BurtW's indictment was filed on 2014 oct 07 in the US District Court for Colorado. On the same day, at least three other cryptocurrency related cases were filed in that same court, with the same special agent Arran McWhirter, with the same prosecuting attorney of Michele Korver, all offenses listed as occurring in Boulder County: 14-cr-00398 USA v Burton Wagner 18 USC 1960 Count 1: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business 14-cr-00399 USA v Sean Swanson 18 USC 1960 Count 1: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business 14-cr-00400 USA v Michael Seiler 18 USC 1956 (a)(3)(B) and (C) 18 USC 1960 Count 1: Money Laundering Count 2: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business 14-cr-00401 USA v Katherine Noland and Thomas Noland 18 USC 1956 (a)(3)(B) and (C) 18 USC 1960 18 USC 2 Count 1: Money Laundering (Katherine) Count 2: Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business (Katherine and Thomas) In all four of these indictments, the text of the Operation of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Business count is essentially identical, differing only in the opening sentence naming the time period of the offenses, and in where the offenses occurred. The Money Laundering counts for the latter two cases (Seiler and Noland) specifically mention 'distribution of controlled substances'. Source: US Courts' PACER documentation system https://www.pacer.gov-------------------- By omission of the 'controlled substances' count in BurtW's indictment, I deduce that no drugs are involved in his case. It seems unlikely that these other parties were involved in the Pirate PassThroughs, so BurtW's case is likely unrelated to this. It seems BurtW truly is simply accused of buying and selling Bitcoin. Or rather, operating an unlicensed Bitcoin transmitting business. Funny - I thought transmittal required three parties. While I don't know, I didn't think BurtW did Bitcoin transmittal. Do you think you could possibly post the complains in all these cases, as well as any potentially relevant documents in the BurtW case? (in PDF format) I know that it costs $0.07 per page and I can reimburse you if you want. |
|
|
|
We have had a number of nearly 1 hour blocks today, this is probably what is causing this, plus the fact that the last several days have seen much fewer blocks then we should have. |
|
|
|
It would probably be smart not to sell to this person as he is trying to sell his account, and it is very likely that he repay any loan that he gets PM  What do you mean? I got confused with ur thread! Are u jocking or what? Please try to explain urself better. Regards! I want to sell this account |
|
|
|
|
There have actually been a large number of shill accounts going around saying they just used various scam exchanges, or recommending scam exchanges, or otherwise advertising scam exchanges, or that they will use a scam exchange instead of dealing with someone in the currency exchange section.
They have generally be newbie accounts, although I would not doubt that the OP is a shill for Gemini.com and that there will eventually be scam reports about them
|
|
|
|
You are bidding on the following 15 accounts. This is a package deal. - 6 accounts with 10+ activity/posts - they can reach 50+ activity just by posting and some may be able to reach member status just by posting
- 9 accounts with 5+ activity/posts - they can reach 30+ activity just by posting which would result in them becoming a junior member
All accounts were created in Mid (June to August) 2014. All of the accounts have neutral or positive trust. All accounts were created by me personally, however I have not ever posted any BTC addresses onto any of the accounts. Some of the accounts have had a BTC address on the address field for many months, however this is not an authoritative way to prove ownership. If you can trust me then you should not need to worry about any future dispute in ownership. Starting bid:.01 BTCBuy it now: .15 BTC or .05 BTC above the highest bid, whichever is greater Minimum Bid increment:.005 BTCEnd date and time: March 23 2015 at 9:00 PM forum time I reserve the right to reject bids, even long after you have made them. I will likely not accept bids from users with less then 15 activity, so you may not want to get in a bidding way with a newbie without checking with me first. If you are a newbie with less then 15 activity then I will likely require you to pay your bid in advance (I will refund you if you are not the winner). Payment is due within 24 hours of the end of the auction, if you do not pay in this time then your bid will be invalidated and the accounts will be sold to the next highest bidder who will be responsible for payment within 24 hours of me notifying you that you had won the auction. Be careful of imposters, someone with a similar name may try to contact you with a fake payment address. My UID# is 358020. I will not be held responsible if you sent payment to an imposterHappy bidding! |
|
|
|
Now restocked
1 HERO MEMBER
2 Full Members
4 Members
No scammers, i will catch on to you within your first message.
Escrow Is not worthy of the price amount you either trust me or not.
-snip-
Are you still not accepting escrow? |
|
|
|
If I have many examples when one out of two variables is known and the other is unknown and the output is always the same, then I would think that it would be possible to determine what the unknown variable is. I would think it would be similar to figuring out the private key that was created using a weak RNG.
I would think that someone would essentially use some level of computing power to "guess"/hash what the secret seed is based on the above known variables.
Nope: I must be missing something then. Let's say I (user id 17768) achieve Legendary status next tuesday, when my activity goes from 798 to 812. That means that: 799 <= 775 + conv(substr(sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)), 1, 2), 16, 10) <= 812
24 <= conv(substr(sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)), 1, 2), 16, 10) <= 37
0x18 <= substr(sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)), 1, 2) <= 0x25And by removing the substr(…, 1, 2) part we infer that secretSeed is either: - some word such as sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)) results in any hash starting with 18, or - some word such as sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)) results in any hash starting with 19, or - some word such as sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)) results in any hash starting with 1a, or ... - some word such as sha1(concat('17768',secretSeed)) results in any hash starting with 25. And it isn't difficult to find those 14 possible seeds, right? That's like trying to find the equation of some particular line when you only have one point on the line. You can find an infinite number of possible lines, but there's essentially no chance that you'll find the correct line. And with SHA-1, you won't get any closer to finding the true "line" no matter how many points you have. There are very many possible seeds which would perfectly match the current list of Legendaries, but only one of them will also match all future Legendaries. Well at least I am not the first person to make this mistake. That's like trying to find the equation of some particular line when you only have one point on the line. You can find an infinite number of possible lines, but there's essentially no chance that you'll find the correct line. And with SHA-1, you won't get any closer to finding the true "line" no matter how many points you have. There are very many possible seeds which would perfectly match the current list of Legendaries, but only one of them will also match all future Legendaries. It sounds like a very simplified way of explaining it is that my (and dserrano5's) assumption was that the line is on a 2 demential plane, while in reality, the line is on a three demential plane, the two variables only make up the x and y coordinates (or the x/z, or the y/z but which one shouldn't matter), and that you need the third (missing) variable in order to accurately calculate when future legendary accounts will become legendary.
Out of curiosity, how would someone who can read your code be able to accurately predict when someone will become legendary without the secret seed? |
|
|
|
In theory, if you were to monitor when enough users are promoted to legendary status, it would be possible to reverse engineer what the secret seed is (you would however need to take into consideration that the required activity for each member may not be divisible by 14), although it would probably take more effort/work then it is really worth.
If you can find the secret seed by looking at when people are promoted, then you've (more-or-less) broken SHA-1's preimage resistance. This has never been done before, so if you do it, you should probably publish a paper about it.  This will probably show my newbieness in the world of encryption and cryptography. If I have many examples when one out of two variables is known and the other is unknown and the output is always the same, then I would think that it would be possible to determine what the unknown variable is. I would think it would be similar to figuring out the private key that was created using a weak RNG. I would think that someone would essentially use some level of computing power to "guess"/hash what the secret seed is based on the above known variables. I was under the understanding this is why bitcoin related gambling sites generally have their server seed expire after (usually) 24 hours and have their 'rolls' result in a number that is 4 digits (usually two before and two after a decimal). Although after reading a few wikipedia articles, a few stack exchange answers, and the beginning of a paper (it quickly became more advanced then what I could understand so further reading would have been futile), it sounds like my theory is incorrect. |
|
|
|
|
I don't see what the fact that the account was sold has anything to do with anything. Someone that buys an account needs to follow the same rules as everyone else.
The posts in your thread seem to appear that he has a misunderstanding of what you mean by "fees" - he thinks it is the fee charged by the exchange (or LBC in his specific case) - however the more common 'meaning' of "fees" is the spread between the market rate and the selling rate.
