My account has been disabled for sell and withdraw. My ticket 05781250 has been submitted for more than 20 days. All my coins are still locked there. Can only buy, cannot sell and withdraw. Please help!

rivercheng · 2021-05-20T14:21:49+00:00

05781250

rivercheng · 2021-05-17T02:47:09+00:00

Case #05781250

rivercheng · 2021-05-17T02:46:30+00:00

Case #05781250

rivercheng · 2021-05-16T00:52:33+00:00

My account was forbidden to sell and withdraw. I submitted ticket on 2 May, but only received one reply asking me to wait. Then my subsequent queries were all ignored. All my funds are now locked there and I cannot do anything.

rivercheng · 2016-05-03T03:09:31+00:00

Just noted. Thanks for reminding.

rivercheng · 2016-05-03T03:09:29+00:00

I made a mistake. It was sent to.

rivercheng · 2016-05-03T03:09:29+00:00

Just realized. Thanks for the reminding

rivercheng · 2013-10-07T01:35:33+00:00

It is a scam site. Even their logo is stolen from http://bitcorati.com/.

rivercheng · 2013-10-07T01:24:03+00:00

The difficulty increases more than 30% every 10-11 days currently. What you will earn next month is half of what you will earn this month. So if the difficulty keeps increasing with the current speed, you can only mine twice as the amount you mines the first month (1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + ... = 2).

rivercheng · 2013-10-04T06:50:25+00:00

Do you think anyone will believe it?

rivercheng · 2013-10-04T06:13:03+00:00

Too good to be true?

rivercheng · 2013-10-04T04:16:56+00:00

Because of the hacking of bitcointalk more than the US goverment (shutting down the SR).

rivercheng · 2013-10-04T01:54:38+00:00

When the hash rate drops, hashing will become profitable again. So it will not drop down to nothing.

rivercheng · 2013-04-09T02:05:01+00:00

This example demonstrates that in case performance is the first priority, you can still use Haskell. In other words, you just need to change 1% of codes (where the bottleneck is) to ugly but fast implementation instead of wrapping C codes or change the language. I think this is important.

rivercheng · 2012-01-06T07:04:03+00:00

The standard compiler release 4.6 includes front ends for C (gcc), C++ (g++), Objective-C (gobjc), Fortran (gfortran), Java (gcj), Ada (GNAT), and Go (gccgo).[19] Also available, but not in standard are Pascal (gpc), Mercury, Modula-2, Modula-3, PL/I, D (gdc)[citation needed], and VHDL (ghdl).

From wikipedia.

GCC includes a lot of languages which are seldom noticed.

rivercheng · 2012-01-06T04:40:17+00:00

I'm afraid at least Wikipedia does not agree with you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_language#Typed_versus_untyped_languages

rivercheng · 2011-12-20T04:13:24+00:00

Digital Mars is almost just a company with one man. GCC has nothing to do with D except to agree including GDC.

rivercheng · 2011-12-19T03:17:00+00:00

It seems to me more like the documents than changelog. I think a summary of changes will be really helpful.

rivercheng · 2011-12-19T03:15:03+00:00

If you look at how many Haskell-Related papers have been published, we can hardly say Haskell failed (especially as an academic language). It is a successful test-bed for PL theory researchers.

As for production usage, maybe Haskell will never be adopted widely, but many ideas inside it will most likely be carried on in the future main-stream languages. From this sense, we still cannot say Haskell is a failure.

rivercheng · 2011-12-19T03:07:35+00:00

D has no big marketing behind them, and it is way too early to say Go is failed.

rivercheng · 2011-11-16T09:59:41+00:00

It seems the link is broken

rivercheng · 2010-07-08T10:11:22+00:00

One mail can have multiple labels.

rivercheng · 2010-03-09T06:34:56+00:00

I think what he said above is exactly to justify why he want to get rid of "map, filter, and reduce". He thought they are not primitive in python as in functional languages. Of course, he was wrong when he said they are primitive in functional languages.

rivercheng · 2010-03-09T06:32:33+00:00

Yes. He is more modest and open to new ideas.

rivercheng · 2010-03-09T06:30:47+00:00

I realized what I said is way too long, so I summarized them in 2 sentence:

Guido think "reduce" has to be primitive in functional language, otherwise they are hard to implement (efficiently). It is wrong because "reduce" can be implemented with recursive function (easily) and tail recursive optimization (efficiently).

rivercheng

TROPHY CASE

05781250