Linguica posted:

within the week?

Sentient Data posted:

So I've been selling Bitcoin locally for cash every now and then. No huge amounts, but I take some % markup and do it instead of withdrawing cash from ATMs to get a better exchange rate. So far only cash. I decided to try to do it via online banking. Shortly after I set up an ad, some guy initiates contact to buy ~0.5 BTC (about 16,000 JPY), which was all I had up for offer, and says he wants 10 BTC. He has no trading history so I tell him we can do a little now and maybe more later, since I want to see that things go smooth before doing any large amounts. Shortly after, the guy writes that he has deposited 20 BTC worth of money to my account. I realize something fishy is going on and go to the bank. They say nothing is in my account. While I am at the bank, I try to deposit some cash to my account using the ATM. It doesn't work. I go to the clerk and they tell me someone from my branch (same bank, different office) will call me. I get a call and they tell me that the police has frozen my account. Today, I get a call from the police.

Apparently someone has committed online fraud, stole money and transferred it to my account. They asked me lots of questions regarding how I got the money, do I know the guy, etc. I answered and told them what has happened (basically what I wrote here). They knew what bitcoins are but had not heard of Localbitcoins.

As he put it, I am now in a position of being either an accomplice or a victim in their eyes.

I did all the brief communications with the scammer through Localbitcoins. I will met the police again on Tuesday and they will want to see my communication with the guy. My concern is that they will be questioning all my previous Localbitcoins trades. I have not filed them, payed any tax, etc, so I am worried that this will be a problem. Also, I am on a student visa so I am not sure how they look at this trading with regards to that. On the other hand, if I delete all the communication with the guy I also delete my only way of indicating my innocence. So I am kind of stumped here.

I guess I did the classic mistake of answering police questions before talking to a lawyer... Which I also have no idea of how to get in touch with someone that will not cost a fortune and has a basic understanding of English and Bitcoin.

TLDR: Trading BTC on Localbitcoins, some guy deposits huge amount, account gets frozen, now the police wants everything from me. Worried that earning money from previous trading without filing taxes will get me in trouble. What should I do?

anthonypants posted:

pretty wild how that criminal knew what specific bank account to deposit the funds into. those cybercrooks are getting more impressive every day

Friendly Tumour posted:

my people will continue roperting on it within 6 months

trucutru posted:

pretty sure the miners won't be able to resist the temptation to try to go back to the current block subsidy after the next halving anyways. then we'll see how decentralized this poo poo really is

Condiv posted:

new satoshi refuses to sign his emails, even though satoshi classic signed p much all his emails

poik007 posted:

New Satoshi
Satoshi Classic
Satoshi Zero
Satoshi Diet
Cherry Satoshi
Satoshi Max

Pocket posted:

12 yr old satoshi

Heresiarch posted:

i was giving this more thought than required

usually, important internet protocols aren't subject to this kind of thing because they're largely extensible standards and there's always multiple implementations. (i.e. dns may have a de facto standard implementation in bind but there's piles of alternatives.) but bitcoin isn't like this in either sense. it's not extensible in any useful way because you can't really just build on top of it (like with custom http headers or something), you have to support the whole thing or not all because it's all so tightly coupled. there's not really any useful alternative implementations, pretty much everything is built on top of the bitcoin core codebase to maintain bug-for-bug compatibility

for something like bitcoin to be "internet money" then it has to be a protocol in a traditional sense, without anything like a "core devs" group. but bitcoin demonstrably isn't this, it's an experiment you'd run under controlled conditions to to figure out how to make such a protocol. everything that's happened to bitcoin is a lesson to anyone who actually wants to make a useful digital currency and not just take the money and run or use it to further a political agenda, but it got way out of hand for reasons we're all way too familiar with

and now the whole idea is tainted. good job, you fuckwits

Dixie Cretin Seaman posted:

Michael Goldstein

But my friends call me Bitstein.

Heresiarch posted:

Heresiarch posted:

one of the xt devs explains their choices using borderline religious language:

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

i couldn't even finish reading it, it's so absurd

quote:

The so-called “Lightning network” that is being pushed as an alternative to Satoshi’s design does not exist. The paper describing it was only published earlier this year. If implemented, it would represent a vast departure from the Bitcoin we all know and love. To pick just one difference amongst many, Bitcoin addresses wouldn’t work. What they’d be replaced with has not been worked out (because nobody knows). There are many other surprising gotchas, which I published an article about. It’s deeply unclear that whatever is finally produced would be better than the Bitcoin we have now.

quote:

These Mods need to be changed. Up-Vote if you agree. (self.Bitcoin)
submitted 11 hours ago by Tiraspolx2

Heresiarch posted:

i was giving this more thought than required

usually, important internet protocols aren't subject to this kind of thing because they're largely extensible standards and there's always multiple implementations. (i.e. dns may have a de facto standard implementation in bind but there's piles of alternatives.) but bitcoin isn't like this in either sense. it's not extensible in any useful way because you can't really just build on top of it (like with custom http headers or something), you have to support the whole thing or not all because it's all so tightly coupled. there's not really any useful alternative implementations, pretty much everything is built on top of the bitcoin core codebase to maintain bug-for-bug compatibility

for something like bitcoin to be "internet money" then it has to be [...]

Splicer posted:

man, I picked the wrong week to fall behind the thread. curse you seraph

Mido posted:

the XT nonsense is reminiscent of IPv6 to me and how that is relatively akin to a schism. except handled by adults. "oh X bits should be enough for anyone":"oh X block size should be enough for anyone" -> "oh poo poo never mind, new version of old thing"

fuctifino posted:

1304 upvotes so far. lol

Mido posted:

heresiarch nevermind I'm dumb and my brain wasn't firing after reading your post and just waking up hungover. your whole point is that the Bitcoin protocol is inextricably bound to its utility and it isn't a noble transport for something above it. I cannot disagree that this is its Achilles heel

Herman Merman posted:

[–]Diapolis 27 points 13 hours ago 

We're doing a sit-in. They can bring the dogs and the firehoses now.

Mido posted:

I'm on the fence a bit about this one (the necessity for extensibility as a recipe for success) there are elements of the internet that are pretty inflexible, mostly TCP/IP layer 4 and below. there are knobs that hardware and software at those levels can fiddle a bit (think MTU and TCP session attributes), not dissimilar to the options the *coin protocol allows pools to set for how many TXs to pull from the pool on a successful block

the XT nonsense is reminiscent of IPv6 to me and how that is relatively akin to a schism. except handled by adults. "oh X bits should be enough for anyone":"oh X block size should be enough for anyone" -> "oh poo poo never mind, new version of old thing"

TCP/IP is fundamentally a small, extremely well specced piece of so many things that constitute the Internet. telecoms are another ok example of people that came up with rigid specifications that hardware makers couldn't gently caress up, that hardware monkeys who are racking things and plugging things in couldn't gently caress up. there's a lot of value in a spec that pushes implementation to as few states as possible (ie: does work, does not work)

I feel like Bitcoin did as well as it could have for a project of its constraints. people have reddit systems built on top of it which dispense or receive micropayments, there are exchanges that generate wallets and shuffle satoshis around automatically without govt or regulatory busywork

-- and it sucked. Bitcoin just loving sucks. it turns out that designing an arena that only allows Mexican stand offs between maintainers and users is an ugly and undesirable thing. it turns out that a lot is sacrificed when you make "trust" a bad word in the core tenets of your system. nothing will do better than Bitcoin in terms of solving the Internet money dream. the problems of Bitcoin are inextricably linked to its design constraints (trust less "decentralized" ledger appends). it's over. the jury is out on how dumb all this poo poo is

theflyingorc posted:

this is why the idea of BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY finding new use cases is never going to happen

bitcoin has to give out rewards to create a competitive mining scenario, or the protocol just doesn't work - anything you do with it could be smashed by one of the chinese farms if they decided to just switch their power to destroying whatever you're doing

Robawesome posted:

you can run a private chain that can't be mined by the chinese superpowers - private companies have already started using blockchain tech for internal ledgers

Robawesome posted:

you can run a private chain that can't be mined by the chinese superpowers - private companies have already started using blockchain tech for internal ledgers

theflyingorc posted:

that doesnt' make any sense

i mean it might be happening, but it doesn't make any sense

surebet posted:

Has R/bitcoin been uncensored? by Jackten in Bitcoin
[–]StarMaged[M] -87 points 7 hours ago
I wanted to show you guys what it is that you're asking for. I've even disabled Automoderator, so go ahead and spam if you want. I sure as hell won't censor it.
I'll probably return everything back to normal tomorrow. You guys already hosed the front page anyway, so not much more can be done to fix it at this point. Good night.

theflyingexecutive posted:

and how is that different from any other versioning?

CampingCarl posted:

this is good for bitcoin