This is not the way it works: the escrow system is only a trusted party that will notify you instantly when the bitcoins have been sent to your address, and when it does, the seller can no longer take them back. The buyer does not claim the bitcoins from the escrow, the seller releases them instead.
And what if I payed the seller and he decides to not release the bitcoins? You're supposed to do that at the same time, he releases the coin at the time you give him the money. You realize that localbitcoins is made for person to person exchanges where the seller and the buyer meet physically, right? This is the same problem as if the seller sells you a book, but doesn't give it to you when you give him the money, or if you get the book and runs away without giving him the money. The way it happened when I bought bitcoins this way is that I showed the money to the seller, he released the escrow, I received a text message, and I gave him the bills. All that in around one minute. |
|
|
|
We have marketed the escrow in a wrong way - both participants can cancel the "escrow" any time, and bitcoins will be returned to sellers in full - no fees.
What happens to my bitcoins (in escrow) if the buyer states that he payed me but he didn't. There is no way to proove that I didn't get the money (cash) and he may claim the bitcoins. Will these bitcoins be gone forever in the escrow piggy bank? This is not the way it works: the escrow system is only a trusted party that will notify you instantly when the bitcoins have been sent to your address, and when it does, the seller can no longer take them back. The buyer does not claim the bitcoins from the escrow, the seller releases them instead. The advantage is that if you trust localbitcoins.com, you know that when you get the notification the money is on the way to your wallet. That allows for quick transactions where you do not need to wait for confirmations. |
|
|
|
|
I would give it to the next person I initiate to bitcoins: 1LtNJcxrmME1QbjghrNe94ThAjGRuqxomV
|
|
|
|
You should special case three cities in France: "75xxx" postcodes all mean "Paris" (more exactly, "75001" to "75020" plus "75116", but no other "75xxx" postcode exist for physical addresses), "13001" to "13016" are "Marseille", and "69001" to "69009" mean "Lyon" (other "13xxx" and "69xxx" exist for other cities). Those are the three largest cities in France and are split into neighbourhood with their own postcodes, but it makes little sense to list them separately. |
|
|
|
So the correct strategy is to deposit more than the max deposit from the 100 previous depositor?
Well, you also have to ensure that people after you deposit enough to make your investment worthwhile, because you will get a share of only what the next 100 people put in. |
|
|
|
This is how I understood it, so if the next 100 after you deposit 1BTC you are breakeven (less fees) if they deposit more than 1 BTC you win smthg.
No: if the guy just before you deposited 100 BTC and everyone else deposit 1 BTC, then out of the next 100 transactions you'll get 99/199 + 1/100 = 0.5075, minus the fees. Why? It should be 0.01 x 100 = 1 less fees; the previous depositors -100 don't get anything anymore so at time speaking total 128 deposits the first 28 depositing addresses are out of the game so any deposits will be split only by 100. Each new entry gets split between the 100 previous depositors, weighted by the amount they have put in. So if every one before you puts 10 BTC and you only put 1 BTC, you get 1/991 of each deposit, not 1/100, that is a total of 100*10*1/991 ~ 1.009082 BTC minus the fees. And this is the ideal situation. If you put 100 BTC and everyone else put 1 BTC, you get 100/199 of every new deposit, that is, after 100 deposits of 1 BTC, 100*100/199 ~ 50.25 BTC: you loose almost half of the money you put in. For you to win any significant money (say more than 1%), you have either to be near the top of the list, or to make sure people before you put less than you and people after you put more than you at an increasing rate (because they will start to split the new income with you and since they put more than you they get a bigger share than you). |
|
|
|
This is how I understood it, so if the next 100 after you deposit 1BTC you are breakeven (less fees) if they deposit more than 1 BTC you win smthg.
No: if the guy just before you deposited 100 BTC and everyone else deposit 1 BTC, then out of the next 100 transactions you'll get 99/199 + 1/100 = 0.5075, minus the fees. |
|
|
|
Why do the charts stop there? It would be interesting to see how many people receive less than 100%. Also, how much the first addresses, which purportedly belong to the creator of pon-z, have received. As a creator, you can play as much as you want before letting other people in, as all the money you put in is redistributed to the previous players, that is you. The first address seems to have received more than 147 BTC for 1 BTC invested ( http://blockchain.info/address/18DEHVMSfKHJyLmoKEcrorVKpJnzv1DbTJ). The second one, which belongs certainly to the creator as well, has received 231 BTC for 50 BTC ( http://blockchain.info/address/1HsXuUEmdMeBtZAz6oiB3BxBt9HJ2tqtAx). You can bet that number three and four, all above 1 BTC, also belong to the creator, and together have received more than 168 BTC for 54 BTC ( http://blockchain.info/address/1FsARshLM2ek5cfsvAtGf97ejUzYzSWuk9 and http://blockchain.info/address/18DEHVMSfKHJyLmoKEcrorVKpJnzv1DbTJ). I am confident that at least those 4 addresses belong to the creator of pon-z.com, as they also exhibit the pattern of not having been touched at all. This is the case for a few addresses more, then the pattern changes and people get their "wins". So, with only the first four addresses, the creator of pon-z.com has made at least 546 BTC for an investment of 105 BTC. Not bad, eh? Those BTC won't be received by other "players". The fact that you only gain from the next 100 transactions makes it even less profitable than a real pyramiding scheme for participants, except for the first ones, when the new incoming BTC are not split amongst 100 people. |
|
|
|
you would have to find around 155 people to join the system after you to get even.
You only get paid by the next 100 people joining, so that seems impossible? I missed that part! So in fact, if everyone (including you, the 99 people before you and the 100 people after you) all give 1 BTC, you get your money back, minus the fees. So you don't lose much. |
|
|
|
what a great fun that is! I also kicked in some coins, let's see if it beats our casino payout  Is your casino payout that bad? If you start here at rank 90, with you and everyone before having bet 1 BTC (which is not the case, there are some big participations), you would have to find around 155 people to join the system after you to get even. Our global payout for current year is 95.3% while some games like live roulette and live baccarat (97.1% respective 100.2% as of today) have higher payouts. I don't know exactly how you calculated the 155 needed depositors but I believe that 155 is not that many especially knowing that some deposited 50BTC at once. return <= sum(i = 90+1 .. 90+155) (1/i) And as I wrote, this is much below the real number, as here the computation assumes that depositor i gets you 1/i of the share (only the case if noone bet more than 1 BTC before you do, which is obviously not the case). |
|
|
|
I can lend you the 3 BTC if you repay 3.1 BTC within 24 hours, or 3.2 BTC within 48 hours. If you accept the deal, send a payment address here.
Thank you, this is my adress: 17zWAcApRW8kqcmA5Yvc4KwWn13WKh5Nwh Sent, TX is b10ead124074ba715a1716a838e5f5cacb92e88a03050ce2be55442f937ffa51. Where should i send the payback to?
Please send to 12E4WPnRNq9Lg4wXwtPx8Dyj2HwziToVWZ. |
|
|
|
|
I can lend you the 3 BTC if you repay 3.1 BTC within 24 hours, or 3.2 BTC within 48 hours. If you accept the deal, send a payment address here.
|
|
|
|
14x36ktcNuf3CNrkVH1XY7vXwGHb9mCZwF
Sent (TX e200758c47d2e05a7816d9c027182399637b529ae95d71a41752f026602fb3ec). |
|
|
|
I decided that I am going to release a dividend of .2% every day until all shares are sold. This should make it more fair for early investors. The return per week will be higher than 1.4%. So, this should not be a problem.
Does this mean that there will be an extra dividend on Mondays in addition to the .2% daily dividend? If there isn't, then the return per week is exactly 1.4%, not higher. |
|
|
|
you would have to find around 155 people to join the system after you to get even.
thats the fun part of this site  you simply dont have to find 155 people! just sit back and wait. no advertising do be done. you participate on every user which is joining I meant, and you know it, that if less than 155 people join the system after him, he can only lose. And that would be if any of the people before him had put only 1 BTC. This is not the case. In fact, the total of people shares is 649 so far. That simply means that if someone puts 1 BTC into your system right now, and other people after him also put 1 BTC, he must wait until approximately 1100 more BTC are collected before he is even. And of course, the situation is worse for people after him, who have to wait even longer every time. |
|
|
|
1)Garr255 - 189JHV6KPzvnPmjYCGPbvMMmZUWppere7h #2
2)the joint - 17EVRSvdPJGhk7uKHCpY9ghnWnx7j3pPAs #3
3)sadpandatech - 13YmfB6TeLzyCdnwsVZ5MdYVCLnfm5eNGF #4
