Topic: 📈 NastyFans: The Bitcoin Enthusiast Fan Club (est. 2012) - page 170. (Read 958972 times)

Distribution 219119 is complete. This distribution refunds the 0.006 BTC for overpayments previously distributed.

The "Total Received" from the donation address

https://blockchain.info/address/1EwtTKJaXAtctSFqCQKU3LiCg9dqYPEkxN

is equal to the total donations distributed to members plus 0.004 BTC (8 distributions each with 0.0005 tx fee took from donations) plus donations not yet distributed.

Now nastyfans is clean. 

I decide to add e-mail notification. You can set a e-mail address in the account settings. E-mail is sent for:

• new poll open
• poll close with results
• account status change (warning probation suspension termination)
• policy change

E-mail always has 2 attachments. The text message and a Bitcoin signature from the donation address. If the signature is not included or is not valid then it is not a e-mail from nastyfans. Also I will never include links in e-mail.

I will activate my seats when ASICs arrive, but further expansion is high on the list of priorities for me.  Right now I'm waiting to see what will happen with the bASIC situation before proceeding on that front.  Currently, we have an estimated 29.76MH/s in ASICs ordered per seat (including mine).  That is roughly a 3,000% increase over today's MH/s per seat.  I have also started brainstorming a plan to increase our hashing power to 50MH/s per seat, but it will depend on the ongoing demand for seats.

Isn't Ognasty still holding a lot of shares to be sold. And the profits of this seats being sold will go to the ordering of new hardware?
Or am I completely wrong on this

There are 12 ASIC on order. I think that will combat rising difficulties.

I didn't intend to be rude, and I apologize if you took that post that way (guess the instance can be interpreted in a significantly different wiay). However, the combination of a long inforgraphic (on a bitcoin mining asset thread!), and other made me feel that it's really overreacting, unnecessary to a single line comment. Not saying that it's not worthy to address, but a screen-height reply?

It's like getting annoyed by the term "manslaughter" or "manmade", and FYI I'm really supportive of gender identity, transgender people, using xe/xyr in neutral/preferred cases, etc. Gender is an arbitrary (and often assumed binary) divider, especially on the internet. But I'm going to stop before this thread gets even more offtopic

Ontopic; I wonder what would have happened if Nasty Mining reinvested a portion of the mining returns, in order to combat rising difficulties and present non-decreasing dividends.

Was that dismissive comment really necessary?



See also: derailing...

^ I understand your point completely but was that really necessary?

---

True fact: Women exist, and know how to use computers / internet.

Monthly internet traffic counted and aggregated across many of the most popular sites on the internet...
Usage / site hits / view count (per monthly traffic reports) on average has 99 million more female users than male.

Either way though: "Sure, you're welcome / no problem"

---

Edited to add:

Just in case the imgur hosting platform some day ends up deleting the chart, here's this too:

(( source / link ))

Thank you, good man.

If you haven't seen this, it's the timetable which was posted by BFL earlier this month:

13 January 2013 BFL ASIC UPDATE (originally posted on BFL's own forum)

In theory, I guess we're right about at this point in the timeline?
And this part is still to come?

Hi
any news about our ASIC?

Please think that the system is still in development. So sometimes I use manual triggers for things like distributions to be sure it works as it should.

For distribution 218055 the new things are:

• include refunds for overpayments
• do not distribute the 0.006 BTC that I donated to replace refunds

The refunds work O.K. but there was a error and my 0.006 BTC was distributed. This was human error because I forgot to subtract 0.006 from total before distribution. For the next distribution I will not distribute 0.006 BTC. Then everything is clean again.

Distributions are more complicated when they include refunds. But it saves tx fees to include the refunds in distributions. This allows refunds in full. And I do not expect to do refunds often.

Automated?

Partially automated?

Do you need to manually run a command or what? ... The transactions aren't generated at the same time every week / there doesn't appear to have been one yet this week, so I'm just curious.
(I run a very well-connected bitcoin node, and rarely fewer than 50-60 connections to the bitcoin network, so I typically spot most transactions before they get their first confirmation)

Basically, I'm just asking because it'll be easier to interpolate data to determine the actual mining rate (donations versus difficulty / time / etc.) if the distribution is run on a consistent schedule... Of course, the "payout threshold" will still cause some quantization jitter, but that's no big deal (so far it seems like the pools are set up to wait for a whole 1 BTC before payouts)

Thanks for all the time and effort getting things running

---

Edited to add:

Ah, and 6 hours later, here it is:

Today's distribution 663f55206f0c54bbfbdcef6c991c5aa44ca6fdcae8c98a5bc5d250fb3f14bce0 - Size: 4337 (bytes) / 0.0005 BTC transaction fee

Considering the size, that fee is actually a little low. I suppose it was just high enough for the network NOT to outright refuse to relay it, though it might be a while before the first confirmation in a block.

