Last update: 2026-04-12_Sun_21.24h (Amsterdam time)
Change your preferences in LoyceV's notification bot.
See Notifications for others.
LoyceV receives Notifications when he's quoted or mentioned
Ignore list:
Posts from these users are ignored:
1. Timelord2067
2. LoyceV
3. wolwoo
4. Bitcoin SV
5. The-One-Above-All
6. Excimer
7. truth or dare
8. bonesjonesreturns
9. KaneVWE
10. Laudanum
11. Quantum_Resolve7987V
Posts in these topics are ignored:
1. [ТОП-200] Щедрые пользователи, дающие мериты
2. [TOP-200] Members who support newbies - Thanks!
3. [TOП-200] Пoльзoвaтeли, пoддepживaющиe нoвичкoв - Cпacибo!
4. Time Series Analysis on Distributed Merits in the forum (daily, weekly, monthly)
5. [CLUBS] Top Merited-Users Classified into 4 Clubs
6. Interquartile range of intra-day merits with time series plot
7. Timelord2067's Timely Test and Main-neT LighTning Loans to a "T"
8. Weekly earned merits (median) of top 100 merited users
9. The active levels of sent/earned merits of users , excludes autobanned/ nuked
10. Bitcointalk Merit Dashboard
Username "LoyceV" occurred in the following posts (quoted and/or mentioned):
1. Post 66610160 (unedited backup) (by MrToshi) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 21:21:13 CEST 2026) in Recovering Incomplete or Broken Bitcoin Private Keys / WIF Keys:
feel free to DM the available pattern or missing sections
Don't do this! This is how you get scammed by an anonymous Newbie!
uses pattern reconstruction
This is typical scammer mumbo jumbo. There are no patterns in random keys.
Ok mumbo jumbo send me a test data and i will proof
2. Post 66609906 (unedited backup) (by macson) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 20:11:50 CEST 2026) in AI Spam Report Reference Thread:
One of the most stupid newbie accounts that uses AI directly in its posts.
We’ve seen massive growth in Layer 2 solutions and sidechains throughout 2025 and early 2026. While this is great for scalability, it feels like the main chain is strictly becoming a "settlement layer" for institutions and whales.
If the majority of daily transactions (coffee, retail, etc.) move to Lightning or other L2s, does the on-chain velocity even matter anymore for Bitcoin's fundamental value? I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether we should stop looking at on-chain volume as a health metric for "money velocity.
You’re spot on. Looking at raw on-chain data in 2026 without filtering is like trying to count real traffic by including every car that just pulls out of a driveway and backs right in. The UTXO model inherently inflates 'volume' because of change outputs.
If you're digging for the 2025 stats, here’s the state of the art right now:
Entity-Adjusted Volume is the Standard: Most of us now rely on Glassnode’s 'Entity-Adjusted' metrics or Chainalysis reports. For 2025, the 'clean' volume was significantly lower than the raw total, especially with the massive 'Whale Shadows' we saw late last year when long-term holders moved millions of BTC.
The 2025 Sell-off Data: Reports from early 2026 (like TRM Labs and Bitcoin Magazine Pro) indicate that 2025 saw a record transfer of BTC from early 'whales' to retail and ETFs. That 'velocity' is real economic activity, but it’s often buried under billions of dollars in internal wallet reshuffling.
The 'L2 Leakage': We also have to accept that 'Money Velocity' is increasingly invisible on-chain. With the Lightning Network and other Layer 2s maturing in 2025, a growing percentage of medium-of-exchange volume never touches the base layer. On-chain volume is becoming more of a 'settlement' layer for large chunks rather than a daily spending metric.
Check out the NVT (Network Value to Transactions) Ratio on Glassnode—they specifically use the adjusted volume you're looking for to filter out the noise. It's probably the most honest metric we have for 2025's actual throughput
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
Another newbie who was caught using AI in his posts. Of the 5 posts I included, they were detected using AI.
User:
RuneStockxLitecoin is not getting the same attention it had years ago, but it still has a place because it keeps doing its job well. Low fees, fast transfers, and a network that has been running for long time without major issues still give it value for everyday use.
The market just changed a lot. New projects came in and most people started chasing newer trends, so naturally Litecoin became less talked about. But that doesn't mean it failed, it just moved from being a hype coin to a coin people quietly use when they need something simple and reliable.
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
I totally agree with this, especially on the part about knowing what kind of trading suits you. A lot of people jump into trading thinking it's just about being active every day, but it's really more about understanding your approach and sticking to what works for you.
Some people do better with slower, safer trades, while others can handle higher risk. It really depends on your mindset and discipline. At the end of the day, it's not just about showing up consistently, but improving your decisions over time.
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
I get why that prediction sounds believable right now. When the whole market is bleeding, even extreme targets don't feel that crazy. But this kind of situation isn't new in crypto. Ethereum has gone through big drops before, especially during weak market conditions, and it has also recovered in past cycles.
One thing i've learn is that analyst predictions usually follow the current trend. When price is going down, you'll hear lower targets. When it's going up, you'll hear higher ones.
What matters more is how you handle it:
- don't make decisions based on fear
- understand that volatility is normal in crypto
- focus on your time horizon (short term vs long term
Markets can stay weak for a while, but they don't stay that way forever. The key is staying level-headed instead of reacting to every prediction.
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: Not Detected
Originality.ai: 100%
Altcoin season usually doesn't come when people expect it, that is why many got caught last year. Most of the time, it only starts after Bitcoin makes a strong move and then slows down. That's when money rotates into alts.
If the market is still red, it's better to stay careful. Chasing alts too early is where people lose. My advice is not to rush into hype, stick to solid projects and keep some funds ready. If altseason really starts, you'll see it clearly, it won't be hidden.
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: Not Detected
Originality.ai: 100%
I think one of the underrated lessons in bitcoin is learning to sit through volatility without overreacting. For example, some people focus only on price swings but understanding network fundamentals, like adoption, on chain activity, and supply changes, can give a realistic view.
It's also interesting how different strategies work for different people. Some prefer gradual accumulation, others use DCA, and some only step in during big market dips. I'd be curious to hear how others balance long-term holding with active learning from market behavior.
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: Not Detected
Originality.ai: 100%
This newbie account also spams forums with its AI-generated posts. Of the four posts I included, it was detected as AI-generated.
User:
SusanVacI hate when people touch my clothes or my stuff in general. It’s not about germs or anything like that. I just don’t like seeing someone touch something that belongs to me. I can deal with it if it’s someone close to me, but if it’s a stranger, I’ll openly show I’m not happy about it
I can’t really say where this came from. No one took my toys away on the playground or anything like that. I’m probably just possessive. If someone needs something, I’d rather buy a new one and give it to them than let them use mine. People around me know about this little “quirk” and they’re fine with it. Even though yeah, maybe it’s not totally normal.
Overall it doesn’t ruin my life or anything. But sometimes I get this flash of anger inside when someone grabs my pen like “just to sign a couple things, what’s the big deal,” and I’m standing there already annoyed and about to snap
GPTZero: 100%
Copyleaks: Not Detected
Originality.ai: 100%
4. Use the tools that gambling platforms give you. Most sites have things like deposit limits, loss limits or even a cool-off option. It’s actually a good idea to turn those on, because sometimes relying only on self-control isn’t enough.
5. Also learn to stop even when you’re winning. Everyone warns about chasing losses, but winning can lead to the same thing. After a good win many people keep playing and give it back later. Sometimes the best move is to stop while you’re ahead.
GPTZero: 100%
Sapling.ai: 100%
Originality.ai: 62%
I don’t see it as a bad idea by itself. Money is money, whether it’s fiat or crypto. If donations are legal, the form shouldn’t matter that much.
