Hmm... I think you misunderstood (or what I did). I was not suggesting that the company was legally liable. The company does not take the part of the defendant with the employee. I was suggesting that the company can prosecute the employee -- I don't know the terms -- but it comes down to loss of revenue due to defamation of the company's good name (IANAL). This is true for anyone -- if you run a scam and in execution of it claim to be an IBM employee I think IBM can sue you (not that there's generally $ to get). When you rise to a certain level in a company, your actions are implicitly connected to that company regardless of whether you explicitly advertise it or not. Unfortunately MNW did associate (via magazine images, etc)...
No, it was made abundantly clear that the magazine in no way supported Matthew's actions in making the bet. Yes, I noticed that it was mentioned by Vladimir a bunch of posts down. But unfortunately at that time MNW's graphic was photos of the bitcoin mag... It's also not very easy to successfully sue for damage to your business reputation when you're a new business - you need to be able to quantify damages and that's difficult to do when you don't have significant historical financials to help support your claims of loss. The last thing any new company needs is to incur significant legal costs in an action it may lose.
Yes its probably not worth it in this case to actually sue... but that does not mean they do not have a case. I certainly believe that those calling for Matthew to be divested of his equity in Bittalk Media Ltd should disclose whether they currently hold equity in the company and/or whether they will be actively seeking to acquire Matthew's interest should it become available.
I do not have any equity in Bittalk Media Ltd. I will not be seeking equity. I did not put any money in pirate or in MNW's bet. I have made no bets at all. Betting is a zero-sum game; there is no economic value added to the system. I have equity in BITCOINS. In other words, I'm holding BTC in a cold wallet. I'm sick and tired of watching these f*ckups destroy my investment and the greatest mechanism for the transfer of value ever invented.How can I convince a supplier to take Bitcoins if he goes onto Google and these forums and sees Pirate, MNW, exchanges run by web-script-kiddies, and this Romney cr*p? Given that BST existed, what this supplier should be seeing is all the people who attempted to warn people away from BST, culminating in Vanderoy's (successfully resolved) 5000 btc bet, and postings about subsequent legal action against the perp. |
|
|
|
- If there is a security breach and [MtGox] cannot meet withdrawal requests of its customers, what is the withdrawal preference that [MtGox] would follow? Various preferences are:
- - A.) All deposited funds are of equal standing with bitcoins being valued at their market rate at the time of the loss,
- - B.) Withdrawals of USD funds, if not impacted by the breach, are made available to those customers who held a USD balance. in full.
- - Do customer deposits have preference over any other creditor claims? (i.e., a contract stating so such that they don't become unsecured creditors ending up in the same pool as the landlord for office space and hosting bill.)
- - or is there some other approach?
Fiat balances and Bitcoin balances would be accounted separately based on current rules, especially because of the difficulty to give a value to a given balance in Bitcoin (value at current rate or based on depth). This may change as we are discussing with a large insurance company in Japan to get all funds deposited on MtGox insured. This will however be only possible once the Japanese FSA provides its position on Bitcoin - which we expect to happen in the next months.
Your service seems good but of course I am concerned with the legal reachability of a company in Japan (and the extra hassle of overseas fiat transfer). However, its all about balancing this risk against that, so I recently got verified with MtGox. I think "B" should be the fiat option. Essentially, I do not want my fiat to be held as security for people who choose to leave excessive bitcoin on the exchange. This risk makes it hard to hold funds on the exchange. How are the paper wallets physically secured? Hopefully they are not in an envelope in your sock drawer...  |
|
|
|
Looks like the thugs in charge have stomped their little jackboots. Nice job on trashing the only voice that your little magazine had that did any good for promoting itself. Matthew is a character. Always has been, and if played true to the cards he's showing, he always will be. Anyone who took this bet seriously is a prize ass, and deserving of public humiliation. Coming on the heels of Bitscalper, Bitcoinica and pirate, it was only fitting that somebody call attention to the absolute pathetic lemming-like devotion to believing pure bullshit that has become the hallmark of bitcoin.