Thanks again

Yes. This is a good point. But I would contact you and we discuss the issue first. If it is not clearly a abuse situation then I have no problems with it.


All funds do pass through nastyfans. This is how transactions are confirmed before transferring ownership and sending payment to seller. But nastyfans is only temporary storage as proxy.

I do not want to be a bank. If members can pre-pay for orders then they must also be able to cancel orders and receive a refund. This is like a bank.

Example: A member pre-pays a order for 10000 seats at 0.01 BTC. Now nastyfans is holding 100 BTC for a order that will never happen. I do not want this. I do not want your Bitcoins. Please do not trust me with them.


I agree here. Many people use exchanges for financial gain in the exchange but do not really care about the securities that are traded. For us this translates to members using nastyfans to earn Bitcoin from trading seats but do not care about NASTY MINING. This is not why nastyfans exists. Our interest should be NASTY MINING.

The auction was never intended as a medium for high-frequency trading. It is available for non-members to become members or members to increase/reduce the fan level or members to exit nastyfans. It is not intended for earning Bitcoin by buying low and selling high. Some members might do this and that is their decision. But that was not my intention and it is the reason I did not try to introduce a bid component of the auction.

I am willing to introduce a bid component based on e-mail notification... if I decide to allow e-mail notification... but I will not accept Bitcoins in any form as advance payment.

Yes. That is what the cancel button is for.

nastyfans abuse is only when members allow the purchase order to automatically cancel. And in abuse cases I will not terminate a account immediately. Maybe it was a accident. But if I see obvious abuses then there is danger of account termination.

Example: A member clicks to buy 800 seats and lets the purchase order auto-cancel. The 800 seats are locked for 7 blocks! And if a member does this with repeats then it is clearly abusing nastyfans.

Members do not need to be afraid. Be free to try features and click buttons. Maybe you want to let a 1-seat buy auto-cancel to see what it looks like. Do it. Do not be afraid. Members need to be comfortable with the nastyfans site. But try to keep the experiments harmless.

This would not work.  Email, by design, is not reliable for time sensitive communications.  I go on vacation and then out of the blue some NastyFans orders I placed months ago come up so I get dinged for abuse, not gonna work without a very large time frame and sending multiple emails.

WHile I think it would be nice I see of no way to make it work without the funds passing through nonnakip, which he has stated he has NO interest in doing.

Am I mistaken?

I just manually canceled a purchase order:

Basically, I was having some problems with "microcoins" on my end. Fee was gonna be huge, and my balance (after fee) wasn't enough so I manually canceled so someone else would have an opportunity to get the seat I was about to buy.

Theoretically, I could've tried to send the transaction without a fee, but it would've taken a while to get confirmed and I didn't want to run the risk of things auto-canceling or holding things up.

... it's ok that I manually canceled once I realized the fee was gonna be a problem, right?

(The required fee for me to spend this many microcoins was 7x larger than I expected)

---

Edited to add:

nevermind I guess. It worked this time.

^This is why I hate microcoins though. The fee is rather unpredictable.

Just a brainfart about this:
It's technically possible to prepare and sign a transaction without posting it to the blockchain, there just isn't a convenient UI for that at the moment. Would it be possible for nastyfans to accept and store such a transaction in JSON format until such time as the seller wants to make the sale. Nastyfans could then immediately release the transaction to the network so the buyer need not be online and no-one would have to wait for their funds.

There are some caveats with this that I can see right off the bat:
1. The destination address needs to be known to prepare the transaction. This requires Nastyfans to act as a proxy for the funds when the actual transfer happens. Is this really any different from sending the funds to Nastyfans in advance?

2. There is no convenient way to prepare but not send a transaction (to my knowledge).

There are probably other issues that I'm not thinking of right now, please discuss!

If I add e-mail notification then I can see this is a possibility. It could work opposite of now. Buyers set price per seat and number of seats and e-mail address for sale notification. Sellers specify how many seats to sell and Bitcoin address to receive payment. Then e-mail is sent to buyers to send payment before block N. If payment is not received before block N the purchase order is automatically canceled and this is nastyfans abuse.

This would all work with current policy. But with current policy payment must be sent within 7 blocks. For e-mail notification this is too fast because maybe buyer does not live on the internet. If we want this then policy must change to allow maybe 145 blocks (1 day) to send payment. Or 433 (3 days) to send payment.