The problem is transparency. Crypto is traceable, but not always in a simple way. You can still route funds through multiple wallets, mixers, etc. That’s probably why some politicians don’t like it, harder to control and track compared to banks.
There’s also politics in it. Some just don’t trust crypto at all, others don’t want new systems they don’t fully understand.
Using crypto for donations is fine in theory, but rules and tracking need to catch up first.
GPTZero: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
Stealthwriter: AI Detected
Feels like they’re just gonna keep tightening things step by step. More KYC, less privacy stuff, more pressure on exchanges. I don’t think they can fully stop people from launching coins though, anyone can still deploy one.
What they really control is access. Listings, fiat ramps, big platforms. So crypto won’t die, it’ll just split. One clean and regulated, the other more underground.
GPTZero: 100%
Originality.ai: 100%
Stealthwriter: AI Detected
3. Post 66608862 (unedited backup) (by juttsab@) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 14:36:25 CEST 2026) in AI Spam Report Reference Thread:
What's the verdict on Newbie
aldianoktoey?
We’ve seen massive growth in Layer 2 solutions and sidechains throughout 2025 and early 2026. While this is great for scalability, it feels like the main chain is strictly becoming a "settlement layer" for institutions and whales.
If the majority of daily transactions (coffee, retail, etc.) move to Lightning or other L2s, does the on-chain velocity even matter anymore for Bitcoin's fundamental value? I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether we should stop looking at on-chain volume as a health metric for "money velocity.
Quillbot: 44% AI
Stealthwriter: 70% AI
Gptzero: 100% AI
Money velocity metrics are important measures of a currencies underlying value as a medium of exchange. So, knowing the on-chain exchange volume measured in BTC is important for Bitcoin as it is for every cryptocurrency, but I don't see that data anywhere.
I looked for 2025 on-chain BTC transaction volume and failed at finding that data. I was able to find one chart of BTC transaction volume but it included the change to the sending address, which makes the data wildly misleading. It was also only a daily chart without apparent links or methods for annual data.
You’re spot on. Looking at raw on-chain data in 2026 without filtering is like trying to count real traffic by including every car that just pulls out of a driveway and backs right in. The UTXO model inherently inflates 'volume' because of change outputs.
If you're digging for the 2025 stats, here’s the state of the art right now:
Entity-Adjusted Volume is the Standard: Most of us now rely on Glassnode’s 'Entity-Adjusted' metrics or Chainalysis reports. For 2025, the 'clean' volume was significantly lower than the raw total, especially with the massive 'Whale Shadows' we saw late last year when long-term holders moved millions of BTC.
The 2025 Sell-off Data: Reports from early 2026 (like TRM Labs and Bitcoin Magazine Pro) indicate that 2025 saw a record transfer of BTC from early 'whales' to retail and ETFs. That 'velocity' is real economic activity, but it’s often buried under billions of dollars in internal wallet reshuffling.
The 'L2 Leakage': We also have to accept that 'Money Velocity' is increasingly invisible on-chain. With the Lightning Network and other Layer 2s maturing in 2025, a growing percentage of medium-of-exchange volume never touches the base layer. On-chain volume is becoming more of a 'settlement' layer for large chunks rather than a daily spending metric.
Check out the NVT (Network Value to Transactions) Ratio on Glassnode—they specifically use the adjusted volume you're looking for to filter out the noise. It's probably the most honest metric we have for 2025's actual throughput
Gptzero: 100% AI
Stealthwriter: 76% AI
Copyleaks: 100% AI
Sapling: 56% AI
4. Post 66607933 (unedited backup) (by tbct_mt2) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 06:35:31 CEST 2026) in Is the "Medium of Exchange" narrative dying due to L2 dominance?:
Quite frankly, this narrative has already been dying from the very beginning. This was already a significant issue back then because of ridiculous fees and delayed confirmation. If anything, on the contrary, we have a much improved situation recently. We can send high priority transactions with only 1 Sat/vB today.
1 sat/vbyte for transactions to have a first confirmation in a next block is quite popular in recent months, and it's a very good fee rate to use compares to how considerable higher fee rates Bitcoin users had to use in past years.
They even can get a first confirmation quickly for their transaction with fee rate lower than 1 sat/vbyte but they must check Bitcoin mempools and choose a proper fee rate for their favorite waiting time.
How to make a bitcoin transaction and pay less than 1 sat/vByte.LoyceV's 0.1 sat/vbyte Electrum Server Adventure.
5. Post 66607527 (unedited backup) (by ESG) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 00:48:56 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
Round 14 : The Bloody round
Maybe I can use this to my advantage: who wants to
buy protection?
Or who wants to buy "not protecting a certain individual"?
Ahm? I thought you were going to do a draw after listing each participant
with a 'ten', and wait for the next block to close?
- but no... is there as a mercenary!!
>Out of curiosity only, what are the values? hehehe...
6. Post 66607478 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 00:33:49 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
~
So no deal and I lost the round just like that ..
@halab let’s go back to using the tool for prediction
7. Post 66607389 (unedited backup) (by notkim) (scraped on Sun Apr 12 00:01:31 CEST 2026) in missing 18 characters from my wif private key:
You don't understand. It's better for you when you have the first chunk of characters of your WIF than otherwise, because this would limit the range of private keys to search in a much more favourable way (if I don't get it wrong, I haven't had to do such a recovery myself so far, only experimented a bit to gain some knowledge). Um, not sure if my logic holds water here, but I had probably a Gin Tonic too much to think clearly.
What LoyceV mentions is when you have a limited bit-range that needs to be explored and you have a public key exposed and known of that private key, you can use methods like Kangaroo to find the correct private key much faster than a conventional brute-force search in such a range.
Off the top of my head I can't estimate what 17-18 missing trailing characters of the WIF translate to with respect of missing bit-range. IIRC, five of the trailing characters are the embedded checksum, so you're actually missing 12-13 characters of your WIF (WIF private keys are 51 or 52 characters long, Base58check).
Roughly you're missing around a quarter of your private key, if my napkin math is right, let's assume around 65-75 bits, maybe 80 at worst. That's a bit-range size which seems very doable with a modified RCKangaroo solver or similar at very first glance. (I might be wrong as I compare it to the Bitcoin puzzle challenge where limited bit-range private keys have been "easily" broken for ranges below 100 bits with an exposed public key. The last largest bit-range cracked with exposed public key is currently puzzle #130 (129 bits range) but this one took months with thousands of GPUs, IIRC.)
Be careful: users here might promise you they can help and ask for your 34 characters you have. You shouldn't give them away lightly or at all!
hello,
so since i have the first 34 chars and the public key, i could use rckangaroo if i understand right. because i can short the bit range by a lot . but how ?
i put a 1 in the missing parts and then
i did exactly what this web said :
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Wallet_import_formatand also make one for z (example L14Cf...zzz). is this right ?
now i have two long hex chars , i checked in what bit range those two hexare like where the value changes and its 80 bits.
so could i just input the small right part of the first hex and use it as start range no?
8. Post 66607120 (unedited backup) (by *Ace*) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 22:31:07 CEST 2026) in [Experimental] Bitcointalk quality score:
To obtain a list of UserIDs, I used data from LoyceV and managed to gather around 18,000 UserIDs; I believe that list didn’t include many users, particularly the banned ones, whom I later found through other channels.
New registrants are obviously not included in that list, and to obtain their UserIDs, the tool relies on the userscript; if it doesn’t find them in the list, it adds them to the scraping queue. This is why you might see that warning for some users.
For banned users, we will obviously find the ‘banned’ tag and a score of 1, which is the minimum in the BRDb calculation, but I might make some adjustments for such cases.
Data from LoyceV is regularly updated on a weekly basis. You should run some kind of auto update on a the same time span, so to keep the pace for new users.
Relying on the users to manually input the data they ask for might be bad in the long run, as someone would be discouraged to see a lot of missing values.
Yes, I knew LoyceV’s wasn’t a daily update, but I needed to have UserIDs to get my tool up and running; scraping from scratch was a bit time-consuming. Even the Merits I got for free from the forum, I obtained using LoyceV’s data, if I’m not mistaken.
To obtain a list of UserIDs, I used data from LoyceV and managed to gather around 18,000 UserIDs; I believe that list didn’t include many users
Which list did you use? I also have a list of
all usernames, all
known banned users and more lists on Merit or Trust data.
I can’t remember exactly which list I used, but I think it was a text file containing usernames:UserID or the other way round. I didn’t get them all, though – I don’t think I fetched the data properly and only got 16k records, but I’m sure there were millions of UserIDs.
Actually, that’s fine, because otherwise each round of data retrieval would take weeks rather than days..
9. Post 66607087 (unedited backup) (by Cricktor) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 22:19:31 CEST 2026) in missing 18 characters from my wif private key:
You don't understand. It's better for you when you have the first chunk of characters of your WIF than otherwise, because this would limit the range of private keys to search in a much more favourable way (if I don't get it wrong, I haven't had to do such a recovery myself so far, only experimented a bit to gain some knowledge).
What LoyceV mentions is when you have a limited bit-range that needs to be explored and you have a public key exposed and known of that private key, you can use methods like Kangaroo to find the correct private key much faster than a conventional brute-force search in such a range.
Off the top of my head I can't estimate what 17-18 missing trailing characters of the WIF translate to with respect of missing bit-range. IIRC, five of the trailing characters are the embedded checksum, so you're actually missing 12-13 characters of your WIF (WIF private keys are 51 or 52 characters long, Base58check).
Roughly you're missing around a quarter of your private key, if my napkin math is right, let's assume around 65-75 bits, maybe 80 at worst. That's a bit-range size which seems very doable with a modified RCKangaroo solver or similar at very first glance. (I might be wrong as I compare it to the Bitcoin puzzle challenge where limited bit-range private keys have been "easily" broken for ranges below 100 bits with an exposed public key. The last largest bit-range cracked with exposed public key is currently puzzle #130 (129 bits range) but this one took months with thousands of GPUs, IIRC.)
10. Post 66606811 (unedited backup) (by notkim) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 20:51:13 CEST 2026) in missing 18 characters from my wif private key:
It can recover, but brute-forcing 18 missing characters will take decades even if you have multiple GPUs unless you only have 8 or fewer.
It's much faster if the public key is known, and it could be even better if the missing characters are the checksum (at the end of the private key). So OP may be in luck, but I've never actually done this myself.
unfortunately its only the first 34 characters . also that FinderOuter seems to only use cpu, so too slow for my 18 lost chars no?
11. Post 66605546 (unedited backup) (by Charles-Tim) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 14:18:43 CEST 2026) in Why no forks these days?:
Bitcoin SV is not a fork of bitcoin, it is a fork from Bitcoin Cash.
Other forks of bitcoin forks are Bitcoin Diamond and Bitcoin Gold. You can read more about thine on this topic:
LoyceV's Bitcoin Fork claiming guide (and service)
12. Post 66605456 (unedited backup) (by Ivystar5) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 13:51:07 CEST 2026) in I found an AI :
Why waiting on the answer, I will use this opportunity to thank everyone especially @nutidah for his strong arguement that the accusations was a false accusation, and also use this opportunity to ask LoyceV to remove the neutral tag which he gave since I am not an AI shitposter unless there is evidence which was used to back up such claim as this thread being used as reference obviously said otherwise, and for Babo I don't really know why you copied LoyceV and did same thing without even taken your time to make further investigation, unless there are valid evidence or reason I don’t see why you also have to tag my account.
I just put a neutral informational tag, you're making a fuss about nothing.
I've been following the AI issue in other contexts—it's called prompt poisoning—and I assure you I know a lot about it, but it hadn't occurred to me to apply it in the forum.
There are no apologies, and we just added a note, me and LoyceV.
There is no witch hunt, just a note.
If it's nothing then it shouldn't exist either if I'm correct, looking at the reference it points to this thread which is a failed and false accusation, having learnt that the AI accusation is wrong why should a neutral tag still exist ?
it's just a note, like you said but the note connotes something that could be read with meaning which is not true if anyone is looking at the trust of IVYSTAR?
I still insist it should be removed because I never used an AI.
13. Post 66604823 (unedited backup) (by SilverCryptoBullet) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 09:20:19 CEST 2026) in My account was stolen ant the account banned:
You seem to be unfamiliar with the trust system.
He can read and learn about it after recovering his account successfully or even without that account recovery. Because his account was not banned, so he is allowed to use the forum with another account if he wants.
LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system.
14. Post 66604738 (unedited backup) (by babo) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 08:23:49 CEST 2026) in I found an AI :
Why waiting on the answer, I will use this opportunity to thank everyone especially @nutidah for his strong arguement that the accusations was a false accusation, and also use this opportunity to ask LoyceV to remove the neutral tag which he gave since I am not an AI shitposter unless there is evidence which was used to back up such claim as this thread being used as reference obviously said otherwise, and for Babo I don't really know why you copied LoyceV and did same thing without even taken your time to make further investigation, unless there are valid evidence or reason I don’t see why you also have to tag my account.
I just put a neutral informational tag, you're making a fuss about nothing.
I've been following the AI issue in other contexts—it's called prompt poisoning—and I assure you I know a lot about it, but it hadn't occurred to me to apply it in the forum.
There are no apologies, and we just added a note, me and LoyceV.
There is no witch hunt, just a note.
15. Post 66604483 (unedited backup) (by nc50lc) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 05:29:07 CEST 2026) in How do I identify the valid checksums for bip39 if I generate 11/12 of the word?:
...
Such a "feature request" is in my opinion bad to dangerous for obvious reasons, not only what LoyceV mentions. The smallest typo in what an "advanced" user might use as "something raw" for the binary seed will yield an empty wallet.
If that happens, there's obviously a typo and the user has to do it again.
If it's just during restore, there's not much issue in having a wallet accept raw entropy.
The issue here is during backup, but Bobby already mentioned that it's SOP to test the backup before depositing anything to it.
Since it's an "
Advanced Feature", that should be hidden by default, either only accessible though command or inside a toggleable option with warnings.
And it's not something non-standard.
It simply skip the BIP39-related parts, everything follows BIP32 standard.
Besides, the full context is: I simply implying that what he wants isn't possible without changing BIP39's spec.
So, I showed him what is the possible alternative way of achieving that.
16. Post 66604330 (unedited backup) (by Ivystar5) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 02:36:14 CEST 2026) in I found an AI :
Today is making it exactly 2 months since I was ban from the forum not entirely but posting or responding to PMs however, the ban was meant to last for only 1 month with is 30 days but ended up to stay for 31 days which I was active all the time checking in, but however I couldn't make a post during the ban with the ban Appeal account because it would have been considered ban evasion if I had responded to this thread, so I kept my cool.
However I was engaged with other life activities since I felt the forum passed a very wrong judgement on my case but I couldn't argue further because I firstly make a comment which I said " whatever is Theymos and the mods choice on this case I will accept it" but however I guess I was wrong I shouldn't have said that because I was not lying nor am I an AI or use AI to make post in the forum.
Where I am so surprised is the fact that someone (nutidah) even did the maths and did understand that I wasn't using AI nor did the post which has been deleted was made from AI using the forum standards of finding out AI posters yet the mod took his decision which was not in my favour.
Furthermore, After the allegations I discovered the OP of this thread didn't really care much about this case as he left the thread in the hands of the forum.
The experiment was one that has never existed before so it was nice to see but it was flawed to and extent however OP didn't even wait to see if anyone was going to get caught or not but because he was eager to post this after my comment was quite questionable which one or two people did question him.
Now, I think that the fact that the signature ban still exist is no longer a matter of if I was AI or not but now an oppression because I can't do anything about it, having looked at the comments and how people agreed to the fact that I wasn't using AI or have I used it especially with PowerGloves comment, I now have concluded that it's no longer an unjustified punishment but an oppression, which is why I stayed away from the forum till today and now it's 2 months so I'm back to question the authorities... WHY?
Why waiting on the answer, I will use this opportunity to thank everyone especially @nutidah for his strong arguement that the accusations was a false accusation, and also use this opportunity to ask LoyceV to remove the neutral tag which he gave since I am not an AI shitposter unless there is evidence which was used to back up such claim as this thread being used as reference obviously said otherwise, and for Babo I don't really know why you copied LoyceV and did same thing without even taken your time to make further investigation, unless there are valid evidence or reason I don’t see why you also have to tag my account.
17. Post 66604324 (unedited backup) (by Halab) (scraped on Sat Apr 11 02:22:38 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
Round 13 is now over, here are the results :Closing price on 10/04/2026 :
72 973$| Name | Prediction | B/M | Final prediction | Difference |
| LoyceV | 72 100,00 | 0,3% bonus | 72 316,30 | 656,70 |
| promise444c5 | 72 269,00 | | 72 269,00 | 704,00 |
| xLays | 71 767,00 | | 71 767,00 | 1 206,00 |
| cryptofrka | 71 250,00 | 0,4% bonus | 71 535,00 | 1 438,00 |
| Doan9269 | 71 170,00 | | 71 170,00 | 1 803,00 |
| examplens | 71 012,00 | 0,2% bonus | 71 154,02 | 1 818,98 |
| ESG | 70 688,08 | 0,3% bonus | 70 900,14 | 2 072,86 |
| Pmalek | 70 648,00 | 0,3% bonus | 70 859,94 | 2 113,06 |
| Leahized | 70 582,00 | | 70 582,00 | 2 391,00 |
| Hypnotizer | 69 412,00 | | 69 412,00 | 3 561,00 |
Hypnotizer, you are back, but this time for the last place. Apparently, you had trouble waking up. Sorry, but I'm going to have to take back the life you stole from me.
Why ?!?!! Rhaaaa, why him ?? Why give him a bonus ??... Well... well done LoyceV, you have won this round. 50BTC has been credited to your account.
And for the next 3 rounds (round 14, 15 and 16), you will be the Protector of the game.
Ideally, within the first 24 hours of these three rounds, you will need to give me the name of the person you are protecting in that round via your LoyceVs PM Publisher tool (I won’t go into detail about how the delay works).
This protected person cannot lose a life. This person cannot suffer a malus. If a malus is applied to him, it will be canceled (and not refunded) (that’s why it’s important that you don’t give the name of the protected person).
This protected person can be you, but you cannot use the same name twice during these three rounds.
The name of the protected person will be revealed after the prediction period.
For the next 3 rounds (rounds 14, 15, and 16), the two players with the worst predictions will lose a life. Unless one of them is protected.
Round 14 : The Bloody round
What will be the price of Bitcoin at
April 16, 2026, 12:00:00 AM (BTC closing price on 15/04/2026) ?
Submit your predictions before
April 13, 2026, 06:00:00 PM.
Cash shop:
OPEN Special rules :The two players with the worst predictions will lose a life.
LoyceV has to protect someone.
18. Post 66603654 (unedited backup) (by fillippone) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 22:34:19 CEST 2026) in [Experimental] Bitcointalk quality score:
To obtain a list of UserIDs, I used data from LoyceV and managed to gather around 18,000 UserIDs; I believe that list didn’t include many users, particularly the banned ones, whom I later found through other channels.
New registrants are obviously not included in that list, and to obtain their UserIDs, the tool relies on the userscript; if it doesn’t find them in the list, it adds them to the scraping queue. This is why you might see that warning for some users.
For banned users, we will obviously find the ‘banned’ tag and a score of 1, which is the minimum in the BRDb calculation, but I might make some adjustments for such cases.
Data from LoyceV is regularly updated on a weekly basis. You should run some kind of auto update on a the same time span, so to keep the pace for new users.
Relying on the users to manually input the data they ask for might be bad in the long run, as someone would be discouraged to see a lot of missing values.
19. Post 66603084 (unedited backup) (by Cricktor) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 20:16:49 CEST 2026) in How do I identify the valid checksums for bip39 if I generate 11/12 of the word?:
...
Such a "feature request" is in my opinion bad to dangerous for obvious reasons, not only what LoyceV mentions. The smallest typo in what an "advanced" user might use as "something raw" for the binary seed will yield an empty wallet.
It would be too easy to screw up and there would be nothing to indicate you've done something wrong. Seriously, who wants that? For sure, I don't!
I don't judge if someone doesn't trust a hardware RNG and rather feels more comfortable to generate their own random entropy. I just hope for them, they do it right and don't mess up, because it's quite easy to mess up and commonly a little bit more challenging to do it right (if you aim that your own generated entropy is of similar quality compared to RNG circuits of reputable vendors of hardware wallets).
The majority of wallet operate with BIP-39 and this pads one bit of SHA-256 partial checksum for every 32 bits of entropy. Like it or not, it's the defined standard. It's probably not the best solution, but it's what stuck and what is widespread implemented and used.
20. Post 66602109 (unedited backup) (by Zoomic) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 15:31:32 CEST 2026) in Need community inputs on MonkeyTilt allegation:
xxx
I really don’t understand how a casino will accuse someone of cheating or abusing their site without evidence or proof and everyone will believe them, for crying out loud someone won a huge amount of money and decide not to pay and to cover themselves up they fabricate a lie accusing the player of cheating and abusing their site without evidence proving that they actually cheated or abused their site that was why they blocked their account and confiscate their win. They don’t post evidence or proof because they don’t have any that’s the simple fact.
xxx
I understand you. This seems like a dilemma and there should be a way to balance it.
Of a truth, if Casinos expose the tactic they use to catch cheaters, cheaters will definitely improve to beat those tactics. In the other hand, a casino cannot present their resolution and everyone believe blindly without verifying. The balance could be having a few reputable users from the forum side that casinos will allow this private information in a situation like this.
Without looking into all details of this case, it looks like the typical casino behavior in which users can create accounts and deposit funds without ever asking questions and without KYC, but the moment someone wants to withdraw they suddenly demand paperwork. Even if the multi-account accusation is true, it could easily have been prevented by demanding KYC before depositing, but that's not in the casino's interest.
The model of casinos business is that they try to keep more money in the system than money leaves the system. The reason why some casinos make deposit extremely simple and seamless but during withdrawal, the reverse will be the case.
21. Post 66601878 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 14:06:38 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
To quote Cypher: Ignorance is Bliss
Tell me.. I will stay quiet.
22. Post 66601788 (unedited backup) (by Tungbulu) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 13:40:55 CEST 2026) in 3 Connected Accounts - 1 Legendary - 1 Hero Members - 1 Sr. Member:
Eh, why, as always with all such accusations, is there silence, as if in a cemetery? Mpamaegbu, now I understand why you didn't answer my question about why you don't have alternative accounts. Everything is simple. There was an answer, but I didn't understand it right away. It should be interpreted like this: "
The accounts are there; the problem is only with you. You're not looking hard enough ."