Hey kids? There is no free lunch. You cannot sustain 7% weekly returns. There is no economic perpetual motion money making machine that pulls bitcoins out of your ass for your amusement. Matthew's big crime was poking fun at you about it. Oh me oh my, what a terrible scoundrel he is. You have pirate raping your entire family to the tune of $5 million dollars, and you want to jump on the shit of the guy who poked a finger in your eye? Lame. You have the bitcoinica incompetents pissing in your drink and still being kowtowed to because they are going to be keynote speakers at this joke of a conference in London.
Get a fucking clue Bitcoin Community!!! Right the fuck now. All of these slick snake oil salesmen who have just invented the newest greatest thing that you should invest in are talking to you for one single reason only- to steal your funds.
Wierd to see this coming from you. You normally take a very hard line. Sure pirate is the bigger criminal. I'm sure people are after him too. But if Matthew had won, it would have been for about 1M dollars I think. Please remember the context where Vanderoy just made a real bet 50k USD and won. The original bet at 10k was not so out of line. I did not bet or think he'd pay. Regardless that does not excuse him. We need zero tolerance for these people. Big or small. I want to pay suppliers in bitcoin. How's that going to happen if they come to these forums and see this cr*p from what seems to be pivotal members of the community? |
|
|
|
Reflecting bad on the company is one thing. Making the company legally liable for the fraud of one of its employees is a whole different thing. The argument is legally bankrupt. It weakens the rest of the complaint and honestly just comes off as silly.
Hmm... I think you misunderstood (or what I did). I was not suggesting that the company was legally liable. The company does not take the part of the defendant with the employee. I was suggesting that the company can prosecute the employee -- I don't know the terms -- but it comes down to loss of revenue due to defamation of the company's good name (IANAL). This is true for anyone -- if you run a scam and in execution of it claim to be an IBM employee I think IBM can sue you (not that there's generally $ to get). When you rise to a certain level in a company, your actions are implicitly connected to that company regardless of whether you explicitly advertise it or not. Unfortunately MNW did associate (via magazine images, etc)... |
|
|
|
|
These are good questions.
Really, what is needed is a white paper describing a belt-and-suspenders approach to securing customer deposits. CampBX has a great opportunity as the last US exchange standing and could really capitalize on that if they provided a comprehensive security document. I really don't think such a document would help hackers much... if it did that would be an indicator that the security had issues (security through obscurity is not true security).
Additional questions:
Are these wallets encrypted?
Are there ANY unencrypted backups of the wallet, hard copies of the private key, etc? If so how are they protected?
How are USD deposits secured?
Are USD/BTC deposits held individually and separately or is there a similar issue to bitfloor where USD on deposit could be used to pay off other losses (operating, or hacking).
(I've been a campBX user for several months now)
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
I'm not willing to share my PMs with Matthew, but I'll confirm that as late as last week he fully expected pirate to pay (I don't know why and didn't ask). This fits with his original post about the community being too quick to label people as scammers (which is what started the bet).
I'm sure he did, but the fact that he wasn't able to follow through on his side of the bet proves that it was just a simple theft. Think of it this way please: IF PIRATE HAD PAID, THEN MNW WOULD HAVE STOLEN NEARLY A MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE COMMUNITY. When you see it that way, you'll realize just how bad his scam really was. He was gambling his entire reputation on the chance of getting a quick million, and he lost. Do you honestly believe that Matthew would have taken people's money if he'd won the bet? If so, you know a different Matthew than I do. 100k USD is a LOT of money. If he really meant to do this he would have registered his intention to not take people's money (say a PGP signed message) privately with a few other trusted individuals, pre-bet. But I STILL would not have let him off the hook. I would believe his intentions were not to scam but still hold him to paying the $. Why? If I make a contract with person A but secretly place a note with person B stating that my contract is void, does that make it void? No. |
|
|
|
That will double plus erase them.