I do agree that he does have a good number of one-liners however he also appears to be actually conversing when he posts. I found a few examples of him posting a one liner, someone responded to his post, and then he responded to the response with another one-liner. It seems that he also does occasionally write a more in-depth post every now and then
|
|
|
|
-snip- Sorry, I found it. But still, you need to know how to read this code ... -snip- update smf_members set ID_POST_GROUP=21 where ID_POST_GROUP=8 and
activity>=775 and activity>=775+conv(substr(sha1(concat(ID_MEMBER,
secretSeed)), 1, 2), 16, 10); The required activity level per user is suitably random for betting, but anyone who can read my code (there are a few such people) will be able to exactly predict when someone will become Legendary, so I don't really recommend it. The problem is that we dont know what the "secretSeed" is, thus a proper prediction on the exact result in only available for those that have access to the full code. We just need to pay off some mod. Question is if that secretSeed is account specific or global. I think I saw that it was specific for each account (but I may be mistaken). The exact amount of activity required to become legendary varies from user to user, however the secret seed is global. In theory, if you were to monitor when enough users are promoted to legendary status, it would be possible to reverse engineer what the secret seed is (you would however need to take into consideration that the required activity for each member may not be divisible by 14), although it would probably take more effort/work then it is really worth. Aha, yes, if the secret seed is global then, as you say, the secret seed is the only missing variable if you track exactly when users become legendary---you'd just have to solve that equation for secretseed. However, you're also right that, uh, who cares? Legendary doesn't get you any further forum rights, as far as I know it's just a cute title. Well there are roughly 440 legendary members (as of when I checked yesterday) and roughly 1880 (as of just now) (both may be off by up to 40), so there is a bit of an additional prestige level to have a legendary account verses having a hero account. You are right though, a legendary account does not have any additional forum permissions or features that are not available to hero accounts. Can I ask you how do you know the secretSeed is univocal for all the forum users? Is it only your supposition or have you asked someone from the staff? That is what a secret seed is, it needs to be the same for multiple people/bets Actually no it doesn't now that I think about it. Although theymos has said that it is possible to reverse engineer when each user will become legendary if you can read his code, which would imply that the secret seed is the same for each person. Also I really don't think it would really be worth the trouble to be creating a new secret seed for each user as there is really nothing at stake and the fact that the client seed (aka the UID #) cannot be changed by the user.
The required activity level per user is suitably random for betting, but anyone who can read my code (there are a few such people) will be able to exactly predict when someone will become Legendary, so I don't really recommend it.
|
|
|
|
|
Why don't you post your username(s) (be sure to post all of the accounts that you own as if one of your accounts is banned then they all get banned) so the community can review your post and potentially give some kind of explanation as to why you were banned.
|
|
|
|
-snip- Sorry, I found it. But still, you need to know how to read this code ... -snip- update smf_members set ID_POST_GROUP=21 where ID_POST_GROUP=8 and
activity>=775 and activity>=775+conv(substr(sha1(concat(ID_MEMBER,
secretSeed)), 1, 2), 16, 10); The required activity level per user is suitably random for betting, but anyone who can read my code (there are a few such people) will be able to exactly predict when someone will become Legendary, so I don't really recommend it. The problem is that we dont know what the "secretSeed" is, thus a proper prediction on the exact result in only available for those that have access to the full code. We just need to pay off some mod. Question is if that secretSeed is account specific or global. I think I saw that it was specific for each account (but I may be mistaken). The exact amount of activity required to become legendary varies from user to user, however the secret seed is global. In theory, if you were to monitor when enough users are promoted to legendary status, it would be possible to reverse engineer what the secret seed is (you would however need to take into consideration that the required activity for each member may not be divisible by 14), although it would probably take more effort/work then it is really worth. This is incorrect lol |
|
|
|
For posting in Off-Topic, when my sig campaign doesnt even pay for off-topic posts.
Why have an off-topic area and ban people for using it.
Banned 14 days Spam post + sig.
I am not sure how you draw the conclusion that you were banned for posting in the off topic section. From the looks of it the red message up top says "Banned for 14 days: Spam post + sig" - or something similar. I imagine that you were banned for insubstantial posts + having a paid signature (the message is just different for some reason). |
|
|
|
Fucker you spoiled my REP. This is a clear warning, post it anywhere you want, you will be dealt with. Karma will deal with you asshole. I never sold any illegitimate key. My MSDN subscription was from my college and not from buyers present here, that is why I didn't sell my admin account dickhead.
You just come out of nowhere and start messing with me -_-
Seriously dude get a life. And stand up to your bullies at school.
Dipshit asshole. I'll talk to theymos about this. Enough is enough. Enough of you nuisance. Also my self moderated thread is not a new one. It was created about a week ago. Check you facts asshole. I sent you this PM. Let it be public. Let everyone know what kind of screwed up personality you are. . Read your EULA. Or google it. I concede that your self-moderated thread is over a week old. It doesn't change much though. I throw back that I did not ruin your reputation. I've made the same comments in threads for other sellers, yet they're still actively running their illegal business. You can ask yourself what you did different from them to get a different result. Any chance you could post a link that backs up the fact that it is against the EULA/TOS to sell MSDN subscriptions like this? |
|
|
|
|
The article says that the $600k was funded completely in bitcoin, however I am sure that people were given the option to send fiat that would be immediately converted to bitcoin, which would make them think they paid in fiat when BitSimple can say that they paid in bitcoin. Not only that the bitcoin related media is not exactly the best source for information as it is generally not made up of journalists with a lot of reporting experience, I would personally consider them mostly to be amateurs.
I would imagine that the $25k theft (assuming that one really was reported to shareholders) was the result of employee theft. They obviously had bank accounts as they would need them to receive bank wires and to send out wires/ACH payments. I am not sure what internal controls were put into place that would prevent these kinds of thefts, and would make it obvious as to who stole money when a theft did occur.
I am not sure how the OP would know that money was sent to DeathAndTaxes without any financial reports.
As for the delay in getting the financial reports to shareholders, I think it is understandable that it is taking a long time as creating GAAP compliant reports is not an easy (nor cheap) task, especially when dealing with such a small company.
|
|
|
|
|
Well it is really not expensive to get your coin graded (only ~$21 plus shipping two ways), so for the most part it costs very little to get your coin graded when compared to the cost/value of the coin.
The good thing about buying ungraded coins is the fact that ungraded coins tend to sell for less then graded ones, even less then a MS-64 coin, which from what I can tell is generally the lowest grade that these coins tend to fetch, so if you pay to get an ungraded coin graded and it gets the worse rating that they tend to get then you make a little money, but you have the chance that it will get a higher grade which would result in the market valuing them at higher prices
|
|
|
|
13.75 BTC
Oh, just realized that you have not got it graded, no interest then, sorry. You do realize that one of these just sold for 20 BTC here by bitmarket.io his asking price was 20 BTC and he seemed to be pretty firm on his price. There were also a number of people who were offering several BTC above your offer. Does anyone know what the latest sale was for one of these via any medium? Last I can recall was the MS67 purchased by Otoh for 19BTC back in August of 2014...
See above. For 20 BTC just today |
|
|
|
Hi, Thanks for making this thread because I had no idea this account was hacked. Someone sold this to me and I've been using it lately just on and off in the community and planned on joining a sig campaign later on. I am happy to give you the account back but im out .1BTC as that's how much I paid for this account. I know I am probably scammed but I guess this is my fault for not doing research on the account and my seller :/ What I wonder though is why you just claimed it stolen but I've had possession for nearly a week?  Contact me and we can work out how to get this back in your possession. Hopefully we can sort this out Best regards Who did you buy the account for? |
|
|
|
|
You forgot about the fact that we are in a free market. Anyone selling anything is going to sell above their costs. Period. They are not acting as a chairity nor is anyone else on the forum (for the most part).
If you think you can sell better coins then you should create better ones and sell them for less.
|
|
|
|
Hmmm .65 is a little high for an 270+ account, several have gone for as little as .3 to .35 recently. Granted they only have neutral trust. You don't need to use any kind of custom trust list to see the dark green trust level do you? Is the account on default trust? Has the account ever been banned? Does the account still have the massive positive trust even after recent changes to the default trust network?
Yea that is pretty much what I was going off of most are going for .3 .35 with no trust at all. Im not quite sure what you mean by custom trust list but I did load the users/transactions into the default trust. Never been banned. As far as I know when I log in on the account the trust is always dark green. How can I check to see if it is on default trust? If you have never made any adjustments to the trust list then it would not be using a custom trust list. If you trust me enough to disclose the identity of the account then you can PM it to me and I would agree not to disclose the identity of the account. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