Lol
It took me some time to understand this sarcasm. Aakzaki looked very hard on your behalf
I've always maintained my stance on this issue of multiple accounts. To me I think it was a great mistake for this forum to clearly stated "having multiple accounts is allowed". That was the beginning of cheating. You can not issue a gun to someone and then prohibit them from shooting. It's almost impossible rule to abide by because someday and somehow, they might be triggered and fire the gun. Then different explanations will follow like "ah it was a mistake" "I was only defending myself" etc.
Opening the forum for multiple accounts automatically gives room to cheating. How confident are we that anyone with multiple accounts will be willing to forfeit other accounts when all are accepted in one campaign? I'm not sure there's any. No matter the explanation, I will assume they have gotten that opportunity else they'll keep mute and continue to milk the campaign until they get caught or the campaign ends. I haven't seen but is there any case of someone giving up a slot because multiple of their accounts were accepted in a campaign? They always get caught.
The only way to stop this is by exposing them. All known alt should be tagged Alt automatically and not wait until they cheat in a campaign. Without being exposed as alt, they'll definitely cheat some day when the opportunity comes. It's better we prevent that right away before they take that advantage.
The problem isn’t having alts but what you choose to do with your alts mate.
Having alts doesn’t guarantee you must cheat or break forum rules with those alts, I mean the likes of LoyceV has an alt account, but is he doing anything wrong with the alt? the only thing is that, since having alts might eventually bring about some complications, it’s best to avoid it, and try to be transparent with your dealings with other accounts, especially when it involves exchanging transactions via wallets because right now, forgetting to do that could make you take the fall for someone else’s misconduct even though it’s obvious you’re innocent.
The rules are clear, have your alts (if you want to) but avoid breaking any rules, and if you do this then you shouldn’t have any problems with anyone. capiche
23. Post 66601526 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 11:55:49 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
I will also do same if I win this round.
You can't win this round
I can, with a tiny margin or if the price stays within your exact prediction and mine
24. Post 66601522 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 11:54:49 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
Bonus .. what did I do to you
I saw an opportunity to either win, or at least not lose, and I took it
So far it's looking good!
I can, with a tiny margin or if the price stays within your exact prediction and mine
25. Post 66601454 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 11:29:55 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
I saw an opportunity to either win, or at least not lose, and I took it
So far it's looking good!
There’s still possibility I lose( which is game over for me) but incase you eventually win, let’s make a deal pls
… Will you be able to willingly give me 20% or 30% of your
BTC reward, I will also do same if I win this round.
That way I'd win in case BTC flies (which it did) and I'd still be safe in case it tanked.
Yeah.. use me as shield just as LoyceV did
26. Post 66601087 (unedited backup) (by joker_josue) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 08:25:50 CEST 2026) in TalkImg.com - Image hosting for BitcoinTalk:
The 10 images viewed (estimated) this month, which were uploaded in the previous month.
I downloaded all 10 images, their file dates range from February 12 to 25. Does this mean the images that are uploaded in April qualify for your Statistics in May, to be posted in June?
I'm asking for .... reasons
I think he wants to mention the
" Top ten most viewed images of the month",
in which case the date of upload would not be relevant.
Well, what I think is not the answer, he will say the right thing.
It actually does...
In order to ensure that all images have the same number of display days, the system analyzes the most viewed images that were uploaded in the second-to-last month. Therefore, at the top of March, you'll find the 10 most viewed images from March, but which were uploaded in February.
It will be somewhat the sequence that LoyceV mentioned. The images uploaded this April will be analyzed in May. The results will be included in the May statistics, which will be published in June.
I've been using this method for a year now:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5450546.msg65243649#msg65243649It may not be the ideal method, but it's what I found to ensure that all images uploaded in a month have the same display time. Or to prevent the list from becoming cluttered with images that were uploaded years ago.
27. Post 66601050 (unedited backup) (by ESG) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 08:11:49 CEST 2026) in TalkImg.com - Image hosting for BitcoinTalk:
The 10 images viewed (estimated) this month, which were uploaded in the previous month.
I downloaded all 10 images, their file dates range from February 12 to 25. Does this mean the images that are uploaded in April qualify for your Statistics in May, to be posted in June?
I'm asking for .... reasons
I think he wants to mention the
" Top ten most viewed images of the month",
in which case the date of upload would not be relevant.
Well, what I think is not the answer, he will say the right thing.
28. Post 66600603 (unedited backup) (by gracreavix) (scraped on Fri Apr 10 01:34:02 CEST 2026) in WORD SEARCH :
2. Contains the names of DT1 Members, find as many as you can.
,
bitbollo, bitmover, blackhatcoiner, charles Tim, davef, ddmrddmr, Elduderino, fillippone, gazetabitcoin, gmaxwell, heuristic, hosemary, hugeblack, Icopress, jeremypwr, LFCBitcoin, lovesmayfamilis, LoyceV, neuroticfish, notatether, nutildah, philipma, pmalek, powerglove, thescepticalchymist, theymos, TryNinja, Zasad
29. Post 66598849 (unedited backup) (by BlackHatCoiner) (scraped on Thu Apr 9 17:22:26 CEST 2026) in Fixing Testnet4: proposal:
The
testnet4-fix branch is now rebased with bitcoin/bitcoin:master. It was simpler than I thought:
# git branch shows "testnet4-fix"
git fetch upstream
git rebase upstream/master
If that's the case, all the block signaling will depend on just those 2 pools and the rare solo miner is insignificant. So can't this whole block signaling thing be dealt with by email as a much more direct approach?
Yes, I think a direct mail before any block signal, if it even happens, is definitely a good idea. Mara, Foundry and wiz (the person behind mempool.space who is also a testnet miner). Maybe I also make a page "Testnet4 Fix" to make this whole process easier.
30. Post 66598724 (unedited backup) (by dkbit98) (scraped on Thu Apr 9 16:48:20 CEST 2026) in Full blockchain airgap:
The OS doesn't matter, but a different drive might still get it to work.
Nope.
I tried several other discs and they are working fine, only one with movies is not working.
And I keep them all in exactly the same way, they are protected from scratches in separate purse with separators.
I almost forgot how loud those cd/dvd drives are, loading every time computer boots up
31. Post 66598475 (unedited backup) (by SquirrelJulietGarden) (scraped on Thu Apr 9 15:27:38 CEST 2026) in If I don't wake up tomorrow, who gets my Bitcoin? A painful question most of us!:
My seed phrase is in my head and in a place only I know. My private keys are mine and mine alone. That's how security works. But that's also how loss works.
Your wallet seed phrase should be back up and store in a safe place only you know, it's a best backup method. Your head (I guess you implied about your brain and memory) will be only like supplementary backup method, as it is dangerous and can be broken, lost anytime so it should never be your main backup method.
Reminder about memorization risk as a backup method is written in this helpful education article.
How to backup a seed phrase.How to let your loved ones inherit your wallet and bitcoin, hosemary helped you with LoyceV's topic.
32. Post 66598456 (unedited backup) (by BlackHatCoiner) (scraped on Thu Apr 9 15:21:56 CEST 2026) in How do I identify the valid checksums for bip39 if I generate 11/12 of the word?:
Your link goes above my technical understanding (and I don't have time to read it all)
This is all you need to know:
https://claude.ai/share/5bd729a2-10ec-4675-9403-d4a71c8dabd8.
It has to be, to avoid generating the same R twice if it's generated from the same seed.
