Topic: Show your firstbits - get 2 bitcents - page 3. (Read 12631 times)
<-- Added mine
Payments received 
Thanks
Thanks 
If they form rememberable words they don't need to be short
Is someone trying to reserve large portions of the shorter firstbits address space? Check out this account that seems to be connected with distributing > 100 BTC to weird pseudo-sequential prefixes, and in random quantities less than a micro-bitcoin each. Yeti pointed out similar behavior, but more focused on vanity addresses here.
What would this person do: sell the private keys and expect people to use them on an ongoing basis? If that's true, I sincerely hope no one buys into it. Otherwise, it seems like scorched earth policy against firstbits, forcing people to use longer prefixes.
It seems odd that they are sending different amounts to each address. Almost seems like they are trying to encode something into the blockchain with the addresses and amounts. I've checked some of those addresses out after noticing the same thing, and they weren't particularly good firstbits (many were 1 + 5 characters), so I don't think those are related. What would this person do: sell the private keys and expect people to use them on an ongoing basis? If that's true, I sincerely hope no one buys into it. Otherwise, it seems like scorched earth policy against firstbits, forcing people to use longer prefixes.
Is someone trying to reserve large portions of the shorter firstbits address space? Check out this account that seems to be connected with distributing > 100 BTC to weird pseudo-sequential prefixes, and in random quantities less than a micro-bitcoin each. Yeti pointed out similar behavior, but more focused on vanity addresses here.
What would this person do: sell the private keys and expect people to use them on an ongoing basis? If that's true, I sincerely hope no one buys into it. Otherwise, it seems like scorched earth policy against firstbits, forcing people to use longer prefixes.
What would this person do: sell the private keys and expect people to use them on an ongoing basis? If that's true, I sincerely hope no one buys into it. Otherwise, it seems like scorched earth policy against firstbits, forcing people to use longer prefixes.
<-- done
Got my 2 bitcents on the 4th July. Was on mini-vacation so only saw it today. Thanks!
I should have realized right away to take the site down. There are at least two addresses 1samr7 and it's change that will "reappear" before current blocks at some point in the future. This means that any new similar address could be told it's wrong firstbits address by firstbits.com until this is fixed.
You should not need to send from an address for it to get in. This is an error on our side, probably having to do with that missing public key since it's never happened before. But the public key should not be necessary.
Yeah, I know. I'm just saying, the temporary fix is to leave your client open for a while. In block explorer, both his address, and the change address have their public key listed as "Unknown (not seen yet)", like they haven't sent anything yet. If that's what is causing the bug, simply having samr7 open his Bitcoin client should send those coins to an internal address, and (Hopefully) fix the issue.
You should not need to send from an address for it to get in. This is an error on our side, probably having to do with that missing public key since it's never happened before. But the public key should not be necessary.
I found a new vanity address and somebody sent me a cent on it (thanks). The transaction went through in 134798, and 25 blocks have been generated since. Yet, it hasn't shown up in firstbits yet! What's the deal?
Something strange is going on. I'll investigate.
edit: The only addresses in the chain I've found that firstbits.com can't find are 1samr7 and the change address from that same transaction, other addresses from the same block work, including the generate address. I can't see anything unusual that could have triggered a bug.
In block explorer, both his address, and the change address have their public key listed as "Unknown (not seen yet)", like they haven't sent anything yet. If that's what is causing the bug, simply having samr7 open his Bitcoin client should send those coins to an internal address, and (Hopefully) fix the issue.
Updated my firstbits with a "firstvanity": firstbits.com/1davux
I found a new vanity address and somebody sent me a cent on it (thanks). The transaction went through in 134798, and 25 blocks have been generated since. Yet, it hasn't shown up in firstbits yet! What's the deal?
Something strange is going on. I'll investigate.
edit: The only addresses in the chain I've found that firstbits.com can't find are 1samr7 and the change address from that same transaction, other addresses from the same block work, including the generate address. I can't see anything unusual that could have triggered a bug.
I found a new vanity address and somebody sent me a cent on it (thanks). The transaction went through in 134798, and 25 blocks have been generated since. Yet, it hasn't shown up in firstbits yet! What's the deal?
BTC received. Thank you!
All I can guess is that you grabbed a different one than you though. The address listed at the top of the Bitcoin client changes on it's own so if you grabbed that one and payed to it you might not have noticed that it changed on you.
This is exactly what happened. I didn't know the bc client changed the address like this.
Here are my firstbits : 1kznfw
Thanks, BTCs received !!!
my firstbits address 1nxdw6
I'll still pay if you stick it on the side.
I think I'm not getting something. When I put in my address, it simply said "This address is not in the chain." The address has been used for btc transfer before, so I don't understand why it's not finding it.
Try searching for the address at blockexplorer.com. All I can guess is that you grabbed a different one than you though. The address listed at the top of the Bitcoin client changes on it's own so if you grabbed that one and payed to it you might not have noticed that it changed on you.
I just checked and the generate address from the most recent block is showing it's firstbits, so our database updater is not broken.
Done 
Jump to: