Topic: **CEX.IO Bitcoin Exchange ** Buy Bitcoins with Cards in iOS / Android App*** - page 79. (Read 422328 times)
June 30, 2014, 03:05:43 PM
46.86 Ph/s
June 30, 2014, 06:48:37 AM
Guys any one have this problem ?
When i try to withdraw it say insuficient fund ??
When i try to withdraw it say insuficient fund ??
I think the issue is only on your account.
Please notify our support, and they will be able to help.
@CEX - please stop spamming this thread with fake support comments
June 30, 2014, 05:48:14 AM
Guys any one have this problem ?
When i try to withdraw it say insuficient fund ??
When i try to withdraw it say insuficient fund ??
I think the issue is only on your account.
Please notify our support, and they will be able to help.
June 30, 2014, 05:37:33 AM
Guys any one have this problem ?
When i try to withdraw it say insuficient fund ??
When i try to withdraw it say insuficient fund ??
June 29, 2014, 03:08:26 PM
10 blocks in a row - I thought we were done with this bullshit?
What ?
June 29, 2014, 01:28:50 AM
10 blocks in a row - I thought we were done with this bullshit?
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
June 28, 2014, 04:21:44 AM
Hello!
I like your service better than others because unlike others users can sell their GHs anytime. Now the fee is a little high, if you decrease the fee, it would be more better.
Now Scrypt.cc offers same trading GHs but when you check the mining profit, it isn't good compared to Cex.io . I suggest others to use GHs rather than KHs to get better mining profit.
Kindly,
Muhammed Zakhir
I like your service better than others because unlike others users can sell their GHs anytime. Now the fee is a little high, if you decrease the fee, it would be more better.
Now Scrypt.cc offers same trading GHs but when you check the mining profit, it isn't good compared to Cex.io . I suggest others to use GHs rather than KHs to get better mining profit.
Kindly,
Muhammed Zakhir
June 28, 2014, 01:08:22 AM
Is there some issue ongoing at the moment on CEX?
GHash is reporting that there has been 9 blocks solved over the last 6 hours but my GHS has done no work for them? On top of that the price dropped around the same time.
GHash is reporting that there has been 9 blocks solved over the last 6 hours but my GHS has done no work for them? On top of that the price dropped around the same time.
June 27, 2014, 08:02:53 AM
guys check interview on http://fuk.io with one of CEX/GHASH owners. theres a bit about FBI etc.
June 26, 2014, 04:47:28 PM
Can we have your registered office address and company registration number for verification at companies house (UK)
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/toolsToHelp/findCompanyInfo.shtml
Your page mentions:
and
However I'm unable to find VITOPRIA CONSULTANTS LTD at companies house UK, is that a Cyprus registered company
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/toolsToHelp/findCompanyInfo.shtml
Your page mentions:
Quote
We are conducting business as a legitimate UK based company. We will not be able to disappear, as we are governed by UK laws.
and
Quote
VITOPRIA CONSULTANTS LTD
Strovolou, 77 STROVOLOS CENTER, 2nd floor, Flat/Office 204, Nicosia, 2018, Cyprus
Strovolou, 77 STROVOLOS CENTER, 2nd floor, Flat/Office 204, Nicosia, 2018, Cyprus
However I'm unable to find VITOPRIA CONSULTANTS LTD at companies house UK, is that a Cyprus registered company
At the present moment the founders of CEX.IO are in the process of transferring assets and ownership of CEX.IO to CEX.IO LTD in UK.
Up to this moment, VITOPRIA CONSULTANTS LTD was the investor as well as the assets owner of CEX.IO.
Right now the founders of CEX.IO have reacquired all the assets of CEX.IO and have acquired assets of GHash.IO as well. As soon as all official registration steps are completed - we will release an official statement regarding the ownership of CEX.IO and GHash.IO
News about this?
June 24, 2014, 02:31:13 AM
-snip-
June 24th, CEX.IO and GHash.IO will be down for scheduled maintenance from 4 a.m. to 5 a.m., GMT. We apologize for temporary inconvenience.
June 24th, CEX.IO and GHash.IO will be down for scheduled maintenance from 4 a.m. to 5 a.m., GMT. We apologize for temporary inconvenience.
Scrypt hashing....?
Seems like it's called "maintenance" now
June 23, 2014, 01:02:47 PM
June 24th, CEX.IO and GHash.IO will be down for scheduled maintenance from 4 a.m. to 5 a.m., GMT. We apologize for temporary inconvenience.
Scrypt hashing....?
June 23, 2014, 10:11:53 AM
June 24th, CEX.IO and GHash.IO will be down for scheduled maintenance from 4 a.m. to 5 a.m., GMT. We apologize for temporary inconvenience.
June 22, 2014, 02:18:39 AM
At the moment almost all RDD blocks are orphaned. Can't imagine that this is good for the overall profit.
Is it an idea to remove the coin for as long as it's working this bad?
Is it an idea to remove the coin for as long as it's working this bad?
June 18, 2014, 02:25:49 AM
Sorry, but to set up such a scalable and dare I say relatively high-margin operation, you had to have seen this coming, right?
Also, can anyone verify - I thought I'd heard some time ago that due to the "spot" nature of network hashing share, the 51% attack actually discretely manifests itself as the production of 6 or more blocks in a row by one entity...
Also, can anyone verify - I thought I'd heard some time ago that due to the "spot" nature of network hashing share, the 51% attack actually discretely manifests itself as the production of 6 or more blocks in a row by one entity...
They won't have the luck to do it. Not with 30% of the hashrate (by the way, they could go even lower).
It doesn't matter that they had 6 consecutive blocks, GHash.IO/CEX.IO isn't a threat. It was just a pointer that such an attack is possible.
If you think a 51% attack will happen, it won't be CEX.IO. That 51% of the network hashrate would just appear out of nowhere when someone powers on the units. With Ghash closing in to 51% in a timespan of 2-3 months, we had the necessary time to prepare for a hard fork...
Oh, and the 6 blocks is when the tx is confirmed for good, that's what you mean by "computational irreversibility". Yes, an attack as such (the 51%) could be done with a lot lower hashrate, that's true. The 51% just means that you have a 100% chance of the attack succeeding, and that's what we were afraid of.
Great clarification, thanks. I hadn't thought about the timing/time-scale in relation to the magnitude of the attack...should be interesting to see what happens when we start to hit the 14nm and 10nm chip architectures.
June 17, 2014, 11:37:20 AM
growth? more people are leaving cex than joining!
cex are trying to force whoever is left to stay
i have been saying for some time now that cex is in trouble and are struggeling and that is why they introduced all the extra fees and charges
they did not even allow me to withdraw all my earnings, they did this i believe so they could keep enough btc or ghs just to keep going!
i was even being charged maintenance fees on my own hardware!
to prevent the so called 51% attack all cex has to do is to stop increasing their mining power for a short time, and not turn off the mining power all the time, it goes to show what type of people are running cex, they are not very bright they just have a lot of money invested and want more money from everyone!
cex are trying to force whoever is left to stay
i have been saying for some time now that cex is in trouble and are struggeling and that is why they introduced all the extra fees and charges
they did not even allow me to withdraw all my earnings, they did this i believe so they could keep enough btc or ghs just to keep going!
i was even being charged maintenance fees on my own hardware!
to prevent the so called 51% attack all cex has to do is to stop increasing their mining power for a short time, and not turn off the mining power all the time, it goes to show what type of people are running cex, they are not very bright they just have a lot of money invested and want more money from everyone!
June 17, 2014, 02:41:32 AM
Rapid growth of GHash.IO mining pool, seen over the past few months, has been driven by our determination to offer innovative solutions within the Bitcoin ecosystem combined with significant investment in resource. Our investment, participation and highly motivated staff confirm it is our intention to help protect and grow the broad acceptance of Bitcoin and categorically in no way harm or damage it. We never have and never will participate in any 51% attack or double spend against Bitcoin. Still, we are against temporary solutions, which could repel a 51% threat.
In any market, competition and innovation drives growth and that is particularly true in an emerging and disruptive environment such as Bitcoin. Successful and innovative companies cannot be expected to limit their growth or competitiveness as a direct result of their success. However, this is the situation we find ourselves in when faced with the community perception of the threat of a 51% attack on Bitcoin. Asking our users to not use our services or to use competing solutions is not conducive to fostering innovation. Implementing a pool fee to our pool contradicts principles of our operation from the very launch of GHash.IO. It also does not address the core issue only pushing the problem a few weeks or months down the road when another pool or perhaps GHash.IO again grows towards 51%.
We do fully recognise the concerns and possible threat posed by an entity with malicious intent taking control of enough mining power to exploit the 51% scenario, but we also have confidence and agree with the views expressed by the Bitcoin Foundation that any such exploitation or attack ”would be obvious it was happening, and pretty easy to defend against. The transparent nature of the blockchain provides unprecedented insight for all to investigate and report such behaviours.
We also recognise however that a long term preventative solution to the threat of a 51% attack does have to be found, the current situation we find ourselves in (essentially being punished for our success) is damaging not only to us, but to the growth and acceptance of Bitcoin long term, which is something we are all striving for.
Sorry, but to set up such a scalable and dare I say relatively high-margin operation, you had to have seen this coming, right?
Also, can anyone verify - I thought I'd heard some time ago that due to the "spot" nature of network hashing share, the 51% attack actually discretely manifests itself as the production of 6 or more blocks in a row by one entity (51% power is just what you would need, on average, to accomplish such a feat). If this is correct...I mean, GHash.io has produced 6 consecutive blocks in the chain on a number of occasions. I've personally observed a chain of 8 (tracking via Blockchain homepage) on at least one occasion - and let me tell you, nobody said jack until their averaged share of the network power (measured by floating average share of blocks produced over the past 24/48/96 hours) began to near the false-warning 51% mark.
Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but even without 51% of the active hashing power on the network you can still carry out the exact bruteforce attack described by what most people refer to as "the dreaded 51% attack" - all you need is enough luck to mine 6 consecutive blocks. Satoshi himself referred to the single-entity (pool) 6-block-mark as the point of 'computational irreversibility'...
They won't have the luck to do it. Not with 30% of the hashrate (by the way, they could go even lower).
It doesn't matter that they had 6 consecutive blocks, GHash.IO/CEX.IO isn't a threat. It was just a pointer that such an attack is possible.
If you think a 51% attack will happen, it won't be CEX.IO. That 51% of the network hashrate would just appear out of nowhere when someone powers on the units. With Ghash closing in to 51% in a timespan of 2-3 months, we had the necessary time to prepare for a hard fork...
Oh, and the 6 blocks is when the tx is confirmed for good, that's what you mean by "computational irreversibility". Yes, an attack as such (the 51%) could be done with a lot lower hashrate, that's true. The 51% just means that you have a 100% chance of the attack succeeding, and that's what we were afraid of.
June 17, 2014, 12:33:43 AM
Rapid growth of GHash.IO mining pool, seen over the past few months, has been driven by our determination to offer innovative solutions within the Bitcoin ecosystem combined with significant investment in resource. Our investment, participation and highly motivated staff confirm it is our intention to help protect and grow the broad acceptance of Bitcoin and categorically in no way harm or damage it. We never have and never will participate in any 51% attack or double spend against Bitcoin. Still, we are against temporary solutions, which could repel a 51% threat.
In any market, competition and innovation drives growth and that is particularly true in an emerging and disruptive environment such as Bitcoin. Successful and innovative companies cannot be expected to limit their growth or competitiveness as a direct result of their success. However, this is the situation we find ourselves in when faced with the community perception of the threat of a 51% attack on Bitcoin. Asking our users to not use our services or to use competing solutions is not conducive to fostering innovation. Implementing a pool fee to our pool contradicts principles of our operation from the very launch of GHash.IO. It also does not address the core issue only pushing the problem a few weeks or months down the road when another pool or perhaps GHash.IO again grows towards 51%.
We do fully recognise the concerns and possible threat posed by an entity with malicious intent taking control of enough mining power to exploit the 51% scenario, but we also have confidence and agree with the views expressed by the Bitcoin Foundation that any such exploitation or attack ”would be obvious it was happening, and pretty easy to defend against. The transparent nature of the blockchain provides unprecedented insight for all to investigate and report such behaviours.
We also recognise however that a long term preventative solution to the threat of a 51% attack does have to be found, the current situation we find ourselves in (essentially being punished for our success) is damaging not only to us, but to the growth and acceptance of Bitcoin long term, which is something we are all striving for.
Sorry, but to set up such a scalable and dare I say relatively high-margin operation, you had to have seen this coming, right?
Also, can anyone verify - I thought I'd heard some time ago that due to the "spot" nature of network hashing share, the 51% attack actually discretely manifests itself as the production of 6 or more blocks in a row by one entity (51% power is just what you would need, on average, to accomplish such a feat). If this is correct...I mean, GHash.io has produced 6 consecutive blocks in the chain on a number of occasions. I've personally observed a chain of 8 (tracking via Blockchain homepage) on at least one occasion - and let me tell you, nobody said jack until their averaged share of the network power (measured by floating average share of blocks produced over the past 24/48/96 hours) began to near the false-warning 51% mark.
Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but even without 51% of the active hashing power on the network you can still carry out the exact bruteforce attack described by what most people refer to as "the dreaded 51% attack" - all you need is enough luck to mine 6 consecutive blocks. Satoshi himself referred to the single-entity (pool) 6-block-mark as the point of 'computational irreversibility'...
June 16, 2014, 01:48:22 PM
Cex.io it's all in your hand to reassure the BTC community
But i think this whole story benefit someone...the 1000BTC question is : WHO ?
But i think this whole story benefit someone...the 1000BTC question is : WHO ?
June 16, 2014, 01:32:34 PM
interview updated with Ghash/Cex extra question from today - http://fuk.io/cexio-ghashio-jeffrey-smith-interview-exclusive/
Jump to: