Topic: [ENDED] ChipMixer Signature Campaign | Sr Member+ - page 3. (Read 303483 times)

Have you guys tried to see how the signature looks on small screen? I am sure you did but let's check it again. Use mobile screen or hit the restore icon of your browser and try with different screen size for your browser.

DarkStar_ it's on me. Let's hope the campaign find it useful. It's just something I learnt today when I was working on improving the visual of Sinbad signature. It took me few hours. Then I saw Chimpixer signature set have the same issue.

No idea why the { and # used in the signature but it seems keeping the { does not help to improve small screen experience. So changing { to # is the only visual change I made. I tried to replace it by [ too but it seems {,[ are not good fit. If you want then you can replace it even with a transparent . (DOT).








 

Can confirm that I never had a issue with the service (so far) as the one reported by NotATether. I can, however, tell that every time that I open the link to test it, my average opening time is sitting around ~20-25 seconds which, when compared with Google Sheets, is noticeable. I really believe that this is due to the size of the spreadsheet and I can only believe that this will get worse over time (even if we started, this would eventually happen if we consider that ChipMixer will run at least the same number of years that it has). My only hope is that either CryptPad is aware of this issue, or if we would get better results if the service was hosted in a server...

---

Thank you for your feedback Trofo! This is what makes me feel like that this test by ChipMixer was already worth it - At least 1 campaign manager is using / testing the service and let's hope that others do the same. The more users of CryptPad (or similar), the less users will Google Sheets have (regarding this subject).

PS: I reckon that I might look like I'm pushing CryptPad, but I promise that I'm in no way affiliated with the service.

Yep, I can confirm, now it works. 2h ago it was either a glitch, either just very slow, especially as I tried on Tor browser, I don't know.

Just tired it and it works fine for me, table is a bit on the large size and it needed about 15 seconds to load. Which is a lot by my standards since I have 500/250 Mbit/s optic connection connection at home.

Whole table shows history and longevity of the campaign to those that just stumble on it. But I also gave an idea earlier in thread to maybe just show last 20 or 50 weeks. I have been using CryptPad for the campaign we are running for these last couple of weeks and on that table size it works even better than google.

This message about storing it should always appear, that's a default feature of CryptPad. But the table indeed doesn't fully load. My guess is that it is potentially too large; as DarkStar_ already had issues due to its size.

For me, it's easily enough if only the last few weeks are mirrored on CryptPad. Not sure why he even migrated the existing table over. I expected it to only contain new weeks.

Edit: If you wait long enough, it does fully load. It just got a bit slower somehow. Either due to size growth of the table or they just have a slow day today..

In my case it went on, but said then "This pad is not in your CryptDrive. Do you want to store it now?".
So I'd guess it's not there; maybe got a new name/URL at (re)upload, I don't know.

Cryptpad does not seem to load at all and gets stuck at "uploading shared folders". 

Payments for this week of the campaign have been sent, using an exchange rate of 1 BTC = $23370 USD. (24145a3a1d63fa3296094d4c172375d8ddf3c3b67310a2a86d46230a0e5fa959)

Of course it makes sense.

"Wait"  is just keeping posting like you would do anyway.


Just roll back a few pages a look for the time when a user was last accepted.


It was 03/04/2022 , reference here
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.59737619

Hi, guys!
Tell me please is make a sense to waiting for a free slot in this signature campaign? If its not hard - answer please when last participant was accepted?

You don't need to write any software. Just give us your PGP public key, we send you our encrypted addresses over any insecure communication channel (forum post, direct message, anything) and you decrypt them on your machine. Problem solved.

I had to comment because I thought this was the best sentence in that debate. I apologize for meddling in the subject.

This campaign has existed since 2017, and since its inception it has worked in the same way - with the respective updates over time. Those who signed up knew the rules and accepted them. Of course, things can be done differently, as long as it's better for everyone. Managing a campaign of this size is not easy. Increasing the workload at the time of payments, I think that's everything you don't want, so there are no mistakes.

When information is shared with a third party, that same information is no longer private. This must be the first principle to take into account in order to have privacy.

Therefore, it is easier for each user to manage how he receives money from this campaign, than for DarkStar_ to do this work for the users. I believe that everyone here knows the best way to receive payment for this campaign, and then use the mix to divert attention from the final destination of the money.

Good week everyone!

Payments for this week of the campaign have been sent, using an exchange rate of 1 BTC = $23200 USD. (b8a1ce7a7426a00833a74a1fcaa105a6c11bc417f3ac1d5c0cb8ec83ba7b2d1c)

---

There's an argument for allowing people to easily see how many of their posts were rejected, without needing to do math. Manually counting the number of posts you made last campaign period is a bit annoying, and will discourage people from checking if they were paid correctly.


