Well I'm no lawyer in the slightest, but in order to find us out they'd have to do something illegal which would then break the laws they set up because of all the security measures Bitcoin has, so the only way to catch anyone in their country using Bitcoin would be to get rid of the fifth amendment ( I think that's the one that prevents unreasonable search and seizures ) and in doing that they'd stop being any sort of legitimate government. Or they could look at the companies that openly say that they exchange Bitcoin for dollars? That would seem like a pretty obvious start, wouldn't it? And no, the fourth amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizure. The fifth protects against self-incrimination. I don't even live in the US, and I know that. |
|
|
|
Then you are REALLY scamming the investors but scamming the players just a little... There are no "real" bets, only your own bot placing "fake" bets on the website.
As long as the actual payouts are provably fair, why on earth does it matter if people are placing bets manually or using bots? A bot placing bet A doesn't affect the payout of a user placing bet B. |
|
|
|
I'm not quite sure what the uproar is about: Nearly 5 months ago I tried to open the door with him as far as my willingness to cover some, if not all, of the cost of his failed insurance claim. This is the bit you just don't get. It isn't his failed insurance claim, it is your failed insurance claim. |
|
|
|
Through all of this, I was happy to communicate with you, but it quickly became obvious you were attempting to bully us into replacing the cost of your items out-of-pocket with the attitude that it was an obligation, as opposed to a kindness. It is an obligation. The customer paid for an insured delivery. If you failed to provide correct insurance coverage, that is your fault, not the customer's. |
|
|
|
|
Sounds like they could be overheating. Have you tried pointing more fans at them, see if that increases stability?
|
|
|
|
Some parameters will be changed so that escrow funds are never under-funded That is impossible. Unless you simply mean closing any fund which becomes underfunded. |
|
|
|
You made harm to people and you did it on purpose. Just so you haven't forgot: You lured people to trust you without telling them they will lose all their real valuable backed ripple bitcoins (if they had any) when they add the trust towards you. It's scamming.
I didn't directly do harm to people, and no it is not scamming. Wiggle all you want, you knowingly caused harm. It may not be scammy, but it is pretty scummy. And it is nothing like annoucing a security leak in SSL. The equivalent would be that you didn't just announce the leak, you created a page to trash end-users' computers, and tricked them into visiting your site. |
|
|
|
tl;dr: funds will likely be in either an m-of-n wallet so that he needs 2/3 keys to spend the coins or maybe a variation thereof in the case that votes will be tallied by investment size (seems to be more fair). the keys will be held by as-of-yet formalized, independent holders who have a desire to see the project through to fruition AND keeping the fund healthy. we just have to trust Willett to keep 1exodus safe until then. Like I said, he personally controls all the fund. This is a direct donation of money to a single person with no escrow or return guarantees. If that changes in the future, my statement will no longer be true, but right now, it is. |
|
|
|
However, an unhealthy fund can eventually become healthy by continuing to buy GC low and sell GC high! If MasterCoins don't crater, a modestly unhealthy escrow fund still stands a decent chance of getting back to 100% funded This is a logically fallacy, it has an inbuilt assumption that the currency will overall rise in value. You have no way of knowing at any particular point in time whether the value is 'low' or 'high'. If you buy at a certain point, and then the currency diminishes in value further, you have lost. Do you continue to buy, because the currency is now at a new 'low'? You keep doubling down, and without an infinite reserve, you will go bust. |
|
|
|
It appears that my method of funding this project is still quite contentious. I want to address a couple of those issues further: - Some of you seem to think that my own money is not at risk if this project fails. That is not true. If this project fails (probably because somebody else does something similar, but does it better and/or faster), I would return any remaining funds to investors. I would get a partial refund just like everyone else.
But there is no way of guaranteeing that, as you personally control all the funds. - I modeled this fundraiser like a kick-starter, but investors are motivated similarly to angel investors (venture capitalists investing in early stage companies). The risk they are taking is very high, but the potential reward is very high as well.
With Kickstarter, a project has a set funding target, which it must meet to proceed. If a project fails to reach its targets, all funds are returned to the investors. The funds are escrowed by a trusted third party. None of things is true here [/list] |
|
|
|
|
You make not have actually lied at any point, but is clear that you intentionally mislead people in order to prove a point.
And as a result of that, people who trusted you have lost money.
Feeling good about that?
|
|
|
|
What Bitcoin would accomplish well in terms of banking is personal finances. With Bitcoin, I wouldn't have to pay the bank $14 every month to do all my transactions off of my debit card, plus the 1.50 - 2 dollar service charge for every ATM/interac machine. Is that typical for US banks? In the UK, I don't pay any monthly charges to operate my account, or pay for cash withdrawals. Sounds like what you need isn't a new form of currency, but a more competitive banking sector. |
|
|
|
|
One key questions is not: "What is the best hardware in hash/$ terms?", but "What is the best hardware in hash/$ terms that you can actually get now?".
If you have a wait a month (or 2, or 3,...) before a particular piece of hardware would be delivered, that is another month of difficultly rising, and your expected return diminishing.
Every time the difficulty level increases, you will make less money from the same amount of hashing power.
|
|
|
|
|
The very simple rule is: If something seems to good to be true, it probably is.
There is no such thing as a low risk 20% return investment.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
