how lucky him, make 100x profit from bitcoin's increasing price really envy with early adopters of bitcoin  Don't be envious. Get off your ass and help build the network like he did. No work = No reward I wouldn't say that he so much help build the network, but rather bought when the price was low. Him buying coins did not help secure the network in any way. |
|
|
|
This is an idea for children.
Do not put down children like that. My eight year old daughter would understand why this is stupid idea. This is an idea for infant cry babies. I don't think an 8 year old could grasp the concept of money being fungible very well. This is especially true if the consequences of this were not explained to her. I would doubt that someone that young could make the connection that "banning" coins of one person/entity would put everyone's coins at risk. |
|
|
|
I wouldn't use them for too high of volume. After seeing some of those stories, I definitely figured it best not to be a liquidity provider there. And I prefer to deal in cash only -- P2P and not through the site directly.
Local bitcoins does allow you to meet to do face to face transactions that are not part of their escrow service. |
|
|
|
Those claiming the e-mails are lost are political animals, not IT people, so they didn't realize that the e-mails in question still exist, and probably in several places. I work for a relatively small county government as well as the State of Georgia. I have email accounts with them as well as the US Department of Defense and of course my personal account from my ISP. Not a single email I send or receive resides on the hard drive of any computer I use. They are received and stored on mail servers that stand alone from the other computers. They all have back up systems as well, kind of like Carbonite or other similar services. There is no way any of the emails can be lost unless a failure of several components of the system all crash simultaneously or IT professionals intentionally delete them, a process that involves more than hitting the "delete" button. Accidentally deleted data, including mail traffic, on those drives can usually be retrieved with very little effort according to the IT guys I have asked. And to expect anyone to believe that 2 whole years worth of traffic was lost is just incredible. This story is so much bullshit. The issue is that, at the time that her hard drive crashed the emails were stored on "tape" backups that have a limited amount of storage capacity. These backups held all of the emails at the IRS. What should have been done is the data from the temporary tape backups should have been used to recover her lost emails when her computer crashed. They were not used and the data was eventually overwritten. |
|
|
|
I had talked about this before and every seller should be able to pay an additional fee of 1% to prevent all unauthorized transactions. This will solve 99% of all chargebacks. PayPal then calls up the buyer and verifies the buyer made the transaction. Seller has absolutely no responsibility for unauthorized transactions. Seller still has to deal with "not sending disputes" and "description not matches."
But the majority of scams are the unauthorized.
I would say that unauthorized scams are that way because it is simply the easiest. It requires the least amount of proof and the least amount of work. If this kind of feature were to be implemented then we would likely see other types of dispute scams. I would also argue that paypal would likely charge more then 1% for this kind of feature. They would need to keep an audit-able log of each time they talk to someone. I would say that it would take, at minimum 5 mines for the agent to verify that they are in fact speaking to the customer and verify that the customer authorizes the transaction. I think that most paypal transactions are relatively small (<$100) so I don't think that paypal would want to be making this little on something that cannot be done with automation. Another issue is that I believe that the FCRA (fair credit reporting act) allows people to dispute credit transactions after the fact. If a customer was to successfully dispute a transaction that could not be reversed to the seller then paypal would have to take the loss. |
|
|
|
+1 for keepass. It is free, user-friendly, open source, and you can make random strong passwords with it.  If you lose your credentials to your keepass then you will lose your credentials to everything. If your keepass file somehow gets corrupted or otherwise inaccessible then you will lose access to everything. You can always write all your password down on a piece of paper and place it somewhere which is secure. Thats why its always good to backup the database from time to time on a cloud like MEGA Exactly. You should always backup all your important files (bitcoin wallet, password lists in keepass, etc) as your computer can fail at any second. Many people look to cloud storage for this. IMO this is a horrible idea as your cloud storage account could get hacked at any time and/or the NSA/government could be snooping around in your private information. |
|
|
|
I personally would only use localbitcoin if I met the person in a busy place. I don't trust anyone (meaning web sites or exchanges) with bitcoins. Also, you have to remember that the Govt has its eye on local bitcoin. IF you buy from the wrong person, they will get you for money laundering, although i think they are just using localbitcoin to try to reel in the bigger fish.
All untrue. The government has charged multiple people with violating money laundering charges when they were trading on local bitcoin for large amounts and received high premiums Do you have any proof for this? Links? The only stories I have ever read involved police arresting someone for selling bitcoins after the undercover officers told the seller many times that they were going to use the BTC for illegal purposes. I have never seen a story of anyone being charged for money laundering directly. So unless you have credible links you are just repeating rumors and spreading FUD. I think these cases are one of the same. I think the seller was charging something like a 30% markup on trades. When the police traded with the seller they claimed to be using the BTC illegally, and when the seller did not report this they charged him with a separate crime. IMO this is very bad public policy but still a reality. |
|
|
|
|
This is truly disgusting.
There is no way he should be able to afford such a lavish lifestyle when he lost so much of other people's money. It isn't like he used his expertise to try to protect it. At the very least his incompetence caused his customers to lose their bitcoin, assuming that he did not steal it.
|
|
|
|
Forget Wall Street. On bitcointalk you get better, free, 'round the clock advice!
These forums have advice given by people who are not experts, you have no real way to knowing for sure if they know what they are talking about. A lot of the advice is riddled with conflict of interest. Those so called experts advice is not that much better than advice anyone else would have given you. One must do his own homework before committing any long term investment/action. A financial adviser has a fiduciary duty to give you advice that is appropriate to your situation. |
|
|
|
It seems that coinbase finally implemented a feature that lets you automatically buy back the coins you spend.
I think this is something that a lot of people were waiting for. This way they can spend their bitcoins and not worry about it costing them more over time.
Having it automatically buy coins back for you is much more convenient than having to do so yourself everytime you buy something.
Such a great feature and this is a sign that bitcoin will have a long time increasing its price.. It is great that we can now use bitcoin while keeping money in the bitcoin economy |
|
|
|
Mining is only profitable for hardware sellers - always.
That's not true. I got ROI and a 30% from my mining contract from e-pickaxe. I find that very hard to believe. Right now, they are charging about 8.3 BTC for 1 TH/s, and 1 TH/s is likely to mine less than 6 BTC. I assume your deal was equally as bad. Can you show us your numbers (in BTC)? In November and December I bought 266GH for $8000. That was 10.12BTC at the time. Right now I've got 11.5BTC payed out from them. And they still pay me. 30% was a bit more than the reality I'm about 15% profit. Sorry about that mistake. Right now they would maybe not go break even and there is better deals available. PBmining was they cheapest/GH when I last checked. PBMining is the cheapest, but there are certain people who aren't trusting it yet. I don't like how PBMining locks you in to a 4-5 year contract, even at the low GH/s price. I prefer to keep trading and the like as much as possible. Plus PBMining hasn't shown any pictures of their mining locations to my knowledge, so that's another downer. PBmining is likely some kind of ponzi sceme. I would not at all recommend "investing" with them |
|
|
|
It is cool that you have a list of so many faucets, but have you considered just how much you would make from using faucets?
You're right. But for those who spend a lot of non working/unproductive time online, why not? You get very little amounts, but it's easy and free! Why don't you spend some time singing up for a signature campaign and posting on forums? It would probably be much more profitable and more educational. Well i guess it's just another way, maybe i'll try it. But doesn't that work like a spam incentive? If you post constructively and ask good questions, and listen to answer as to how Bitcoin works then you will not spam. You should simply add to the conversation |
|
|
|
The problem with the NSA searches is....
....that they lied to us, they said explicitly they would not search US citizens except in specific cases and then with a warrant. No more needs be said, except that they are doubling down and intending to continue doing what they've been doing. Hopefully this will be put to a stop the next time the patroit act is to be renewed if it is not put to a stop sooner |
|
|
|
Dust is pretty expensive to send, currently. Not worth it, technically. But, when transaction fees are adjusted in the future, this may not be true. And "dust" may refer to amounts another decimal point or two down.
You cannot actually spend dust as the TX fees would exceed the value of the dust |
|
|
|
Anytime that a hard drive fails in any major corporation (I assume that the government would work the same way in this regard) someone will make an attempt to recover data on the hard drive, it is common for at least some data to be recovered.
From news reports it appears that her Microsoft outlook email account would only keep emails in a user's inbox for a certain amount of time (6 months would be the likely time-frame) after which they would be automatically deleted. If an employee wanted/needed to keep an email for a longer time then they would move them to a personal folder (aka .pst folder/file).
It is common to have compliance requirements to move emails to an archive inbox when they are no longer needed. The "archive inbox" would have emails saved and archived and then deleted from the inbox on a daily basis. This is to be done manually by employees on a periodic basis. The emails that are archived are still accessible if it turns out they will be needed at a later point, the employee can contact the person who has access to the archives with a request and the subject email would be provided. It would generally be against policy to house emails on your computer after the time you no longer need access to an email on a day to day basis.
The answer to the question of would it be possible that these email were really lost would be yes that would be possible. With that being said it would be undeniable that Lerner violated policy by not having her emails sent to the archives for two years. Is this something that she could go to jail for, I am not sure. Is this something she could go to jail for considering that the information contained in the emails could potentially contain information about possible crimes, the chances of jail time are considerably higher. Should she go to jail for this, most likely yes, unless she can provide information that shows she was following direction from someone above her, however even in this situation she should only receive a reduced jail sentence as opposed to no jail at all.
Now, based on your scenario, the likelihood of this, I mean exactly this happening to 6 other employees directly involved in this IRS scandal as pure unlucky coincidence is probable? It would not be that unlikely, but it would mean that all of those employees should face stiff criminal penalties. These employees could still testify about what emails were send/received regarding the additional screening of conservative groups. The threat of jail would give these employees to testify truthfully about what happened. |
|
|
|
Who says it has to be about profit? If someone or some organization is to perform a 51% attack, it's very unlikely they're doing it for profit. Once this occurs, all their btc will also be useless too, so they really only have 1 shot at racking in the profit. If they own 51% of the network, it's much more profitable to mine long term. Rather, a 51% attack will be to maliciously kill off bitcoin.
the world revolves around money, it would have to be done for profit. But bearing in mind that Bitcoin threatens the profitability of several other businesses, someone could be motivated by preserving their current profits.. Imagine something like Western Union -- even if it cost them millions, crushing the crypto movement could still net them a profit in the long run.. That said, I can only imagine the backlash were such a business to ever sponsor such an attack and get caught. It would cost Western Union a lot more then "millions" (or any other attacker) to launch a 51% attack on the network. Assuming that it costs $1,850 per TH/s and a network hashrate of 110 PH/s an attacker would need to spend ~$101 million in order to launch a 51% attack. This would account for less then one years worth of Western Union's revenue, however bitcoin does provide for some of this revenue from trades. Western Union does currently have advantages of being on the correct side of the law as they are a registered money transmitter. With difficulty rapidly increasing it will become rapidly difficult to implement such an attack. Additionally an attacker would need to purchase this capacity in the open market and it should be obvious that someone is going to launch such an attack when the price of miners increases with the additional purchases, this would provide opportunity to somehow defend against a 51% attack. |
|
|
|
Since P2Pool is very small it has a higher variance as it's small size creates a greater chance that it's two week luck will be something other then 100% this can work for or against you
In the long run, both p2pool and big normal pools can have the same amount of payout, I believe p2poool will have a bit higher payout. Why would p2pool have a higher payout? There is nothing to support this (AFAIK) The problem is that when difficulty increases a "luck" of 100% will be less, so if your luck is 90% during one period of difficulty and then 110% luck the next difficulty then your total reward will be less then if you had 95% luck over both difficulty periods (assuming a 20% increase in difficulty). Additionally p2pool does not generally offer any kind of merged mining while most major pools do. |
|
|
|
I think this will just add to confusion as to how much exactly someone is paying or receiving. By having things priced in uBTC or mBTC will make the conversion to these units to BTC (and thus into fiat) very difficult as the conversation rate is not available without some level of research.
Conversion of uBTC or mBTC to BTC is not hard. It's trivial. That's why we're using the metric standards instead of charging in 1/16,384 BTC increments. Converting into fiat does take a little research or knowledge, but using m/uBTC doesn't make this any harder. It is not hard if you know the conversation rate, but you cannot tell the conversation rate from uBTC to mBTC to BTC without some level of research. It is not the same as converting cm to mm to meters |
|
|
|
Martin gale will work on small ammounts on a big balance. Just quit whilst you're ahead and don't get greedy.
Not really, you can also bust on the first few rounds, even if you have a big balance, the risk is actually higher here. This gambling system works so that you must take ever escalating risks to potentially receive a small reward that does not increase with your increased risk. It isn't worth is to use 1BTC to get 1 satoshi. If you actually want to use it to make a decent profit, example, 0.01, you can bust within the first few rounds, variance occurs so you might get a very bad streak immediately. Depending on where you start with your betting then you could very well do essentially this. Your maximum reward will be the amount of your original bet, however you need to double your bet every time time you lose your bet. |
|
|
|
Why localbitcoins dont need KYC ? Moreover they are being used across the continents. Dont they need to adhere by every country's law ?
It is the buyer's responsibility to adhere to KYC/AML laws. Localbitcoins simply connects buyers with sellers and acts as an escrow service. This so it is important to make sure your client is legit and to meet in a public place to trade. And be careful to report in compliance to AML/KYC or that one guy might be the one that was the undercover cop What exactly do you mean by "report in compliance" as you would essentially need a money transmitter license to comply with AML laws/regulations |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