In the end, this isn't a perfect process either, especially if people provide addresses via forum PM due to Cloudflare. I've considered building software to do something like this (more likely it would be in the form of automated address changes), but I'm hesitant to trust any software I write with real sums of money  

I won't rule making large changes out, but ultimately there will always be trust needed somewhere. If you're after the highest level of privacy, your privacy model should not rely on needing to trust me to keep your payout addresses private.

Well.  I think the way this Campaign is managed is not really an issue at all.  It is not like Dark Star is requesting personal documents from the participants.  After all, it is their responsibility to keep their Privacy levels up and strong.  Some body who does not care at all about it will hand out Dark Star an Address straight from Coinbase or something like that anyway.

If Chip Mixer participants care for their Privacy, there are so many ways you can break the link once Dark Star sends out payments to personal Addresses.  But, if there is a will to make things more private straight from the management on, I will be here for it.  It complicates things a little bit.  Sure.  But to me it is always worth it in the end.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

I like the irony of discussing all these privacy issues on a campaign thread for a product that allows you to...get privacy for your coins.

We can think of various ways to enhance privacy when it comes to the weekly payment. But, I don't like forcing my fellows participants do something that I may find bad practice for myself, for their good. If they don't prioritize privacy in Bitcoin transactions, coercion isn't appropriate. I know that we can "split" to one group that does prioritize privacy, and to another that is neutral (backwards compatible technically ), but I just don't find a reason. As I said, posts are public. Even a 10 year old kid, if you give it an hour can work out the total money each participant has received this month, without looking at the spreadsheet. In other words: it's a false sense of privacy.

Now as for the chips: If you want them, go and get them from the onion site. Not from the forum, introducing further risks.

I've thought about this, but it's prone to error. Manually selecting 50+ addresses per week every week means thousands of addresses per year. The only way to rule out mistakes is by automating the entire process.

I've also thought of the possibility to be paid in CM chips directly, instead of on-chain, but that's also more likely to cause mistakes. It's much easier to leave it to the user to mix their coins if they want.

Well, another use case is users sharing the link to others from outside. I would add that I was there on the use case of having a spreadsheet. The direction of not having any at all is... intriguing.
And I agree 100% that not having one at all significantly benefit on privacy. Just then there won't be any choice for scrutiny (of course, it can be debatable whether we need that or not).
Interestingly we may get from 2 spreadsheets (as now, although temporarily) to none (at least not publicly).


Not a bad idea, just it can be prone to mistakes, since as we stand now OP will have to handle correctly 540 addresses.
I would clearly not mid to get the coins sent to a private list of addresses.

---
However, private spreadsheet and private list of addresses... this can probably work at ChipMixer and maybe a handful of other campaigns, but in most cases (campaigns and campaign managers) it can become - sooner or later - the recipe for disaster.

The replacement of Spreadsheet sounds so amazing.  Keep it up, Dark Star.  And F Google.

Disagree.

You can see there is a transaction spent every week in a specific time with the same Inputs and Outputs.  But.  Chip Mixer is a Privacy Friendly service and the Campaign can be organized as such too.  I do not think participants would not like it.  The manager can have a local file containing participants, payments and all of that.  I really believe it is very useful for a manager.  But I agree with o_e_l_e_o.  An online Spreadsheet is not necessary.

Most of the Campaigns I participated in had a Google Spreadsheet with all sorts of information on it.  Want to see how you are doing as a participant?  Go to Spreadsheet.  Are you still a participant?  The manager never sends a PM or publicly announces it.  You can find out by checking just the Spreadsheet.  But, wait.  Google does not allow non Java Script browsing at all.  Most of the links are unusable or display blank pages without it.  So there it goes.  I can not check the Spreadsheet anyway.

There are solutions for everything, I believe.  A manager can run a Campaign in a more Privacy friendly manner.  Applications can be done without posting Addresses.  Just user name, post count and Merits.  Addresses can be sent through PM.  Payments can be sent separately instead of batches.  If I was a Chip Mixer participant, I would agree to be paid the amount minus fees.

In fact.  What if Dark Star paid from a Chip Mixer chip every week instead of using the same Address?  What if Chip Mixer members gave Dark Star a list of 10 Addresses and Dark Star paid them weekly in a random Address from a Chip Mixer chip.  Just an idea.

Payment amounts are based on post counts per week.  Sure.  But not all posts are counted.  Right?  How accurate can a Blockchain Analysis tool be to link it all so accurately to participants.  Why would anyone now even bother doing a Chip Mixer investigation any more.  Too much work for what?  A list of how much participants earn from this Campaign?

All of this is what quickly came to my mind.  There may be big flaws in every thing I said.  And I am sorry for Dark Star because all of this might be a big extra stress to him and now he might hate me.  But maybe he actually likes at least one of my ideas.

Anyway.  As I said above.  Solutions can be found for all the issues.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

It's not enough to figure out which address is mine, though. On the last payment there are 12 addresses which received the maximum payout.