|
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt."
"You know how dumb the average guy is, right? Well, mathematically, by definition, half of them are even dumber than that."
|
|
|
|
|
Amazing: there are 17 comments right now, eight of which are written by "RSchmidt" and are extremely negative and misleading. What a stubborn guy. If you can spare a minute, share your own experience in the comments. I suggest not responding to RSchmidt at all, simply provide your perspective on the article and Bitcoin in general.
|
|
|
|
This has been touched upon in various threads, I'd like to discuss it in more detail. Transaction fees are currently a negligible fraction of the miner's income, it's all about the block reward. There are presently 7200 coins scooped up every day, soon to be halved to 3600. Assuming most miners will not want to mine at a loss in the long term, and assuming they expect a reasonable period of return on investment of say one year, they will only purchase up to 3600*365 = 1.3 million coins worth of equipment and electricity. This is the maximum value of mining equipment in the world, assuming mostly rational decisions are made. Anyone wanting to stage a disruption of the network (aka >50% "attack") will need to spend roughly that much on their mining equipment and electricity. This is the best-case scenario, where the attacker relies on best publicly available mining technology, instead of investing into development of their own technology. All the talk about ASICs making the network more secure is irrelevant: whatever currently available best technology is (GPUs, FPGA, ASICs,  ) - the attacker needs to spend an equivalent of roughly one or two million coins to stage an attack (or more precisely, a disruption). One caveat is that some miners might be investing gambling based on expectations of future value of coins, so their equipment and electricity would cost somewhat more in fiat, but I'd be surprised if this plays a big role. What do you think? |
|
|
|
|
Lots of confusion regarding network strength, security, and >50% attacks. Things are simple: mining is currently worth 7200 coins per day. Soon it will be worth 3600 coins per day. Unless people are willing to mine at a loss, this is roughly what it takes to take over the network.
EDIT: honest miners expect ROI within some reasonable timeframe, say one year. Multiply 3600 coins by 365, and you get 1.3M coins. Anyone willing to invest that much into an efficient equipment will be able to disrupt the network. This will always be the case, regardless of hash rate, ASICs or any new technologies, etc. Simply, an attacker buys the same equipment honest miners are using, and start mining.
|
|
|
|
|
What card? I haven't seen any cards yet.
|
|
|
|
Update:we will begin processing account closures and returning bitcoin later today.
Have you been contacted by GLBSE regarding claim tickets or closure in general? Don't forget the spam folder, just in case. |
|
|
|
...
I was kind of surprised to see Spinner is not the most successful according to the market numbers.
...
The public market numbers just show how many have downloaded the app. The numbers do not show how many still have it on their device, or whether they use it. Spinner was not around during the big bubble last year, as it was made public some time in November 2011. My guess is that many entered and left during the bubble. Jan, out of curiosity - can you tell how many unique devices connect to your servers? |
|
|
|
From the current GLBSE web page: Update:we will begin processing account closures and returning bitcoin later today.
|
|
|
|
Fucking liars.
I have had my demand in for over 8 days providing all the information this latest line of garbage is spewing for all of my assets to be paid out immediately.
Nefario and all the other criminals who own this exchange are now in debt to me, and I demand payment in full. You have been served notice publicly, and have all the records privately.
I hold every owner of GLBSE the holding company equally liable, being the first rat off the sinking ship with your words does not excuse this obligation.
Aww look at Loup get all pissy about his monopoly shares on GLBSE getting held up. Maybe next time you won't send your money/bitcoin to an unregulated stock exchange in which the owner doesn't know the meaning of the word "arbitrage". Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmPD_YSQ--kWe need more clowns like you. Please bring the whole troop so we can have another good laugh after laugh.  Geez smoothster- I though we were friends, being as how we both fight for justice and integrity and the honest way of doing things and all. Truth be told, I don't expect to see a single thing back from the next greatest rip-off in bitcoin history. I'm just pointing out an obligation, because I finally got stung (a little bit, 208.5 btc, the family is still able to afford groceries, thanks for worrying) in one of these. Yet another nail in the coffin of any possible use for bitcoin other than funding drug purchases on silkroad and funding anal lube for the "customers" of all the genius businessmen here. Get ready for it kids, bitcoin is going down the path of specialized criminal enterprise so fast it outstrips belief. The next big disaster is already out there- BFL's and the massive pre-order, that will end up getting the royal shaft in about 30 days. Of course, my bets against their delivery were all on GLBSE, so I won't get to enjoy a glass of bubbly celebrating that particular premonition. Let's just wrap this joke up and call it finished. It was an experiment in what an unregulated currency could do to save mankind from his ugly, brutish and short self, and all we have done is prove that all most people want to do is prey on one another to satisfy their own greed. Bitcoin business is really little more than a collection of blood-sucking leeches who have the technical chops to wrap their confidence games in crypto-technical mumbo jumbo, and play the mark by sounding like they actually give a damn about fixing the economic reality of our world. But in the end, all we find is a bunch of petty gangsters who would sell their mothers for the next tin coin. Bitcoin works just fine for me. I am still able to, just like I was able to do it in previous months, use it to transfer money internationally. I still have some savings. No one has scammed me yet. Any coins I have invested are coins I can afford to lose. Things you complain about are simply a consequence of Bitcoin being new, obscure, and unregulated. All of this will get better. Quit whining, and start using coins. It's a great technology. |
|
|
|
You can speculate if robbing a bank is legal, but its not prudent to assume it might be.
