I've seen this on reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/83d9y9/im_freaking_the_fuck_out_wtf_is_this/
it is on a domain which was related to ASICMINER earlier (but maybe the website was run by a shareholder?) asicminer.co

Someone knows more about this? I still own 100 direct shares, so would be good to know what's going on -_-

Edit: BTW I think most likely someone grabbed the domain and the linked website is a SCAM so please don't preorder anything lol.

I just had this problem on my linux laptop after upgrading python-trezor, protobuf3 and so on.

Turns out in my case the error only happens if the TREZOR is plugged into the USB3 port, in that
case trezorctl get_features works the first time, but if called again complains about Unexpected magic characters.

After some trial and error it turns out it works fine if I use one of the USB2 ports. So if someone has that
problem, try a different USB port.

Still feels to me that this is some kind of software issue, because it works with the first call.
That was also the symptom in electrum it would detect the trezor (first connection), but then fails
when it connects again (magic error). Maybe this bug https://github.com/trezor/python-trezor/issues/76
is not completely fixed?

What I am a bit worried about is that finex still has open long/short positions (I think). Hope we don't crash hard again when they get closed 

1NSCgnkpeDpwcbKvQKz2yoAaeLu8gKxVA9

Wouldn't mind, please send here lol  

2.6 hasn't been officially released yet, but I just tried it works fine here.
If you got it from github try, 'git pull' to get the latest updates.

If the error keeps popping up you can report it here: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues
Or you can try going back to electrum 2.5.4

with current electrum from github I get: Wrong signature

But if I add a = at the end of the signature I get: Signature verified.
Maybe somehow the = got missing? Try adding it 

 

I agree decentralization is very important and we shall not lose it, but it is also a very subjective and hard to measure thing.
We have to find the sweet spot that makes most sense:
http://www.coindesk.com/how-to-save-bitcoins-node-network-from-centralization/

I am so sick reading stuff like this over and over. This kind of elitist thinking is very dangerous imho.
The Whitepaper says "A peer to peer cash" system. As long as lightning network and co are not production ready
the coffee goes in the blockchain - deal with it.

Also the 7$/TX theoretical cost ist retarded, this is mostly because the 1MB blocklimit, if we would raise it to say 10MB
it would go down to 0,70$/TX and so on. ( of course this shit is inefficient, but it makes sooo much economic sense wtf )

I know decentralization above everything blabla, but I think we have to make a tradeoff here, most fullnodes are servers or on cable
connections anyway. Those machines don't care much if the blocksize is 1, 2, 4 or 8 MB... They run anyway, top 5 fullnode networks:

Hey


Congrats you have an average internet connection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_connection_speeds
So it could be worse, but it is likely to get better with time. A short time ago I was stuck on 1/0.2 Mbps which was shared by 4 people, that was not fun.
Now it is hybrid DSL/LTE, I was very sceptical but it works pretty well

Maybe the values should have been chosen lower with bip101, but something like it which keeps growing makes a lot of sense to me.



I think this kind of thinking is very dangerous, not everyone has access to those payment systems, they also can confiscate funds or let you jump trough hoops like identity verifications.
For me Bitcoin is a currency-commodity so it should be able to flow around nicely. It should not scale to visa levels right now imho, but also not the total opposite, it is something in between.

From the bitfury roundtable it seems Gavin is more worried about the shortterm, while I am more worried about the longterm. Seg-wit will probably work, but it needs a clear plan how
further increases happen. And I read multiple times that a HF need atleast a year runup time etc, so it needs to have a plan right now. (TBH my opinion is that this should have been fixed years ago, I can't imagine this will get easier if userbase keeps growing)

There are thousands of altcoins just waiting to pick up, some of them have bigger or dynamic blocksizes, as a BTC holder it would be sad if (more) value flows into them...

Hi  ,

@gmaxwell

I agree mostly with what you wrote, but I think the plan behind bip101 was that the average internet connection will likely keep getting faster with time, even today some people have 1Gbit fiber connection at home, others are probably watching 4k netflix right now. Ofcourse it would be a tradeoff and make it harder to run a node, maybe different values should have been chosen for bip101, I don't know, but I don't think it was Gavin and Mike's intention that it can only run at datacenters.


The Problem is also that satoshi said, we can just raise the blocksize later if needed at blockheight xyz.

Also if I understand it correctly your roadmap also includes a hardfork later but does not specify a timeframe for it, I think this is a big part of why we have this situation right now, maybe you want to check out my pullrequest to add a rough timeframe: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/website/pull/74 or you need a scaling roadmap part2 or something.

And if you guys have other methods of increasing throughput, like extension blocks or whatever, than you need to communicate this correctly.
We non wizard-people don't know if and how this is possible, but we understand that raising the blocksize archives the goal of more throughput.

BTW: I really like bitpays idea of adaptive scaling, can't you get together with gavin and plan this safely for next year or something. I don't like the 2MB HF, because it is no longterm solution. Also sorry if this sounds angry or so, I have not slept well the last days lol, please don't take it personal.

Also received such a mail, headers also look fishy (terms-google.com?)


the text version links to https://www.betcoin.ag/auupdate?token=...
but in the html version it links to: http://141.105.69.206/dn/?e=... (that ip is from russia  )

This looks like a error message from python (electrum is written in python).

I can't help you with it but I would suggest you fill a bug report here: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues
with as much info as possible (how was the wallet created etc) you could also reference this issue
https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/1466 which was about the same error message.

I have this too, with a windows 7 vm no notes icon, but with windows 10 it shows up fine. Not sure what could cause this 

Hey  

there is a new wine version out ( https://www.winehq.org/announce/1.7.52 ) and with that the connection to swc server
seems to work now, it says online 139 players now!
I have not tried playing or anything, and the interface is a bit buggy (active games list not working) but better than nothing.

Okay whatever that was it is not working anymore, has the same error like earlier now lol... wtf

I swear it was working few minutes ago, interesting 

So I googled a bit about the problem, and it seems most of the time
it is caused by a corrupted blockchain, this can have multiple reasons,
maybe you had a power outake or a hardware problem like faulty ram.

For example:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/4125
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/4064

Most of the time it gets fixed by running bitcoin with the "reindex" option,
that will take a long time and rebuilts the blockchain database.

You may try that by adding

to the bitcoin.conf, but remember to remove it afterwards, else
it does this everytime you start bitcoin.

Can't tell what the problem is, but I would try to add a few nodes to bitcoin.conf maybe this gets you going.

Just add this to d:\Bitcoin\bitcoin.conf
(create file if it does not exist, grabbed the nodes from https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/)

Same here, then I noticed the server it connects to has an expired certificate, maybe
windows just connects despite this and wine is more strict? I emailed them about it some time ago,
but seems they haven't found the time to replace it with a correct cert.

So sick of all the FUD around here.

Bitfinex is moving coins to coldstorage:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3g88ol/30k_btc_just_moved_out_from_a_bitfinex_cold_wallet/ctw2oe4

Sadly it doesn't work with wine, lobby shows up for a split second, then it crashes with this error:

Maybe there is a trick to get it working, pokerstars works so good with wine :/

Hey I was just snooping around a little bit lol and noticed that
your php installation is not uptodate, also seems you run debian wheezy
so you need to run apt-get update && apt-get upgrade

You can also set php to not display its version info with this config option: