avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • August 19, 2018, 02:33 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 13 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Renegade [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 437next
Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: August 14, 2018, 10:45 AM »
Bitcoin is still a total disaster

comes across as a very snarky article (presumably by someone who is a fan of the status-quo), yet may have some valid points. I dont know enough myself to say.

When this thread started, Bitcoin was $12.40.

So, not sure I take the WP seriously when it continually cries about the end of Bitcoin.

Screenshot Captor / Re: Menu bar stuck on right, not top
« on: July 16, 2018, 12:17 PM »
Dragging worked. Thanks!

Screenshot Captor / Menu bar stuck on right, not top
« on: July 16, 2018, 11:20 AM »
I can't seem to get the menu bar to the top. After reinstalling a newer version, and wiping settings, it's still on the right.

Here's a screenshot:

Screenshot - 2018-07-16 , 11_53_28 AM.png

If a law of physics is broken, does it make a sound?

What is the speed of gravity?

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: November 20, 2017, 05:55 PM »
I should also mention that for some wallets, if you upgrade them, you can automatically get your bcash.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: November 20, 2017, 05:02 PM »
Hay, does anybody know how the hell you're supposed to get the BCH from the BTC fork back in August?? I had some coin in an old Multibit wallet back then, but I gots no clue on how to jump the fork (for lack of a better/correct term) with it..

It's pretty easy. However, make sure that you are very careful with your private keys, as if anyone sees them, all your coins are GONE.

This is the SHORT version. I recommend doing a search to find out how to do the steps you're unsure of.

1. Find which addresses have coins in your Bitcoin wallet.
2. Export the private keys for those addresses.
3. Transfer all your coins from your Bitcoin wallet to a new address (this is a paranoia step that should be followed - it aims to prevent a replay attack).
4. In your new bcash wallet, import your private keys and you'll see the coins appear in your wallet.

Thought this might be interesting to some: Successful completion of the first off-chain atomic swap.

This is a much bigger deal than I think most people realise.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: November 18, 2017, 11:46 PM »
I just sent a transaction through at the maximum priority level for $4 CAD. Yes, that's a fair amount to spend, but it will arrive sooner than a wire transfer, for less, and a normal transfer of any amount in Canada cost $1.50 anyways.

So, I paid $2.50 over what an insecure, shitty, primitive system based on email would cost me. (Interac in Canada is a minimum of $1.50 per transfer.)

And guess what? I regularly have to wait HOURS for direct transfers here in Canada.

Canada is worse than the third world (I've lived there and banked there and have bank accounts there). Canada is the asshole of the banking world. It sucks. More than I can possibly say.

How much do most people spend in banking fees for their transactions? $4 a month is normal here in Canada for a small number of transactions.

I still hate paying fees, but I still pay less than with the traditional banking system when I use Bitcoin.

Consider this... When you go out for dinner with your family and spent $100, $2.50 of that is transaction fees for credit cards.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: November 18, 2017, 11:27 AM »
Heh! Seems we have a lot of disagreements on many things.

For Bitcoin Cash, I see it as just another altcoin. The 8MB blocks solve nothing. Further, code screw-ups in it have shown that the bcash team isn't up to the same level as the Bitcoin Core team.

For SegWit2x, some people tried to pull it off. Guess what? It died immediately due to show-stopping bugs. It never got off the ground. Again, solid code review is important. (It had multiple bugs, including an 'off-by-1' bug.)

So, complaints about the Bitcoin Core team being slow are very much unfounded.

One of the greatest allies of Bitcoin is Litecoin (and others too). The Litecoin team has deployed code ahead of Bitcoin in order to provide a production environment testing ground. SegWit was in Litecoin first.

Litecoin is currently proving atomic swaps (not to be confused with atomic transactions). This is a big deal.

If recent news is anything to go by, the future of atomic cross-chain trading looks bright. Creator of Litecoin, Charlie Lee, successfully completed atomic swaps using Litecoin in exchange for Bitcoin, Vertcoin and Decred.

As for fees, yes, this is an issue, but give it a bit of time and that will disappear. MimbleWimble/Grin and off-chain scaling techniques will alleviate mempool bloat.

Also, keep in mind that Bitcoin has been under attack for years now, with everything from technical attacks to nation state attacks and political attacks. And it's survived all of them. Bitcoin is highly resilient. And that's in part due to the good judgement of the Bitcoin Core team.

On the topic of Ethereum...

And I'm also not sure what any variant of Bitcoin offers these days over other cryptos that haven't had development stalled for the past 2 years. I think Dash has integrated some cool features (like InstantSend, PrivateSend, and their treasury to help fund continued development). I think Ethereum is pretty interesting because you can run programs on the blockchain.

Ethereum is constantly having to have hard forks due to serious bugs.

As a currency, Bitcoin is far superior to Ethereum because it's stable. The problem is in part due to Ethereum being Turing complete, and Bitcoin being not Turing complete. This is important. The design decision to be not Turning complete was a good one, as Ethereum has shown.

That being said, Ethereum is superior to Bitcoin as a development platform. They do different things.

One to watch is NEO.


Monday should see a pop there. Not sure though. I don't have time to dig too deep. Still mulling over whether to throw some at it and see what happens.

Bitcoin has a problem when one its most ardent supporters you know says things like this:

Quote from: Renegade on November 11, 2017, 01:21 AM
I don't send my friends BTC. I send fiat.

That was taken horribly out of context.

I don't send my friends BTC. I send fiat. Because it's less valuable. I HODL.

In other words, he sends fiat because fiat won't go up in value.  Bitcoin will.  BTW, HODL means to hold, as many people do with stocks.

Yep. I like my friends, but... Nope. Keeping my BTC. They can buy BTC if they want. If I have fiat, I'll settle in fiat. Good money drives out bad. And fiat right now is the ultimate s**tcoin.

Regarding Rick Falkvinge, he's being a dishonest shill. (Yes - he's in on the bcash nonsense.) The fee issue will be resolved, but big blocks aren't the answer -- they only create further problems. If he wants free transactions, there are plenty of coins out there. This isn't about free transactions in the least.


It seems that late in 2010, Satoshi realized there had to be a maximum block size, otherwise some miners might produce bigger blocks than other miners were willing to accept, and the chain could split. Therefore, Satoshi inserted a 1 MB limit into the code.

Rick, Roger, Jihan, and the rest of them are behaving like petulant children. Their temper tantrums over scaling aren't helping anyone. The issue is being addressed, but it's being addressed in a responsible way that takes time.

One only needs to look at the bcash and SegWit2x code failures to see just how idiotic these children have become. The bugs seen there are catastrophic. Their rush to address scaling is reckless at best.

Regarding wire transfers, I had to send money to someone again last night. It cost me less than 10% what a bank wire transfer would cost, and it was there immediately instead of taking 3-5 business days.

And, if I really need faster or cheaper payments, I can always use Monero or Dash or whatever.

But this incessant whining about Bitcoin not being X or Y or Z is silly. Bitcoin is conservative, stable, and resilient. No other coin has been attacked as viciously as Bitcoin. And that probably plays into why Bitcoin development is so cautious.

It's like people complaining that their hammers don't have Philips and Robertson screwdriver heads on them. Well... duh! That's because those tools do different things. Pick the right tool for the job. Bitching about the wrong tool not being the right tool is just silly.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: November 10, 2017, 11:21 PM »

The real question is.. some of you crazy people who were ranting about it, and telling us how bitcoin was going to take off during the early days of it.. are any of you rich enough to retire and bankroll the rest of us yet?

Well, I can't bankroll the rest of you, but I can certainly bankroll myself.

I'm not super wealthy, but, I have options open to me and some freedom to choose what I work on.


Would you mind briefly explaining how you solved the scalability issues? And what you mean by that? Or if it's in the whitepaper just say so and I'll try to get the time to finally read through it.

The very short answer is "Game Channels". It's a form of trustless off-chain scaling. You can read the academic paper in the journal Leger (a crypto journal) here:


It's also in the endnotes in the White Paper. The White Paper explains it briefly.

You can think of it like this... You have the Chimaera blockchain, and then every single game running on the Chimaera platform has its own blockchain where size doesn't matter. (Get your mind out of the gutter!)

That's a bit crude, but should give you an idea.

But the reason I ask is because scalability seems to be a major issue in most of the major cryptos, especially Bitcoin. There are lots of interesting ideas out there on how to resolve or work around the issues, but as far as I know things like sidechains (Lightning, Raiden, Plasma, etc.,) are all still currently being researched and/or developed but nothing is actually released and running on the network(s) yet. If you're talking about scalability in a similar sense as for other blockchains, then solving the scalability issues could be really big news for cryptocurrency in general. :Thmbsup:

What can I say? We're ahead of the curve! :D


Due to encouragement of the bitcoin evangelists here on DC I did eventually provide a bitcoin address for people who wanted to donate to DC via bitcoin, back in 2015.

There have been a total of 12 payments received in that 2 year period.

Total received from those 12 payments was 287mBTC which apparently is worth about $2,000 USD currently  :huh:

That's great! Keep it! HODL! :D

You perked my interest, so I went back through my wallet to have a peek:



Checking again... Geez... That's more than I've donated in fiat to you. I'm pretty sure I've donated to DC a few times with fiat.



That's about $5 to send a transaction at current prices. And if you have a bunch of small amounts in different addresses, which is the recommended way to do it for privacy, transactions can easily be over 1,000 bytes (or over $20 in fees to send a transaction). And if you try to pay a lower fee, you could be waiting days before your transaction finally goes through, if it ever does.

it's ironic that it's so user-un-friendly, considering the opposite was the intention.
Was that covered here in this thread -- how that changed (I think it was, but I'm being a lazy beggar here - I mostly work on memory first, then search, but tonight I'm leaving out the search part...)

A few screwey things there...


That's about $5 to send a transaction at current prices. And if you have a bunch of small amounts in different addresses, which is the recommended way to do it for privacy, transactions can easily be over 1,000 bytes (or over $20 in fees to send a transaction). And if you try to pay a lower fee, you could be waiting days before your transaction finally goes through, if it ever does.

You can choose your transaction fee rate. You're not forced to spend anything. The only issue is that the transaction may take longer.

I regularly send BTC to people and set a lower fee because I don't care if they get it in 12 seconds or 12 hours. It's all close enough.


it's ironic that it's so user-un-friendly, considering the opposite was the intention.

That's soooooo far from the truth.

Have you ever had to send money to people in another country?

It's not easy.

I recently had to send funds to a company to pay for a service.

I did it in 2 parts:

1) BTC
2) Fiat

BTC was easy. I sent it. Done.

Cost me about $1.80 CAD. I could've spent less on that fee.

Fiat? F**king nightmare.

I had to drive almost an hour to another town to get to the bank to wire $$$.

The teller there didn't know how to do it. After 10 minutes.

I waited another 15 minutes.

Then it took 30 minutes to send.

The transaction fee cost me $40 CAD. That's over 22x what I spent sending BTC.

It cost me gas. Probably around $30 or $40 CAD there. Call it $35.

So, about 3 hours of my time, plus around $75 in costs (not including paying for parking), and that's the fiat world.

Sorry. No. BTC is far better. Crypto is better. By leaps and bounds.


2 minutes & $1.80 CAD

180 minutes & $75.00 CAD

Now... for a $2 coffee at a shop... The Lightning Networks are coming. That's next year.

But, even forgetting that, it's still easier to send BTC to a friend than to send fiat.

I don't send my friends BTC. I send fiat. Because it's less valuable. I HODL. :)


Was that covered here in this thread -- how that changed (I think it was, but I'm being a lazy beggar here - I mostly work on memory first, then search, but tonight I'm leaving out the search part...)

We all do it. :D


Back when I first got into Bitcoin toward the end of 2015, I sent a test transaction to Renegade after he sent me what was then just a few dollars worth of BTC (now worth almost $200! Wish I had kept it...). I paid 5 sat/byte for that transaction, which at the time was less than 1 cent. But now the recommended fee is 300 sat/byte to get your transaction included quickly.

Heh! I remember that!

I sent at the time about $10 USD, and Deozaan sent back about $0.40.

Now, for many of my transactions I'm spending in the area of 50k satoshis to 2k satoshis. It depends on how quickly I want it to arrive.


To further illustrate the point: Just for fun back in 2015 I gave a friend $1 worth of BTC for Christmas (the low value was an inside joke) to try to get him interested in cryptocurrency. It failed to pique his interest. With the value of BTC going up so much this year (by my calculations that $1 gift is now worth about $22.50), he has finally taken an interest in crypto, and asked me how to access the funds I gave him. But it would cost ~$5 in transaction fees for him to do anything with it so I've told him not to bother.

You can spend MUCH less. It's not hard.

The expensive fees are all fiat fees.


In a nutshell: The Bitcoin "Core" developers refuse to increase the blocksize limit from 1MB to anything larger even though people and developers and businesses have been clamoring for an increase for years. So the blocks are at full capacity. Which means if you want your transaction included in the blockchain, you need to compete with others for the limited space in each block. The only way to incentivize a miner to include your transaction over others is by paying higher fees than others. But everyone else is also trying to pay higher fees than everyone else so they can get their transaction included, so the fees just go higher and higher. Meanwhile more and more transactions are being added to the backlog. So if you intentionally try to get away with paying a low fee, you could be waiting days for your transaction to clear (the backlog tends to catch up over the weekend). And even if you pay what your software deems a decent fee, but for some reason fees skyrocket due to sudden increased demand (making miners consider your fee to be a comparatively "low" fee), then you could be waiting days for your transaction to clear anyway.

The Core devs rock.

Also, in Chimaera, our Lead Blockchain Developer is a Bitcoin Core contributor.

But, for the block size, that's a bit misleading.

The idea is to off-load transactions into Lightning Networks. That will solve scaling issue massively.

Those will take off next year.

This is just the beginning. There's a long way to go.

Right now Bitcoin is NOTHING in the financial world. It's a blip. A curiosity.

If you're not in already, do your due diligence and think about whether BTC has a place in your portfolio.

Right now some great thing to watch are Julian Assange's Twitter:

He's ripping through people. Savage. Good on the Based White Wizard.

Also, James O'Keefe is destroying the NYT right now. It's very entertaining.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: October 15, 2017, 07:27 PM »
I'm involved in a project that's now publicly open. (Check bounties below.)

Chimaera is a blockchain gaming platform. If you remember Huntercoin (it's still running), Chimaera can put countless games with near limitless players on the blockchain. We've solved the scalability issues, so the sky's the limit.

The main web site is here:

The token sale is here:

It's open to large investors until October 23rd when it's then open to the general public. Discounts are offered for the first investors with lower discounts offered as the CHI tokens are bought up.

Technical details and other information is in the white paper here:

The official Bitcoin Talk announcement is here:


However, that's not really why I came here.

We have a MASSIVE bounty campaign, and you can make quite a few CHI coins in it. 3.5% of the total supply is available for it.

Check out the bounty details here:


There are lots, and there's something for everyone in there. Some of the best bounties may end up being for the creative section (Articles). You can make videos or blog posts or whatever.

So, if anyone wants to earn some crypto, head on over!  8)

Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: August 22, 2017, 12:02 AM »
@IainB - I suppose I shouldn't find any of that surprising. Hey... let's do a study! And pay people! Surely people willing to do our study for f**k all aren't any different than people that have productive and meaningful lives and that couldn't give a s**t less about us!!!

The idiocy is deafening.

For the most part, science is dead.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: August 21, 2017, 11:57 PM »
Major drama coming over the next little while. Expect ups and downs.

For any long time DCers looking for an inside scoop, email me. If you don't know my email, then figure it out. Option only open to long time DCers here.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: March 12, 2017, 01:15 AM »
@Ren - you'll appreciate this. Yours truly used Bitcoin for the first time just recently. Interesting.  8)

Congrats! You popped your cryptocurrency cherry!  ;D

Once you get used to it, it's far better.

And currency is just one use for it. More will come. It's the Internet of money now.

Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« on: March 05, 2017, 11:43 PM »
Anyone happy with the new ATH?

Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: March 05, 2017, 11:23 PM »
Ego is definitely an issue. And a difficult one. Admitting that you're wrong is hard. The first point in being honest, is being honest with oneself.

Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: March 04, 2017, 09:30 PM »
Such blindness may extend to self-serving fraud. In this example report, scientists/management investigated at the US DOE had apparently planned a scheme that deliberately withheld relevant information from Congress, so that members of Congress could not see the strong form of an argument that risked disproving the DOE's management's preferred "truth" and politicised line of research funding: Dept of Energy gov’t scientist fired for answering Congressional questions contrary to DOE management views.

I think you're right about outright fraud, but what might be even worse is simple error in "settled science".

I'm quite a fan of the Thunderbolts Project.

If you go through their materials, it's flat out terrifying that we've made so many fundamental errors in science.

The most recent video walks through some issues:

In particular, here:

The 3 points he makes at 7:30 can't be ignored.

We should re-examine basic science as it appears that much of what we think we know is simply wrong.

Living Room / Re: What books are you reading?
« on: February 06, 2017, 09:20 PM »
I've done fairly well with investing. The easiest one so far is Bitcoin. Buy & HODL. But, hey... what do I know... I've only raked in more in a day than most people make in a year or more (not Bitcoin even).

Investing takes a lot of effort though. Read, read, watch, watch, think, think, buy... hold... SELL! Timing is everything.


Great book.

It's objective and calm. There's no hyperbole or anything. Everything is directly from primary sources and Islamic scholars.

Highly recommended for anyone looking to learn a bit more about Islam.

It doesn't get into political Islam or Sharia much though. That's not the scope of the book. It's simply about the actual scriptures, history, etc.

Fun bits include Islamic prescriptions for drinking camel urine, as well as others.

sjws always lie.jpg

Great book again.

If you're wondering why Donald Trump won, read this. It will help shed light on that.

It also gets into the innards of identity politics. The second half of the book is better on this front.

The first bit of the book is a bit dull if you're not into #GamerGate, but wildly awesome if you are.

If you're a gamer and interested in #GamerGate, this is a must read.

Anyone have any experience with recording from multiple cameras and keeping them all synchronized while switching easily between them for the final production video.. Im interested in a workflow that doesn't involve a huge amount of "work".

Not video, but I've done it in audio before with multiple sources. We had everyone say at the same time "1, 2, 3" and then clap hard. That would provide a way to very quickly line up and sync all the audio tracks. Think of that board thing that they use for movies with the scene numbers and a "clack". You could do anything like that and line up the "clack" to sync things quickly. Or, if you have all the clocks on all the cameras sync'd, you could use the SMPTE time.

Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: December 23, 2016, 01:24 AM »
Sure, they may get their rocks off, but it's still garbage science. And it's peer reviewed.

Humanity is doomed at this rate. Hunker in.

Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: December 20, 2016, 02:20 PM »
Not the same as the above general critiques of peer review, but examples of way beyond simple insanity... articles so utterly disconnected from reality... People are "peer reviewing" absolute drivel. Then publishing it.

FAIR WARNING: You will likely lose a few IQ points, soil yourself, and spend the better part of an hour vomitting if you click on either of these links.



Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: November 23, 2016, 07:20 AM »
More corruption in the world of "science"? Of course!

Owner of Canadian medical journals publishes fake research for cash

The new owner of two prominent chains of Canadian medical journals is publishing fake research for cash, and pretending it is genuine.

More depression at the link.

Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« on: November 04, 2016, 11:51 PM »
What?! You still here Renegade? I'd thought I'd ordered my minions to have you carbonised.

I was. I escaped. The truth set me free. :D

For your last post, I think we both know that science is merely a political tool now. It's been co-opted.

There is hope though.

DC Gamer Club / MIT Morality game for self-driving cars
« on: October 08, 2016, 09:37 AM »
MIT has a morality game for self-driving cars.

Take the results with a cowlick of salt. They're not very accurate, but you might have fun. It's pretty short too, so no major time investment.

I used 3 principles in the "game":

1. Save the people in the car.
2. If nobody is in the car, obey traffic lights.
3. If nobody is in the car, and you can't obey lights, swerve.

That results in prefering:

  • Men over women
  • Younger people over older people
  • Large people over fit people
  • Higher social value over criminals

All of those were simple accidents of how the questions appeared.

Site/Forum Features / Re: Code Highlighting Tags Broken
« on: October 01, 2016, 10:02 PM »
You could use Pastebin if needed.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 437next