That made me lol. I'm actually waiting for this guy to show his face here again. I can't wait personally. I just hope no one does something stupid like punch him in the face when they see him in London. I would feel really bad if something like that were to happen. Cheers! He is noted for having many sockpuppets so he will just use one of those to troll with. Unfortunately that may be true so we will have to ignore them as well. But countering this is to boycott ALL of his ventures (I think that bitcoin will rapidly outgrow support of ventures run by unknown, unverified individuals -- the pirate ponzi being 1st step). With no source of income his time and interest must be turned elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Matt never made any link to the company and Vlad did post that this had nothing to do with the magazine. Shortly after Matt removed any links to the magazine in his sig and avatar (likely at the urging of the company).
Oh yes he did. On his spreadsheet he had pics of each one of Bitcoin Magazine's issues and links to subscribe. They were of course removed but it made it look like the company was involved in the bet while they were up. Did you honestly believe it was a promotion run by BitTalk Media? Really? Did you make a bet specifically based on this fact? Did you contact the magazine to determine if it was legit? Did you attempt to even clarify with Matt after the links were removed? Even if this went to court (which it wouldn't) a judge would look at the evidence and try to determine what a "reasonable person" would think. Based on the event I don't see how a reasonable person would believe that this was an official promotion by the magazine. It does not matter. He does not hold the position of janitor. It is well understood that as you rise to high positions in companies, (some of) your external actions do reflect on the company as a whole. Like if a judge is caught smoking pot. Like if an editor-in-chief of a magazine -- a construct built solely on words -- cannot be held to his own word. |
|
|
|
Can we start more threads about him?
Didn't you know? The best way to make someone not exist is to avoid the 10+ threads which already exist and then start a NEW ONE. Bonus points if you put the name of person who no longer exists in the title. That will double plus erase them. A method to achieve justice needed to be proposed. This is quite different then the other threads. Please keep your comments here to a "yes" or a "no". You can discuss why on those other threads. |
|
|
|
Are people over-reacting on MNW's bet? Yes, it's getting kinda lame. If I recall correctly, he did say: I'm giving 100% ROI... in the header. Dunno about you but I got my money's worth  . In fact, I got more than 100% of my "investment" back. And no, I didn't promise to 'bet' anything in that Interwebs discussion thread. It kinda concerns me how people started putting in 'bets' (if you can call it that) and the reply-counter shot up like microwave popcorn, and nobody thought to ask for clarification. It would have been this easy: So let me get this straight. If the naval gazer defaults, you're going to send the amount of money that I specify to the address that I specify? And if he doesn't default, I have to pay you said amount? THAT EASY. Gambling addicts annoy me. Get help dudes/dudettes. With cash your word has to be solid. I think they used to say "his word is as good as his deed"... I did not bet so have nothing to gain. Think of all the people who were defrauded by Pirate -- possibly for money they could not afford to lose. MNW's bet gave them hope that he had inside knowledge (that a payment would come). And a hedging strategy. Why prolong the agony? |
|
|
|
|
I am an impartial observer; I neither invested in Pirate or bet with Matthew. There is no rational person or court who would agree with MNW's technical interpretation of his contract. Fundamentally, you cannot call it a "bet" if you don't pay the other side, just like you cannot call it a "contract" if value is not received by both parties. Additionally, an example does not override the fundamental intention of a contract. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind he would have taken the money if he had won.
This forum needs to grow up. Bitcoins are worth 10 USD EACH now. Real money. This garbage tarnishes the reputation of Bitcoin and has extended/doubled the agony of the people defrauded by Pirateat40.
There is only one thing we as a community can do. It is simple.
Matthew N Wright no longer exists.
First put him on ignore, and LEAVE him there.
Do not respond to any of his posts. Do not even acknowledge they exist. Do not read them. Do not read replies that quote him.
[EDIT: he's fired] Do not buy Bitcoin Magazine until Vladimir fires him. PM Vladimir cancelling your subscription (even if no refund is offered) unless he is no longer there. Tell Vladimir that reading his trash is just a waste of your time so he might as well not waste the postage.
Do not post to or read any threads he starts.
Do not use any of his companies or services.
Post a message here if you will support and implement this method of justice so Matthew and other members of the community can see that something is being done. Please keep this posting to a yes or no. You can discuss MNW's behavior on the many other threads.
Matthew N Wright you are not welcome here. We cannot stop you from showing up. We cannot stop your sockpuppets. But when we discover them, they will also go on ignore. Anything you do will wither and die. There is nothing for you here.
Goodbye
|
|
|
|
Mathew I know you regard any serious questions from me as trolling, but are you implying that pirate hasn't paid everyone back because Chaang Noi threw a spanner in the works to win his bet against you?
No. I'm implying that Chaang Noi is actively working -against- pirate paying out, throwing as many spanners, and attempting to convince others to throw -their- spanners in as well, in an attempt to sabotage my bet. Yes. I have witnesses-- the people he tried to convince to do his dirty bidding. Chaang Noi is not the reason why Pirate is not paying back -anyone-, he's the reason why pirate -can't- pay back -everyone-. I'll repeat-- He's actively working against Pirate at every turn so that I will lose my bet. I wonder how the community thinks about that as a "fair" bet. Matthew you need a cereal box education. As in read the box in the morning as you eat your bowl of candy-coated wheat. You see that promotion? See the part where it says "Not open to P&G employees or its affiliates"? Maybe you should consider WHY that might be printed there... When you agreed to a non-trivial bet against people who are to some degree affiliated with BST you essentially guaranteed that they would be working towards a payout on the 10th. Your post. It needs fixing. No, the double score for people who "invested" with Pirate and bet against Matthew is when Matthew loses the bet on the 9th, and Pirate pays out on the 10th. (Not saying I think Pirate will ever pay...) [EDIT] of course if you assume the players really thought all this out it becomes quite a "wall street" like drama. It implies M had a deal and relationship with P that he believed is stronger that of P to the PPT ops. This is one reason why I didn't bet (another reason is that betting is fundamentally zero-sum -- it does not create value like normal economic activity). But getting back to reality -- naw, I don't think these guys really thought it all through I think we're just seeing M's flashy exit from the bitcoin community. |
|
|
|
Borrowing in fiat to loan out bitcoins? SOunds like some nasty exchange-risk there.
1) Borrowing BTC to convert to fiat does not make sense. You can get cheaper loans in fiat without the exchange risk. 2) Borrowing fiat to convert to BTC is also risky for both the lender and borrower. In addition to the 10% APR you need to add the exchange-risk. BTC-USD can easily go up by 50-100% or down by 50% over the next 12 months. If I were someone who borrowed USD at 10% APR from by bank, converted that to BTC, and loaned out the BTC to a business venture that operates using BTC (and not USD), I would probably loan it out for at least 10% + 50-100% APR = 60-110% APR. That way the BTC interest takes into account the USD interest and the BTC-USD risk. 3) Borrowing BTC to use as BTC makes more sense. It is difficult to say what a reasonable APR would be. It really depends on whether BTC-USD is expected to rise or fall over the loan period. IMO the APR should be less than 2), but probably still higher than fiat rates. In summary, because of the exchange-risk component I would NOT consider a BTC loan with and interest rate of 60-110% APR to be usurious. Borrowing in BTC makes sense only when that business needs BTC and not fiat. 2. Is a bit risky but if you are really making significant returns I think you'd start doing it in a small way, eat rice & beans and plow all profits back into your system. 3. Its possible you'd do a bit of 3, but you wouldn't open it up to the nickel & dime forums. You'd tell your business model to one or 2 high bitcoin-worth individuals, get a much better rate, and most importantly, you'd be paying the thing off (reducing the size of the loan) NOT soliciting new investment. But 3 is great if you need to pass tremendous risk onto your investors, or if you are doing a Ponzi. Of course the first becomes the second as soon as some of your investments fail (and you hide that by paying out normally). |
|
|
|
Mathew I know you regard any serious questions from me as trolling, but are you implying that pirate hasn't paid everyone back because Chaang Noi threw a spanner in the works to win his bet against you?