The seed is used to derive master public keys, which are then used to derive Bitcoin private keys. k value (which R is computed from) is derived deterministically from the Bitcoin private key and the hash of the message (i.e., the transaction). Therefore, no random number generation is needed. For each pair of private key and message hash, there is a unique R value, derived deterministically.
33. Post 66598362 (unedited backup) (by hosemary) (scraped on Thu Apr 9 14:52:49 CEST 2026) in If I don't wake up tomorrow, who gets my Bitcoin? A painful question most of us!:
What is the best and safe solution?
It's simple. Tell someone you trust about your funds.
Teach them how they can get access to your funds, or at least tell them those words are all they need to recover the funds.
If you want someone to have access to your funds only after your death, LoyceV's instruction may be helpful to you.
Using Locktime for inheritance planning, backups or gifts
34. Post 66598311 (unedited backup) (by BlackHatCoiner) (scraped on Thu Apr 9 14:29:44 CEST 2026) in How do I identify the valid checksums for bip39 if I generate 11/12 of the word?:
I'm thinking about for instance
Reused R values: how do you use dice rolls to avoid this?
You don't need an RNG to generate an R value for your signature. If your private key is securely generated, you can use it to hash it, along with your message, to generate an R value. This is
RFC 6979, and it is supported by every bitcoin wallet, IIRC.
So, as long as you use a dice to generate the 128 bits for your seed phrase, you no longer need an RNG. You can just take advantage of that entropy and extend it everywhere else. This could be applied beyond bitcoin. You could just roll a dice enough times, and store the results during OS setup, and then your Linux would need not to ever call an RNG. It's just not user friendly.
I'd say you're a few bits short this way.
100 dice rolls are
more than enough.
35. Post 66596276 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Wed Apr 8 22:55:02 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
So you're praying for me to win this round. That's nice
I don't think you realize the full extent of my wickedness
Lol
[/quite]
Bonus .. what did I do to you
36. Post 66596085 (unedited backup) (by promise444c5) (scraped on Wed Apr 8 22:08:01 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
I hope we climb slowly without any drop from here.. that’s the only way I can save my ass.. LoyceV I saw what you did
. Now I have to pray it stays above 72.2k, you’re wicked
37. Post 66595712 (unedited backup) (by Halab) (scraped on Wed Apr 8 20:14:26 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
Here are your predictions for Round 13 :| Name | Prediction | B/M |
| Hypnotizer | 69 412,00 | |
| Leahized | 70 582,00 | |
| Pmalek | 70 648,00 | 0,30% bonus |
| ESG | 70 688,08 | 0,30% bonus |
| examplens | 71 012,00 | 0,20% bonus |
| Doan9269 | 71 170,00 | |
| cryptofrka | 71 250,00 | 0,40% bonus |
| xLays | 71 767,00 | |
| LoyceV | 72 100,00 | 0,30% bonus |
| promise444c5 | 72 269,00 | |
38. Post 66595430 (unedited backup) (by Zoomic) (scraped on Wed Apr 8 18:52:32 CEST 2026) in Does this post deserve to be deleted?:
I discovered that sometimes, users go off-topic to troll, after trolling, they quote one on-topic reply and include it in their response to serve as a guard to the off topic troll thereby making moderators not to delete it.
That is exactly what the rules say that you should do if you want the trolling/off-topic/insults to remain and not get deleted. Therefore, those users are acting in accordance to the rules and are behaving better than those that are not adding anything and just slinging mud because their brains are pajeets too. Socioeconomic factors my ass, uncivilized savages is more like it.
Thanks for this exposition. I had wondered why moderators don't delete obvious insults until I discovered how they maneuver to get the posts not deleted and now you validated my suspicion. I never knew that such big loophole exists in the unofficial rules.
The REAL litmus test is franky1.
Franky1 is in a class of its own. He disagrees objectively and doesn't resort to racial slander or personal attacks.
Franky does not disagree "objectively" he posts complete fabrications and lies, he does not even understand the basics of Bitcoin. He is one of the most stupid people that have ever come to this forum. He's banned from the section where this post was deleted for a reason. To disagree "objectively" would imply having objective knowledge and facts, which that user does not. He should not even be in this place, but theymos is too left leaning so users have no choice but to deal with such nonsense no matter the damage it does to Bitcoin.
Well, this is your personal view about him and I believe many will also disagree with you. I have respect for franky1, not because of his view of bitcoin which seems somewhat controversial, but because most times he stands alone and he stands firm. When I was new in this space, I understood he was banned from posting in the technical section and he was always disagreeing with LoyceV. I think the disagreement was about LN. It seems that franky doesn't endorse it because it happens off the chain. But meanwhile, he doesn't make people feel less of themselve at the slightest provocation.
39. Post 66593972 (unedited backup) (by Misa Amane) (scraped on Wed Apr 8 10:44:38 CEST 2026) in AI Spam Report Reference Thread:
User:
worrygenuineReason: This user just joined the forum yesterday and has already made a post. It seems to me that they used AI or ChatGPT to create their very first post right after joining.
You've been here for a week, had 5 chatbot shitposts posts deleted by Moderators, earned yourself neutral feedback, and made it to my Ignore list already. What makes you post here to report a Newbie? I wouldn't be surprised if you created another shitposter account just to be able to report it.
Friend, I’ve been here for about a week, and moderators have already deleted 5 of my chatbot-related shitposts. I also received a neutral feedback for that. However, I only used the chatbot as a translator when I wrote something myself, I asked it to translate and refine it before posting. Still, my posts were detected as AI-generated, so I deleted them myself and took time to read the forum rules.
I’m not here to report newbies I’m here to help clean up the forum by addressing AI/chatbot misuse. If reporting AI users is considered wrong, then I sincerely apologize for that. I can also see that you’ve already added another neutral feedback, which I honestly didn’t expect just for reporting.
40. Post 66593944 (unedited backup) (by Hulk990) (scraped on Wed Apr 8 10:33:13 CEST 2026) in 3 user is cheating on julerz12's Bcon.Global usdt paying campaign:
A quick check at your post history shows that you're a spammer. This is a forum, not "work"!
Yep, me too. a quick check at your post history shows that you are also a spammer. This is a forum not "stalk others profile or judge others"!
This is a forum. This is not a court. Spammer LoyceV.
41. Post 66592515 (unedited backup) (by pbies) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 21:57:07 CEST 2026) in CONTEST: design loyce.club home page:
5 year later ...
pbies gave me this design:
loyce.club!
@pbies: please take credit here, so I can Merit you
Thank you, LoyceV!
It is a pleasure.
42. Post 66591633 (unedited backup) (by OmegaStarScream) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 17:51:31 CEST 2026) in Why is the CLoudfare verification more difficult on mobile devices:
I had similar a few weeks back, which I ended up changing my script to get around the cloudflare. which resulted me in pinging the server a bit too much during that time during testing. However, this time around it doesn't seem like its affected at least my monitoring system is showing me its online, but I restarted it too be sure and its working.
I did have issues just general browsing late last night, where the host was failing. So, I'd assume LoyceV's assumption is correct and there's been a high level of traffic recently aimed at us.
How do you get around Cloudflare if you don't mind asking? Use something like Selenium on a windows machine? Or you pay for some API to handle it for you? I don't think it's easily achievable with something lightweight like BeautifulSoup
43. Post 66591340 (unedited backup) (by Welsh) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 16:34:38 CEST 2026) in Why is the CLoudfare verification more difficult on mobile devices:
I'm personally running a script through my account, and I noticed that it broke. It started acting funny for a couple of days, and each time I had to restart it ... but now it's not going through at all, due to Cloudflare. I'm using BeautifulSoup so it could be because of that. No issues when browsing with my PC.
