Last update: 2025-09-11_Thu_08.42h (Amsterdam time)

Change your preferences in LoyceV's notification bot.
See Notifications for others.

Knight Hider receives Notifications when he's quoted or mentioned

Ignore list:
Posts from these users are ignored:
1. Knight Hider
Posts in these topics are ignored:
none


Username "Knight Hider" occurred in the following posts (quoted and/or mentioned):


1. Post 65791829 (unedited backup) (by Cricktor) (scraped on Wed Sep 10 21:55:49 CEST 2025) in Why do pools fork their own blocks?:

Quote from: ABCbits on Today at 08:46:38 AM
...
Some sort of decentralization (redundancy and/or regional) was also something I had in mind. Sounds plausible to me.


Quote from: Knight Hider on Today at 09:07:38 AM
...
I know that block 912721 was in both UpdateTip events the same, clearly visible by the same hash. I was just surprised why it would need a second UpdateTip when this block 912721 wasn't realy affected by the fork of block 912722. It was block 912723 which decided what branch of the former tip of 912722 should be followed as the "true" blockchain (most accumulated hash work).


Quote from: BattleDog on Today at 11:17:29 AM
...
Thanks for the more in-depth explanations. I had only vague and more incomplete thoughts what probably was going on. With the immense hash power of those pools, many many devices are crunching hashes, timely coordination becomes a real problem and the competitive mining space doesn't make it easier.

I assume it's not trivial to manage such a large amount of mining gear and participating miners. As you say, I can follow that occasional race conditions happen. Trying to cope and avoid them completely likely has more or other disadvantages than letting them happen.



2. Post 65788988 (unedited backup) (by btcnbegun) (scraped on Wed Sep 10 02:42:43 CEST 2025) in Knight Hider's Bitcoin Testnet4 faucet:

Quote from: Knight Hider on September 07, 2025, 01:40:52 PM
TBTC4 address for testnet coins:
 tb1q725dvvqem2jpf0wjsx9z82h0gu62n448w5x8ye

https://mempool.space/testnet4/tx/4f0583eb31ab57c377ee47c05199fc4e304d241d0a57875ad754575438c7e85c
https://mempool.space/testnet4/tx/fc2431c904a646280a96d74e67e7eba5d5449da79761e2d3d44dd2c4d998da8e
https://mempool.space/testnet4/tx/d4e564d295233f62603f7a7e9527acf88f6e467985868f15339887285d64bb1a
https://mempool.space/testnet4/tx/d260fe4ec5a37812b5a2fdd811ce1ae216184910ba19942d5b1eabf1053dc7b5

Thanks for supporting my review work.
This hardly lasts a month, i need a year long supply that prolly ends in winter around 10k ish



3. Post 65779350 (unedited backup) (by WillyAp) (scraped on Sun Sep 7 16:37:43 CEST 2025) in [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!:

Quote from: Knight Hider on Today at 01:38:34 PM
Yes. Its high risk:
Quote
I would HIGHLY recommend that you backup your Tails instance before running this script. I've seen some of the portions of the script corrupt the persistent volume if the right thing goes wrong at the right time. Be warned!!!

Why don't you get the coins out on a system that works?
Send them to your non custodial wallet of choice.

Install a OS that connects and you should be able to move them.



4. Post 65779107 (unedited backup) (by WillyAp) (scraped on Sun Sep 7 15:28:31 CEST 2025) in [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!:

Quote from: Knight Hider on May 25, 2025, 03:52:52 PM
Which wallet works with Trezor safe 5 on Tails OS? Trezor Suite cannot connect, Electrum Litecoin cannot find the device.
Still no solution Roll Eyes

Have you seen this?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TREZOR/comments/12dtou9/trezor_suite_on_tails_os/