I've seen bank robbers arrested, tried, and jailed. I've never seen a bitcoin miner collecting initial funds via GLBSE having any legal troubles. Not saying it won't happen, just saying it never happened. |
|
|
|
They've got my annual membership, too. I am eager to see what first steps they will take. |
|
|
|
Please excuse me if these questions have already been answered. I have not read this entire thread.
Was the plan originally to distribute the proceeds from mining with the ASICs to shareholders by paying a dividend (through the exchange)?
Now that the exchange is gone, how would this be expected to work? Could you instead maybe point a proportionally appropriate amount of hashing power at each shareholders' designated pool account?
I'm still interested in buying into this effort if the loss of the exchange can be overcome, and would love to hear how I might be able to do so.
The original plan is in the OP, and Q&A in post #2. As for your other questions, we'll need to wait for GLBSE shareholders to work out their internal issues and provide some mechanism for GLBSE users to claim their ownership of shares with the issuers. |
|
|
|
And get legal advice.
Since you are in the same boat as a lot of other asset issuers, why not pool some money to get one lawyer? I dont mean to get your money back from GLBSE, but to continue running a bitcoin security. Giga was getting legal counsel I believe, you might want to chip in, to get his opinions.
Alternatively, you could save that money and assume its illegal and a bad idea (which is the most likely legal conclusion IMO).
I wouldn't rely on a single lawyer's opinion in such a novel matter. The opinions seem to range from "it's a security and it's illegal" to "it is simply a contract to run computer calculations, and it's perfectly legal" - whatever the case may be, nothing like Bitcoin has happened before. Ian, if you decide you need more input regarding legality, I suggest you contact other Canadian mining funds, specifically James @ Havelock. They are incorporated in Ontario, though, not Alberta. Finally, Bitcoin Foundation is out there, and is collecting membership fees - helping with these kinds of questions is exactly what they are supposed to be doing. Not that I disagree with your post (particularly getting bitcoin foundation involved), but out of curiosity, did whoever claimed "it is simply a contract to run computer calculations, and it's perfectly legal" have any relevant credentials ? I kinda doubt it. While Im not a lawyer myself, and things might be different in Canada, SEC regulation is pretty clear that these kinds of mining bonds are securities. That the bond relates to mining bitcoins rather than mining coal is of no importance. It really is a contract to run calculations, and results of calculations (hashes lower than target) happen to have some market value. Just like numerical modeling of heat exchangers for power plants. This is certainly a reasonable point of view, even if particular court or a regulatory body might come up with a different perspective. If and when I see a court or an SEC ruling (or whatever it is called) naming a particular mining operation in the context of securities, I'll agree that they've interpreted it that way. Until then, we are speculating. |
|
|
|
And get legal advice.
Since you are in the same boat as a lot of other asset issuers, why not pool some money to get one lawyer? I dont mean to get your money back from GLBSE, but to continue running a bitcoin security. Giga was getting legal counsel I believe, you might want to chip in, to get his opinions.
Alternatively, you could save that money and assume its illegal and a bad idea (which is the most likely legal conclusion IMO).
I wouldn't rely on a single lawyer's opinion in such a novel matter. The opinions seem to range from "it's a security and it's illegal" to "it is simply a contract to run computer calculations, and it's perfectly legal" - whatever the case may be, nothing like Bitcoin has happened before. Ian, if you decide you need more input regarding legality, I suggest you contact other Canadian mining funds, specifically James @ Havelock. They are incorporated in Ontario, though, not Alberta. Finally, Bitcoin Foundation is out there, and is collecting membership fees - helping with these kinds of questions is exactly what they are supposed to be doing. |
|
|
|
Do not engage in P2P trading of BAKEWELL
Many people are panicking and offering P2P trades of GLBSE assets.
While it may be tempting to pick up cheap shares, at this time noone has any way to confirm holdings and trades.
I do not care if you both message me, and it is known you bought in on a private sale, etc.
I will not recognize or facilitate anything outside of what officially comes from the GLBSE at this time.
Just to clarify: what I meant was that Bakewell should only recognize whatever comes from GLBSE, and investors can then make arrangements between themselves. Ian, if you are comfortable spending time managing share transfers between investors, that's great. I was thinking that it might be too much (for both logistic and legal reasons), so investors can make arrangements between themselves and not bother you at all. You just keep paying dividends according to the GLBSE information. |
|
|
|
If he wont bring forth evidence, the statement shouldnt even be brought up. Its just conjecture.
It's worse than conjencture. What is the tx id? |
|
|
|
The Dancing Plague (or Dance Epidemic) of 1518 was a case of dancing mania that occurred in Strasbourg, France (then part of the Holy Roman Empire) in July 1518. Numerous people took to dancing for days without rest, and, over the period of about one month, most of the people died from heart attack, stroke, or exhaustion.
|
|
|
|
Pirate asks for AML info before he'll give the money up. Never gives the money up.
Nefario asks for AML info before he'll give the money up. (predictable result goes here)
Why are you stating that Nefario asks for AML info? All I've seen is the GLBSE statement posted today on their Web site saying that if you are willing them to share your email, user name, and a btc address with the issuers, you can continue your relationship with the issuers (presumably based on claim codes GLBSE will provide). That's all the information available as of today. No need to spread FUD. Users will be able to collect deposits only after submitting identity info.
Identity meaning what exactly? Will my login credentials and deposit address suffice? MtGox-style AML documents. This contradicts what Nefario put on the home page: Q:I'm a GLBSE user, what about my assets and my bitcoin?
You will be able to get back your bitcoin, and if you want to reveal your username, email, and a bitcoin address to accept payments with, you can continue your relationship with the issuer of any assets you hold.
|
|
|
|
A sympathetic judge might agree. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
