I haven't really decided on a price. It's going to cost me some $$$ to pack it properly and ship it. But I'm willing to entertain reasonable prices.

I have a KNCMiner Titan scrypt miner. It's supposed to get 300MH/s, but I've only gotten about 275MH/s. I'm kind of annoyed at it, so I'd like to sell it. I don't have the original packaging, but I'll pack it safely for shipment. It's an early Titan, ordered March 19, shipped September 24.

Is anyone interested?

CAUTION: Someone seems to be impersonating me and possibly trying to get someone to pay them for this miner.

That can be fixed with trivial adjustments to the betting system.
http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/cancellation/

You still need a very large bankroll to win a very small amount of money. But the probability that you will come out ahead can reach around 99% under realistic conditions.

If you haven't made enough to bankroll yourself, that would mean you also couldn't cover the losses if you lost other people's money. What kind of reputation do you think asking other people to lend you money so you can gamble with it is going to give you? What kind of reputation do you think downplaying the risks to your potential investors is going to get you?

Imagine if I said, "Lend me $50,000 so I can go to Vegas and I'll split my winnings with you." You'd think I'm an idiot, wouldn't you? Would you think better of me if I said, "Trust me, I'm a lucky guy. I just don't have the money to stake myself. But I win all the time." Don't I sound like an idiot?

Dude, for your own good, take a step back and look at what you're doing. If you're a scammer, you're one of the worst scammers this forum has ever seen, and that's saying something.

This is a very, very obvious scam. All they're promising to do is take your money. They aren't guaranteeing any particular return, nor are they promising to tell you why or how you lost your money if they decide not to pay it back to you. You would have to be a total moron to send any money to these guys. Their pitch is, quite literally: "Send us some money. Maybe we'll send you back more than you sent us. Or maybe we'll say we lost your money and not tell you how or why. Does that sound good?"

I don't know if you're a scammer or a fool, but on the off chance you're a fool, here's what you're missing: How could you possibly make a good reputation by doing precisely what a scammer would do?

Right, but it's very unlikely that you play for longer periods of time.

That's the whole point. You accept a smaller profit in exchange for a very low chance of loss.

No, that's not true. That's, in fact, extremely unlikely. You can make it as unlikely as you wish, though the amount you win decreases if you do so.

Presumably when you started betting you accepted that if you were unlucky enough to lose 24 times in a row, you would suffer precisely the losses you suffered. To say it didn't work because you were unlucky is absurd. Martingale's job is not to make you lucky, it's to let you choose precisely the risk/reward/loss characteristics you choose. If you got those characteristics, it worked.

Unless you do the math wrong, these systems work perfectly. They let you choose precisely the combinations of risks, reward, and loss you want. If you don't choose them wisely, don't blame the system.

Most likely, it was because you were using the system over and over. This defeats its entire purpose.

The sole purpose of progressive betting systems like Martingale is to accept a low potential profit in exchange for a low probability of losing. If you repeat the system over and over, you increase the potential profit and raise the probability of losing, defeating the sole advantage of such systems.

That actually can happen if the casino isn't sufficiently well financed. If most of the users of a casino or betting system are using progressive betting systems like Martingale, the casino can have many days in a row in which they take small losses. However, so long as they are sufficiently well-funded, eventually one or more of their users will go broke and they will post a huge win that swamps all the small losses they took.

Rational casinos love winners, they generate lots of betting activity. Their expected profit is proportional to the total betting activity.

While that's true, it's useless. You can't control how long a progressive betting system takes. If you're lucky, it will finish very quickly, and you will win. But if it takes a long time, the only way you can stop is by eating your losses.

To use a progressive betting system rationally, you should know before you start precisely what your stopping conditions are. That way, you know very precisely what your odds of winning are and how much you stand to lose.

If you're going to "wing it" and stop betting when you feel like it, don't bother using a betting system. The point of betting systems is to provide you with precise mathematical characteristics that you get to choose -- what your odds or winning are, what the maximum amount you can lose is, and so on. There's no point in going to all the trouble if you're not going to execute to the conclusion.

You will not necessarily eventually hit a very long streak. Progressive systems tell you when to stop, and it is far, far more likely that you will stop before you hit such a long streak.

Progressive systems are bad enough without having to misrepresent the one thing that is actually good about them. The one good thing about progressive betting systems is that you are much more likely to make a profit than suffer a loss.

If you found high risk in progressive betting systems like Martingale then you are doing it very, very wrong. You can make the risk as low as you want with Martingale. That is its whole point. The one actual benefit to progressive betting systems like Martingale is that you can make the risk arbitrarily low. The tradeoff, of course, is that the amount you win gets very, very small relative to the amount that you lose.

The math is what it is. The house always has an edge proportional to the total amount you bet.

sued, arrests
rude asserts
uses traders

<- Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

It's still a 51% attack, it just changes what you need 51% of. To control the Presidency, you need 51% of the electoral college. To control the law, you need 51% of the Supreme Court. For most things, you just need 51% of the population.

That's not quite what I'm trying to say with that quote. What I'm trying to say is that in almost every imaginable system there's a majority of something that can hurt you if it wants to. With Democracy, it's usually the population, but sometimes other things. With Bitcoin, it's the mining power.

The more subtle point is that there are not, and will never be "trustless" systems. There will always be a majority of something that can screw you if it colludes against you. The important thing is to understand precisely what it is that you are trusting, how much damage it can do to you, what its incentives are to betray you, and what you can do if it happens or is in danger of happening.

I'll do my best.

Let me guess ... this was just minutes after you turned 7 BTC into 8 BTC. Amiright?

Except Ripple.

If so, that's a comically absurd plan. You can't distribute value until you create it.

I guess you're going to post this in every Ripple thread.