Forum Replies Created
Looks like ublock origin is an aggregator for a number of 3rd party lists. We will write a script to go through these and flag any we appear on so we can raise support tickets: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/blob/master/assets/ublock/filter-lists.json
What part of the site are you getting bad CSS? i.e. forum, platform, blog, privacy notice?
Just a quick update on this bug. I’ve just rolled out a short-term fix. I think I’ve found it but can’t be 100% sure because it’s a hard one to replicate. You’ll need to refresh the platform and log back in again for the update to load up but then hopefully you shouldn’t get this error with the freezing on high hash rates any more.
I’ve set up a little redirect so you can use:
Where 16401 is your affiliate/user ID.
I’ve also added the short link to the referrals page if anyone want’s to grab it straight from the platform with their affid already in place.
Thank you for taking the time to suggest this.
Could you email dave [at] jsecoin [dot] com please with your account number or the email address you used to sign up with so we can take a look at the account?
Received a response and have followed up here:
So is your policy to block all web based crypto-mining software? Our platform is nothing like the hidden background miners and I feel like we’ve been bundled into the same basket with them.
If you get a chance to take a look at the platform https://platform.jsecoin.com perhaps you’ll agree it should be treated differently and not flagged as a threat or malware.
On 15/11/2017 06:35, Bitdefender Support Center wrote:
> Hello James,
> Thank you for your patience.
> The domain itself is not detected because the website is clean. However, the specific link in the blog post (https://server.jsecoin.com/load/) contains a CoinMiner that is properly detected as Application.CoinMiner.M.
> Let us know if we can be of further assistance.
> Have a nice day ahead!
> Best regards,
> Sergiu Colgiu
> Technical Support Engineer
This is quite a big topic so I wrote my thoughts down as a blog post:
Looks like the virus lab says the URL is clean but a virus check on the system files is picking up a generic trojan warning in the cache which is weird. I’ll email them again and try and find out what is going on.
Hey guys, heated debate indeed. I think we could adjust it to it’s opt-out as standard but if a webmaster wanted it to be opt-in only that would be an option. I’m just not sure anyone would opt-in. It’s like advertising people either don’t care or they hate it but very few understand the perspective of the content wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t monetized.
I could knock up some code if you wanted to give it a try but how could we convince a average user to opt-in?November 8, 2017 at 10:01 pm in reply to: Investor questions around coin price and max supply #4207
Good questions thanks for taking the time to put this together. The price ladder in the whitepaper is example pricing to demonstrate what we want to accomplish. I think it says in there that the actual price bands at ICO will be closer grouped towards market expectations at the time. So if advisors suggest we can only reach a maximum of $x at ICO we will group the price bands around that figure to adjust it to match demand.
We have had a few people mention that the maximum hard cap is too high and we agree generally. The issue is that we aren’t going to ICO until 2018 and we want to keep the maximum number of options available to us. Noone is going to complain if we drop the hard cap but if we tried to increase it stakeholders wouldn’t be happy. Regarding remaining funds post-ICO they will be deposited to the distribution account. This isn’t for us personally but will be used by the company to pay for mining/marketing/referrals etc. If the ICO doesn’t sell out it may be necessary to burn some of these coins but again these details wont be finalized until we have a good idea for what demand will be like at ICO.
The right to buy back funds on exchange is in there because it’s been pointed out to us that the price will be most volatile after ICO when the coin gets listed on exchanges and users can dump coins for the first time. We want to integrate merchant tools and stability will be key to making this work. One option that was presented was placing large buy orders on the exchange to create a floor for the price, this is post-ICO however. It’s not our intention to rehash the same funds to artificially inflate the ICO, apart from making it look like it was selling out I couldn’t see any reason for doing that.
I think we obviously haven’t explained our intentions well enough in the whitepaper. I’ll take a look at it again tomorrow and see if I can explain better what we are trying to do and the reasons behind it.
Thanks again for your comments.
I’ve double checked and it’s working here. We’ve tested it on all the major browsers previously. Bare in mind that the privacy notice will only show once per hour to stop it popping up on every page when a user browses through a site. We could reduce this if you think it’s necessary? Also there is a delay of about ten seconds before the script loads. This is to ensure we don’t affect page-load speed times which could have a knock on effect for SEO.
Hi User19 everything is running fine on the system I’ve just double checked locally and I’m finding hashes here. Could you try restarting your PC or refreshing the browser to log in again?
There is a fixed hard cap of 100,000,000 but our intention is to keep the distribution much lower than this unless there is overwhelming demand at ICO.
There are currently between 500-1000 users self-mining at any one time. Busiest time of day tends to be between 3pm GMT and 9pm GMT.
It’s one ticket per block. We do this to prevent anyone taking advantage of the system using custom hardware such as ASIC devices. By imposing the one ticket per block for self-miners it means that the rewards are more evenly distributed and there is no advantage to someone running a server farm over someone at home with a laptop.
We really want to stick to being as transparent with users as possible as I think this will benefit the project in the long run. I can understand why webmasters would prefer the code without the privacy notification but we aren’t going to be offering this at any point in the foreseeable future. Offering any kind of code that could be considered stealth mining would open us up to legal and ethical criticism.
We are working to change peoples preconceptions about cryptocurrency mining and notifying users is a big part of that.
The “Made ad-free by JSEcoin” is a great slogan but unfortunately we can’t use it because some publishers are running mining alongside traditional advertising. That is part of the challenge with the privacy notification, it needs to work across all sites for all publishers.
I know this probably isn’t the answer that you guys wanted to hear but I hope I’ve clarified our stance on this.
Hi skorpio, so I checked and your account is in the database, it’s just the password doesn’t match. This means you wont be able to setup another account with the same email address. Did you try adding firstname.lastname@example.org to your email address book and then resetting the password using the “forgot password” link on the login page? It sounds like your email provider may be blocking emails as the account was never confirmed either although I’ve now done this manually.