I had similar a few weeks back, which I ended up changing my script to get around the cloudflare. which resulted me in pinging the server a bit too much during that time during testing. However, this time around it doesn't seem like its affected at least my monitoring system is showing me its online, but I restarted it too be sure and its working.
I did have issues just general browsing late last night, where the host was failing. So, I'd assume LoyceV's assumption is correct and there's been a high level of traffic recently aimed at us.
44. Post 66591208 (unedited backup) (by BlackHatCoiner) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 15:58:14 CEST 2026) in Fixing Testnet4: proposal:
If someone quickly increases the difficulty and then stops, your client will have to use the wrong timestamp again because each new block has to be found within 20 minutes.
I now see what you mean.
The softfork is just one rule: invalidate any block that has a timestamp by 20 minutes more than its previous one. That's it. In pseudocode, when a miner would call to get a block template to mine, it would look like this:
if (current_timestamp <= prevblock.timestamp + 1200):
newblock.timestamp = current_timestamp
else:
newblock.timestamp = prevblock.timestamp + 1200
What you are asking is what happens if, after the journey to February, we are at 10 minutes block interval, a new miner joins, drives the difficulty up by, let's say 3x, and leaves? In that case, block interval takes 30 minutes, and difficulty is just reduced by 50% at next epoch, to 15 minutes per block. No big deal really, and I remind you that this
has never happened before.
45. Post 66590934 (unedited backup) (by BlackHatCoiner) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 14:48:20 CEST 2026) in Fixing Testnet4: proposal:
You're thinking of other testnet miners, I'm thinking of a Bitcoin miner who does this.
In the case that a Bitcoin miner suddenly switches to mining testnet blocks with the old client, then a split will occur, where he's mining on top of some CPU block, with current timestamp, and Mara & Foundry continue on the softforked chain, rejecting his blocks.
Testnet is not fucked up for another 6 months. Mara & Foundry continue on their journey to February, with no interruption. They just ignore the other chain. Miners do need to be informed about the softfork, though, otherwise they will have their blocks constantly reorged by the majority.
46. Post 66590463 (unedited backup) (by BlackHatCoiner) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 11:37:13 CEST 2026) in Fixing Testnet4: proposal:
This is a huge drawback of a softfork that still keeps the 20 minute rule.
It doesn't. The moment block 151,200 is mined you can no longer send a block with timestamp more than 20 minutes than the previous one.
Let's say this all works out, and then some Bitcoin miner throws his massive hashrate at testnet for a few hours: he mines 4000 blocks, and testnet is fucked up for another 6 months before it's back to normal timestamps.
This is why I'm presuming the majority of the hashrate will mine my fork. We can know what percentage will mine my fork beforehand, with block signaling. If a miner throws a massive hashrate with the old client, then his chain will be invalid in the forked chain, and unless the majority of the hashrate goes back to the old chain, my chain will outpace the old.
I have noticed that it is mainly Foundry and Mara pool that own the majority of the hashrate. Very often does a new miner throw hashrate at testnet.
47. Post 66590406 (unedited backup) (by igebotz) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 11:09:55 CEST 2026) in Who else has received this PM?:
Lol, I merited igebotz because as he is staff I took for granted that he knew the user is banned but the link to his profile doesn't show a proof. I don't see anything on this regard on bpip.org either where you sometimes see "autoban user" or stuff like that.
The signature isn't wiped, so it's only a temporary ban. Those don't show up in modlog, BPIP doesn't know about them.
I came to tho this; the user got only temporary ban ( warning) and it's only visible to mods on their profiles.
48. Post 66590253 (unedited backup) (by ABCbits) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 10:05:01 CEST 2026) in AI Spam Report Reference Thread:
Could anyone check user
Easteregg69?
1. He already received multiple neutral and negative tag due to non stop spamming.
2. I used BitList search, but no one bothered to check so far. Only
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.msg66540310#msg66540310 mention his spam.
3.
https://bpip.org/Report?r=postsdeleted shows he currently have 316 reply deleted moderator, with rank 125th for account with most deleted posts.
4. He just made such ridiculous/off-topic reply on Bitcoin Technical Support board. I don't expect anyone find his post actually useful to solve technical issue they face.
Yes I have the dat backup. Thanks for the advice
wallet dot dat. Don't encrypt it. My take. Unless you written the keyphrase down which is not the password. Double top stuff.
You still got morons figting for stupid ideas. I got birds building nests under the roof. Leave it on an exchange if your daft.
People think other people is gonna steal from them. That is where they get cheated. Super string.
Can i say it? They get ruined by contract! You relax and uphold a minimum.
I get my beer now. Macro wiser. 4.6%. Gold painted with the kings crown on it.
Thinking about if the name of the damocles sword was gladio.. Kitchen shines. Nothing there.
Tell you man. In the deepest of secrets everything is already on the table. Buy your coins back or loose them.
Why is Newbie shitposter
Nick Finney not banned yet?
--snip--
So annoying, there are more new account created to create off-topic/technical non-sense reply these days.
49. Post 66589710 (unedited backup) (by cacjk) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 04:54:14 CEST 2026) in [REQ] 0.00037016 BTC – Repay 0.00050 BTC (35% in 5 Days) – Admin Access Offered:
I’m willing to put up 400 SGD in my ShopeePay balance as collateral
Your balance is useless as collateral.
With that in mind, what would be the best loan offer you’re able to provide under these terms?
Zero.
It be withdrawn to your bank but I need crypto now, and the withdrawal takes 3-5 business days
50. Post 66589353 (unedited backup) (by examplens) (scraped on Tue Apr 7 00:29:31 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
If you Google "Loyce", you'll see I may be a black woman
$68,012
51. Post 66589145 (unedited backup) (by *Ace*) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 23:26:07 CEST 2026) in [Experimental] Bitcointalk quality score:
*Ace* can you tell me who for many accounts there is no BRDb score shown?
I noticed this for some inactive accounts, and for members with negative feedback I can see this:
Pending — will be available after next scrape cycle.
It would be interesting to have negative BRDb shown for scammers and cheaters, if that is possible.
To obtain a list of UserIDs, I used data from LoyceV and managed to gather around 18,000 UserIDs; I believe that list didn’t include many users, particularly the banned ones, whom I later found through other channels.
New registrants are obviously not included in that list, and to obtain their UserIDs, the tool relies on the userscript; if it doesn’t find them in the list, it adds them to the scraping queue. This is why you might see that warning for some users.
For banned users, we will obviously find the ‘banned’ tag and a score of 1, which is the minimum in the BRDb calculation, but I might make some adjustments for such cases.
52. Post 66588799 (unedited backup) (by nutildah) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 21:50:37 CEST 2026) in The rule on account sales.:
In incidental cases for high-profile accounts, sure. But for millions of accounts, you can't expect the forum admin to start tracking all this.
This idea has probably been proposed already but I'm all for introducing (or bringing back) a
SCAMMER tag issued by mods or admins, to be given to the most obvious of scammer accounts.
This would be reserved for instances where proof of the scam is overwhelming and without reasonable objection. Of course it would require more work for the staff.
53. Post 66588537 (unedited backup) (by Pmalek) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 20:25:43 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
LoyceV: 0.30%
examplens: 0.20%
ESG: 0.30%
Pmalek: 0.30%
cryptofrka: 0.40%
Thanks! I feel better now.
If you Google "Loyce", you'll see I may be a black woman
How black? Robert Downey Jr black or brighter?