4)nimda - 1KiZGitw2zEr4uPzZsT7dh7F6e5yoKGvE7 #5
5)Al the Alpaca - 1EWRJ5BeibZxMguujPLzqM8WWiHpFJtLLx #6
6)pirateat40 - 1CR5BadHQt8wd4t98mE4rw9hUfSGQ4ZGDg #19
7)rjk - 17qypELtTKqr716m937wLWbapnFG6i4fyZ #20
8)NothinG - 1BjMLLGrwYk3hrcnSqEUEeGchkx9tiykfY #21
9)PatrickHarnett - 1KwECAhJGr8BPGgn6mezf5Z3jT7vG1HaAZ #27
10)pekv2 - 12NcNYb2oEh6ANo95AakEjPqQdgbcxh4m9 #32
11)unclemantis - 12kM9BocNb5zSG7RMKp9wPxopK5NpayrMZ #34
12)mb300sd - 1HVmv5EtQZtcsFfXe6Crz972BrB1MwsNCM #39
13)rudrigorc2 - 1MSPwixhqiwMLXxw3WXtNjg2nst6qVWhCX #44
14)Brunic - 16Hz2xA4NmAp4CU3Mr9aJy8H9D5XqXupHG #49
15)fatigue - 1Fj4QZbavJeKfagjDqUPFqQ4iJ4bHqFAMG #52
16)Phraust - 15UJrPbxd6ULPJaxASUoWUp6xc473T7mww #88
17)adamstgBit - 15nutdfqcS38hXdZoL7LNz5wBt8Aq4wCUT #89
18)bluefirecorp - 1PsQ8qFp6ZY94gXvFLP4cqcmoLQSDCqLJc #90
19)Drakahn - 1C1UMHsdPxgsWGWBhdaTC47kibJjFgWnhb #91
20)Gladamas - 1FVySmZNZ6LUvz1mKkt9zgRWjBzvkM4Roh #92
21)phantitox - 1GtGFJskG47Q6Q1NFsfMLWfNV9ivabbyab #93
22)John (johnthedong) - 1Cm2ymVqiHA42jv31rtyze684oWTDkreza (instawallet addy, DON't REUSE) #98
23)Keefe - 1BZy1xxwcxQyRZErcYUFke72TSU7cV5Ptf #107
24)Otoh - 1G5apmPvo2iTtmkNWAHTCET7Y842Ufijs8 #110
25)[Tycho] - 1VayNert3x1KzbpzMGt2qdqrAThiRovi8 (please provide TX hash when sending) (tx) #75
26)Dalkore - 12SSYCcvaHadm8Myxb3mUTzyv96VNhyzeZ #67
27)payb.tc - 14no5MUE4ur2gyyEE3BHpHhV82gKm8NLbH #133
28)damnek - 17xbiU6EWdaf74rmwxPv9AQZc1MeKMWh5n #115
29)Tril - 1Xgeo7EQgrk22paxmKVrhNVSmauczL6EE #117
30)Scott J - 18UVSvCAb6QGjPSdiXxveeu56ujmu3kTt4 #118
31)honest bob - 14x3n2ntSAGN4gGvGoLhi6NbUuuoWwvfdL #140
32)giszmo - 1KLYFWyv5aeci2PwJQs9aTRN1JRzDDL96o #143
33)arklan - 1F4j4Lha8BjL4wxwFVbGaQwMJ4Kd1brfXb #145
34)dooglus - 1BooBz2AEwUd6JepB7NhNsnAe58Q6obpcu #159
35)riX - 155gBnpiBQcpnP6coTX6V7znSK3G73uNjK #160
36)RyNinDaCleM - 1Bgi9fX1TD9cnuzBvWGLfm7D7sNVEq96UU #175
37)hongus - 1APyqdvGMvjfEMPKCo3oHSJ4CkJuXhTCy1 #251
38)flatfly - 1337sfeChyyzZLzdHLewXzcaAaJSNTM893 #256
39)URSAY - 1MzjNVW8z5SuMsGPgQfWZoyKaxsc1VkLXh #261
40)nckrazze - 111mamKazi1ofZ854rKTcAxhTVuGDPhhL #270
41)TYDIRocks - 1PowhrA8kxnn9UBj2ESg7GQzkwTpcg44zm #280
42)Gyrsur - 1FSfmWAMUsuBzUTrXgKaTE9TsSjJw1knvw #281
43)OneEyed - 1MJS3FuUrWmyfvvRnm5gUYvpuFkYDzxCP4 #286 in possesion
...
101) Return to Sender - 18dktRf1EYbyaYTkSSZJiacBmCemxwWdqm #1
Received from Gyrsur. Any taker? |
|
|
|
Who will be the next? Trustable or Scammer? 1MJS3FuUrWmyfvvRnm5gUYvpuFkYDzxCP4 |
|
|
|
what a great fun that is! I also kicked in some coins, let's see if it beats our casino payout Is your casino payout that bad? If you start here at rank 90, with you and everyone before having bet 1 BTC (which is not the case, there are some big participations), you would have to find around 155 people to join the system after you to get even. |
|
|
|
I found out that "any lossless compression algorithm, provided it makes some inputs smaller (as the name compression suggests), will also make some other inputs larger."
It all makes perfect sense in hindsight, with the pigeonhole principle, etc.
And did you know that you could make zip files containing themselves? http://research.swtch.com/zip |
|
|
|
This stuff never gets old |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
