this error you should stop/start the mining.
Re: [FCN] What would you change/introduce to FCN to make it more valuable?
Great news folks!
Today Minergate.com pool introduced merged mining option! You can mine FCN with any CryptoNote coin you want.
It's a first MM pool implementation there is and we're very grateful for it!
Today Minergate.com pool introduced merged mining option! You can mine FCN with any CryptoNote coin you want.
It's a first MM pool implementation there is and we're very grateful for it!