54. Post 66587942 (unedited backup) (by Rikafip) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 17:45:31 CEST 2026) in The rule on account sales.:
What's the point of making something illegal if you can't enforce it? All it will do is push account sales to external platforms.
People getting tagged over account sales already pushed account sales to external platforms, given how few of those account sales offers appear now on bitcointalk.
55. Post 66587547 (unedited backup) (by Mitchell) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 16:07:20 CEST 2026) in AI Spam Report Reference Thread:
It indeed failed, think they posted so much they got moved into a group I cannot nuke. Got the message
> That user is in a protected membergroup
56. Post 66587367 (unedited backup) (by SuperBitMan) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 15:16:56 CEST 2026) in The rule on account sales.:
The forum gets sued for allowing the account to be sold.
Any account can get sold without the forum's knowing about it. Without regular KYC checks, how is theymos supposed to know who's behind my keyboard?
You can find out that an account has changed hands through there writing style and by saying a different thing from what the former person says, I believe they have caught some set of people through this way, even though it’s not a 100% correct way to find out if an account has changed hands or has been sold out to another person.
I Think right now what the forum should do is to make account selling illegal since it’s already illegal in the eyes of everyone in the forum.
If you are caught selling your account you may likely get a negative tag even though it’s not against the forum rules.
Where do we stand in this rule.
The forum rule is that account sales are allowed. When it comes to tags, that's up to everybody's personal preference.
Yeah but the tags will still be inline with the rules and regulations of the forum, if any tag is against the forum rules it’s abuse of DT power.
Can you give a negative tag to someone who talks about US being the world? The answer is no even if you don’t agree with him or her, so giving tags is still done based on the forum rules and regulations.
I think it’s better the forum amend that rule of account selling and make it illegal since it’s already illegal to almost everyone in the forum, so it will be known to everyone, if a newbie buys an account and then claims he was not aware it will lead to negative feedback on the account he bought based on the forum rule, can we actually blame him or her?
57. Post 66587256 (unedited backup) (by Misa Amane) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 14:43:13 CEST 2026) in AI Spam Report Reference Thread:
@Nick Finney is a superfast shitposter.
He created 5 unhelpful posts in just 7 minutes.
I am 100% sure that she used AI to create these posts, because making so many posts in such a short time raises questions. By looking at the quality of the posts, it is clear they were generated by AI, but since they are under 300 words, they are not being detected as AI.
1.
MS is signaling with the buy. But they’re not holding it. They’re using it as a hedge. That’s not a bet on Bitcoin. That’s a bet on their own balance sheet.
Time on: Today at 12:25:32 PM
2.
ASICs are still king for Bitcoin mining. They’re way more efficient than GPUs or CPUs. But the market’s flooded with cheap ASICs now. You need to be careful about power consumption and hash rates. Always check the manufacturer’s specs and user reviews. Some are junk.
Time on: Today at 12:23:56 PM
3.
If you're trying to optimize node performance, check if you're using compact blocks. They cut sync time in half. Also, make sure you're not running full validation on every block. You can skip that for non-critical nodes.
Time on: Today at 12:22:01 PM
4.
People are in denial because they're looking for validation, not truth. Crypto is hard, and the noise is loud. Most folks don't want to admit they're wrong — especially when it's a high-stakes game. It's not about Bitcoin; it's about identity. If you're not careful, you're not just wrong — you're a fraud.
Time on: Today at 12:20:30 PM
5.
The 30.2 release is solid, but the real win is the new RPC API. It’s way more flexible than before. If you're building something that needs to interact with the node, this is a huge upgrade. Also, the block download speed improvements are noticeable on HDDs. Not a big fan of the UI changes though—too many clicks for simple tasks.
Time on: Today at 12:18:32 PM
58. Post 66586541 (unedited backup) (by Hypnotizer) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 10:03:31 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
So…
BSV decided to go bullish this week..
[
Round 13 : The distribution of Hypnotizer
What will be the price of Bitcoin at April 11, 2026, 12:00:00 AM (BTC closing price on 10/04/2026) ?
$69,412
Special rules : For Hypnotizer :
So you have a 1.5% bonus to distribute among 3-5 other participants (it cannot be yourself).
The minimum amount to give to a player is 0.10%.
The maximum amount to give to a player is 0.50%.
So, for example, you can do the following :
- P1 : 0.50%. P2 : 0.50%. P3 : 0.50%
- P1 : 0.50%. P2 : 0.10%. P3 : 0.40%. P4 : 0.20%. P5 : 0.30%
Etc...
So I’ll still go with the people I selected last week;
LoyceV: 0.30%
examplens: 0.20%
ESG: 0.30%
Pmalek: 0.30%
cryptofrka: 0.40%
59. Post 66585969 (unedited backup) (by Halab) (scraped on Mon Apr 6 02:44:25 CEST 2026) in The ultimate battle royale for BTC price prediction | sponsored by 🌐 Bridgoro:
This whole thing was an April Fools' joke from Halab
I love it when a plan comes together. I can finally sell all my old BSV.
Anyway, here are the results of round 12 :Closing price on 05/04/2026 for BSV :
16.38$| Name | Prediction | Difference |
| Leahized | 14,88 | 1,50 |
| Doan9269 | 14,80 | 1,58 |
| LoyceV | 14,78 | 1,60 |
| cryptofrka | 14,75 | 1,63 |
| examplens | 14,72 | 1,66 |
| xLays | 14,67 | 1,71 |
| promise444c5 | 14,58 | 1,80 |
| Hypnotizer | 14,50 | 1,88 |
| ESG | 14,41 | 1,97 |
| Pmalek | 14,37 | 2,01 |
Leahized, you are the winner of this round. I hesitated to send you 50 BSV, but here are 50 BTC. And you get the satisfaction of having dethroned Hypnotizer. That's priceless
Pmalek, there’s no shame in losing this shitcoin round. We are back to predicting Bitcoin’s price, so things should go better from here. But you lose a life.
CSW promised a little something to anyone who complimented him. I'm not sure if he caught the irony in your compliments.
He wanted me to send 1 BSV to each of you, but for technical reasons, that's complicated. So I asked my assistant to send you 1 Merit. I didn't lie, it is a little something.
For Round 13, all I can say is that the winner will play a key role in the rounds to come.
And I can tell you that the rounds to come will be bloody.
So it would be a good idea to win Round 13.Round 13 : The distribution of Hypnotizer
What will be the price of Bitcoin at
April 11, 2026, 12:00:00 AM (BTC closing price on 10/04/2026) ?
Submit your predictions before
April 08, 2026, 06:00:00 PM.
Cash shop:
OPEN Special rules : For Hypnotizer :
So you have a 1.5% bonus to distribute among 3-5 other participants (it cannot be yourself).
The minimum amount to give to a player is 0.10%.
The maximum amount to give to a player is 0.50%.
So, for example, you can do the following :
- P1 : 0.50%. P2 : 0.50%. P3 : 0.50%
- P1 : 0.50%. P2 : 0.10%. P3 : 0.40%. P4 : 0.20%. P5 : 0.30%
Etc...
60. Post 66584947 (unedited backup) (by NotATether) (scraped on Sun Apr 5 20:35:07 CEST 2026) in Fixing Testnet4: proposal:
I've
done the math on nerdminers, and indeed, it's a space heater
But it's not going to help if some ASIC pushed the difficulty up with 10,000 times more hashrate than the BitAxe.
I guess since Antminers and stuff basically have a toggle for testnet mode (right??), asking them nicely to stop is not going to work.
Someone is going to have to run a grassroots operation in a small data center then
But I think the bigger problem is, they will have to keep up with the latest hardware, otherwise powerful miners turning on/off will mess with the block generation time again.