No. I'm implying that Chaang Noi is actively working -against- pirate paying out, throwing as many spanners, and attempting to convince others to throw -their- spanners in as well, in an attempt to sabotage my bet. Yes. I have witnesses-- the people he tried to convince to do his dirty bidding. Chaang Noi is not the reason why Pirate is not paying back -anyone-, he's the reason why pirate -can't- pay back -everyone-. I'll repeat-- He's actively working against Pirate at every turn so that I will lose my bet. I wonder how the community thinks about that as a "fair" bet. Matthew you need a cereal box education. As in read the box in the morning as you eat your bowl of candy-coated wheat. You see that promotion? See the part where it says "Not open to P&G employees or its affiliates"? Maybe you should consider WHY that might be printed there... When you agreed to a non-trivial bet against people who are to some degree affiliated with BST you essentially guaranteed that they would be working towards a payout on the 10th. |
|
|
|
|
No when SD first started I heard the theory that it was so popular because it is used as a mixing service right here on this forum. This author is clearly doing the research.
After all, if you are using a mixing svc you obviously have something to hide, but if you are using SD you are just gambling... but actually IDK whether SD actually mixes... if they don't, they ought to start doing so & maybe get more customers.
|
|
|
|
|
bitcointalk, mtgox its ALL getting hashdotted!!!
>>> >>> >>> import pdb ; import btcwatch; btcwatch.Test()
Opening DB
Db open
Opening Streaming Cnxn to Mt Gox
RECONNECT!
reconnect attempt 1 ws4py failed error: Invalid response
RECONNECT!
reconnect attempt 2 ws4py failed error: Invalid response
RECONNECT!
...
[took 1 minute to connect]
Price is going up...
385.66495938 at 10.8340 USD . .
but come on its got to be you guys -- speculators -- nobody could learn about bitcoin from the Romney event and buy that fast. What's the big excitement? This kind of criminal association is NOT good for bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
Who are you and why will you succeed where others have failed?
|
|
|
|
I almost turned into a bear writing that post, which is rare for someone like me. The thing is that from the perspective of a Bitcoin user who does not do speculative gambling, this recent Pirate phenomenom and the relevancy people give it, is so absolutely disappointing. The whole community seems like it's full of reckless gamblers that don't care about anything other than short term profits. This has actually gotten worse in some ways compared to last year, which is so very disappointing.
I don't think you should be too worried. I think we'll remember the summer of 2012 as the time when the amateurs got washed out. There was clearly going to be a time when the price of a bitcoin grew to the point where it attracted a lot of black hat attention. That time is now :-). There professionals are moving in, both new services, bitinstant for example, and the older services that have been dinged but grew up fast and solidified their operations (Gox for example). Also, WRT upward pressure you only mention bitcoin related items. But do not forget the larger economic situation, in the forefront right now the Euro and the other PIIGS. The Greece situation will come back to the front pages short-medium term. And long term, many other countries USA Germany are very bad WRT debt as well. Also, Bitcoin really saves $ as an international currency, and so the increased trade volumes in Asia, especially in btcchina, is very interesting. Because when buyers in the USA meet the suppliers in China and BOTH already use bitcoin we'll get rapid escalation of BTC velocity (1-2 years out). And the savings will force others in these extremely competitive low margin marketplaces to adopt bitcoin or lose sales. |
|
|
|
|
Whether it is sustainable is irrelevant, HungerCoins can get a lot more a lot quicker by stopping payback. If they were honest they would have posted their identities.
Fellow Bitcoiners: the negative exposure from scams are harming bitcoin! Would you hand cash to a complete stranger? Don't hand it to these guys until they tell us who they are.
|
|
|
|
Your "experiment" won't be that accurate because you are asking lenders to lend to a complete unknown. Few will do that compared to other situations.
Give us a name and address, facebook account. Prove FB by posting "bitcoin hunger games" on your wall.
Or prove you control a bunch of coins.
What does a facebook account really prove? My wife used to be into Farmville, etc and I probably have 10 facebook "accounts" some complete with 100s of friends and at least a history of playing games. Not much but you could look at it and at least separate the long from the short con. Proving a RL to internet mapping to people who can only interact with you via the internet is a fascinating problem... even if he put "bitcoin hunger games" on his company site you could still imagine that the site was hacked... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
