I hereby claim:
- I am cryptozeny on github.
- I am cryptozeny (https://keybase.io/cryptozeny) on keybase.
- I have a public key whose fingerprint is BB27 9FE1 59A0 E40E D02B 3365 B9DD BDE2 AAAD C421
To claim this, I am signing this object:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- | |
Hash: SHA256 | |
9f642663eab004723152c21f1fa3d5484e4a67110a2762f1c3d4b3a857fc3ad7 no_relation_with_civil_labs.md | |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- | |
Version: GnuPG v1 | |
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJeiZBvAAoJELndveKqrcQhyT8QAMxr+GfBHqcQ8Rx61TMEUWA4 | |
93OXz+7HV5gBvJLy3HR9b0zOjTqGi8HFHbXQucC7AzcmpMmyraQMQ9ZS4xH8PJxi | |
sNs4oSCJa0GjiXwgKrZuy0K9av/AAmIRicHP0z1C5Hv+6NJNjlUk1m66W6if/Unv |
I hereby claim:
To claim this, I am signing this object:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5177722.msg52235070#msg52235070
Hello, this is cryptozeny.
There is one thing to explain. I posted a Sugarchain mainnet launch announcement on bitcointalk.org. A person named cpuminerdev started to claim that (cryptozeny) was the same as wjcloud, the culprit of the Bitcoin Platinum case.
In conclusion, this is not true at all.
targetUSER="root" && \ | |
targetIP="149.28.43.9" && \ | |
ssh ${targetUSER}@${targetIP} mkdir -p .ssh && \ | |
cat ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub | ssh ${targetUSER}@${targetIP} 'cat >> .ssh/authorized_keys' | |
enter password twice |
# rsync-homedir-excludes | |
# | |
# A list of files to exclude when backing up *nix home directories using rsync. | |
# | |
# Author: Ruben Barkow <https://github.com/rubo77/rsync-homedir-excludes> | |
# Version: 2015-08-30 | |
# | |
# #Usage: | |
# USER=<homedir username here> | |
# rsync -aP --exclude-from=rsync-homedir-excludes.txt /home/$USER/ /media/$USER/linuxbackup/home/$USER/ |
// Copyright (c) 2015-2017 The Bitcoin Core developers | |
// Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying | |
// file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php. | |
#include <chain.h> | |
#include <chainparams.h> | |
#include <pow.h> | |
#include <random.h> | |
#include <util.h> | |
#include <test/test_bitcoin.h> |
// Copyright (c) 2015-2017 The Bitcoin Core developers | |
// Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying | |
// file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php. | |
#include <chain.h> | |
#include <chainparams.h> | |
#include <pow.h> | |
#include <random.h> | |
#include <util.h> | |
#include <test/test_bitcoin.h> |
// Copyright (c) 2015-2017 The Bitcoin Core developers | |
// Copyright (c) 2018 The Susucoin Core developers | |
// Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying | |
// file COPYING or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php. | |
#include <chain.h> | |
#include <chainparams.h> | |
#include <pow.h> | |
#include <random.h> | |
#include <util.h> |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpNscUBpffU
@zawy#5864 I have a problem. With 0 interval hash attack
Difficulty increases correctly. But after that I change to a very large interval, the difficulty becomes 0
. Whats the problem? I am on LWMA-1
CODE:
/* BEGIN - HUGE ATACK */
// Add 5000 blocks: small attack: with 0 interval
printf("*** HUGE ATTACK: Add 5000 blocks: attack: with 0 interval: insanely higher\n");
for ( int j = 0; j < 5000; j++ ) {