BFL will not ship by march, that appears true at least.
And how does that appear true? What are you basing your statement on? The fact that the chips are here and in the bumping process. This does not seem so sure for me. He's basing it on the fact that Josh won't take Micon's bet that BFL will deliver to 5 people (who will provide proof of it) by March 15th. I think Josh won't take Micon's bet because he wants to prove that Micon no longer believes BFL to be a scam. |
|
|
|
1) Based on your own accusations of BFL being a scam who will never ship, you should easily win the bet he offered.
2) If you believe your own statements that BFL is a scam, you would likely jump at the chance to win 2000 coins. Why wouldn't you just take his monies?
Like I said, it goes both ways...
But Josh changed the terms of the bet quite a bit. For one thing he changed the end date from this month or Mar 15th to December 31st 2013. Also his device is transparent. He is saying: "No, I will not take your carefully thought out 20BTC bet. Instead I will counter with a different bet with different terms for 100x the amount you offered. And if you don't take it, then you are a liar.". First of all this smells like a bluff. But nonetheless noone is going to take a $50k bet with basically no terms in a couple of posts in a forum thread. It's posturing. It's obvious BS. But I suppose it isn't obvious to everyone. It's obvious BS? So you don't think BFL will ship before the end of 2013 either? If that's the case, I'll take you up on that bet, any BTC amount you want (as long as I have that much). Josh changed the terms of the bet because Micon has been stating that BFL is a scam from the start, saying that they'll never ship. Micon doesn't believe that to be true anymore, and Josh is calling him out on it. At this point, Micon is only willing to bet on WHEN BFL will deliver, not IF they will deliver, attempting to cover up the fact that he was wrong about them being an outright scam. One issue is the length of time coins are locked up. If you set end of 2013 as an end point, as long as BFL doesn't come right out and say it's a scam you end up having your coins out of reach for 10+months even if they don't ship anything and all the customers have abandoned them for other vendors. I understand Josh's reticence to accept March 15th given how badly BFL has done with deadlines in the past, but end of 2013 might be excessive. I agree. Mid-2013 seems reasonable to me (which is why I offered such a bet). Regardless, Micon hasn't come out and said that that was a reason for avoiding Josh's bet yet. OTOH, if Micon was still so sure that BFL was a scam, then he should be jumping at the chance to secure a 100% ROI of 2000 BTC 10 months from now. |
|
|
|
Lmfao a financial expert that takes the equity from their house to buy a virtual currency.
It was a calculated risk, and it paid off. Far better than the people who take equity from their house to buy a new boat IMO! |
|
|
|
1) Based on your own accusations of BFL being a scam who will never ship, you should easily win the bet he offered.
2) If you believe your own statements that BFL is a scam, you would likely jump at the chance to win 2000 coins. Why wouldn't you just take his monies?
Like I said, it goes both ways...
But Josh changed the terms of the bet quite a bit. For one thing he changed the end date from this month or Mar 15th to December 31st 2013. Also his device is transparent. He is saying: "No, I will not take your carefully thought out 20BTC bet. Instead I will counter with a different bet with different terms for 100x the amount you offered. And if you don't take it, then you are a liar.". First of all this smells like a bluff. But nonetheless noone is going to take a $50k bet with basically no terms in a couple of posts in a forum thread. It's posturing. It's obvious BS. But I suppose it isn't obvious to everyone. It's obvious BS? So you don't think BFL will ship before the end of 2013 either? If that's the case, I'll take you up on that bet, any BTC amount you want (as long as I have that much). Josh changed the terms of the bet because Micon has been stating that BFL is a scam from the start, saying that they'll never ship. Micon doesn't believe that to be true anymore, and Josh is calling him out on it. At this point, Micon is only willing to bet on WHEN BFL will deliver, not IF they will deliver, attempting to cover up the fact that he was wrong about them being an outright scam. |
|
|
|
...so when Josh says in early December that they still may ship in late December, then they still have nothing by mid February that doesn't bother you? Why are they still taking orders and advertising all over the place?
It doesn't bother me because it wasn't malicious. He gave his best estimate based on the information he had available. That the engineers took much longer than expected to complete the switch to BGA packaging wasn't his fault or something he could have predicted with certainty, at least as far as I can tell. |
|
|
|
I just have to testify...
I've been lurking along with this thread because I find the technology, software, drama, and bets interesting.
But this Josh guy who is a COO of BFL?
He comes of as a giant tool. If I was a person who had spent money on one of these boxes in advance it would make me very uncomfortable seeing him prance around acting like this.
just my B.02
You know, I kind of felt the same way at first, but I actually appreciate someone who is willing to stand up for their company without worrying about any political-correctness or public-relations garbage... |
|
|
|
4) Josh Zerlan has backed down from a 20 coin bet that is within his posted timeline. This should scare most of you with pre-orders: that the man posting the timeline won't bet 20 coins on the timeline he posted. Oh yeah, and the 2nd independent ASIC maker started mining. Meaning even if BFL did ship on the fairytale timeline that Zerlan is telling, they would come to market 3rd. and remember Josh won't bet on it.
It doesn't scare me. Josh isn't taking your bet on principle. You've been calling BFL a scam all this time, that they were just going to take everyone's money and never deliver anything. And now, it appears you're changing your mind, and you believe BFL WILL deliver something, just that it might be delayed further. Josh wants you to admit that you were wrong about BFL being a scam and that you now only want to bet on how soon they will deliver. So, you're trying to call Josh out on the ship date. Josh is trying to call you out on BFL not being a scam. And neither side is willing to give. You both have valid points that the other side isn't willing to take the bet, because, theoretically, either bet would match the beliefs of both of you. But both of you want the other side to admit that they were wrong about their initial beliefs. I respectfully disagree. 1) based on Josh's own posted timeline, he should easily win the bet I offered. 2) based on JoshZerlan.com, if Josh Zerlan believed his own timeline he would likely jump at the chance to win 20 of my coins. Ask yourself that one - why wouldn't he just take my monies? To counter: 1) Based on your own accusations of BFL being a scam who will never ship, you should easily win the bet he offered. 2) If you believe your own statements that BFL is a scam, you would likely jump at the chance to win 2000 coins. Why wouldn't you just take his monies? Like I said, it goes both ways... |
|
|
|
4) Josh Zerlan has backed down from a 20 coin bet that is within his posted timeline. This should scare most of you with pre-orders: that the man posting the timeline won't bet 20 coins on the timeline he posted. Oh yeah, and the 2nd independent ASIC maker started mining. Meaning even if BFL did ship on the fairytale timeline that Zerlan is telling, they would come to market 3rd. and remember Josh won't bet on it.
It doesn't scare me. Josh isn't taking your bet on principle. You've been calling BFL a scam all this time, that they were just going to take everyone's money and never deliver anything. And now, it appears you're changing your mind, and you believe BFL WILL deliver something, just that it might be delayed further. Josh wants you to admit that you were wrong about BFL being a scam and that you now only want to bet on how soon they will deliver. So, you're trying to call Josh out on the ship date. Josh is trying to call you out on BFL not being a scam. And neither side is willing to give. You both have valid points that the other side isn't willing to take the bet, because, theoretically, either bet would match the beliefs of both of you. But both of you want the other side to admit that they were wrong about their initial beliefs. |
|
|
|
North Korea is like a toddler with a pistol. I don't know when, but someone is going to get hurt.  More like this guy with a pistol. Likes to piss everyone off just because they can.  |
|
|
|
Could someone give a rundown of what happened? Whose 110K premined coins were those? Who started NVC? Why did BTC-e feel it necessary to destroy them? Why have people lost trust in BTC-e?
From my pov: Balthazar makes NVC, and mines 110k coins (for the chain testing i assume) He sends those coins on btc-e as a guarantee fund, and btc-e adds nvc trading Everyone gone crazy "lets ddos those f*ckers, and the pools" (coz the price of nvc was/is higher than ltc) Btc-e felt like destroying those coins for everyone to be ok with it Everyone now asks btc-e to remove nvc trading (coz they didnt catch up when the diff was low enough and losing money(from ltc) Some ask btc-e if it doesnt remove nvc trading, to add the coin that they have more of (search in threads) Some call btc-e and/or Balthazar a scammer for creating and adding this coin in btc-e, even after the "premined" coins destroyed, like its their own exchange and their opinion is a rule for btc-e -end Is Balthazar involved with BTC-e at all? If not, what gave BTC-e the right to destroy his coins? |
|
|
|
|
Could someone give a rundown of what happened? Whose 110K premined coins were those? Who started NVC? Why did BTC-e feel it necessary to destroy them? Why have people lost trust in BTC-e?
|
|
|
|
This thread is precious in the light of all the screaming "deflationary currency prevents spending and will kill the economy!!!".
This, this, this!
It's an interesting psychological situation. Because things become cheaper and cheaper as you go along, you think, "Wow, this car would have cost me 9000 BTC last year, but now I can buy it for only 1500 BTC, that's a steal!" Nevermind that you'd be able to buy it for 375 BTC the next year. |
|
|
|
Market has been quieter than I thought after this announcement.
... I wonder if Monday will be crazy as people get their fiat transfers into gox.
I was thinking the same... I guess my prediction was wrong. Either everyone who wanted to buy had already bought up to this point, or they had already priced reddit accepting Bitcoin into the Bitcoin price. |
|
|
|
If you believe that the US government will keep inflating the dollar, wouldn't it be better to take out a 3% loan in USD? The asset value of your property will inflate substantially versus the principal on your loan over time. Another problem is that people receive their income in dollars (or the currency of whichever country you live in). If you're willing to assume Keynsian economics don't hold with regard to inflation (shouldn't be a hard argument to make in this community and there's a lot of data to support this, especially in the short term), it would probably be hard to keep up with your bitcoin loan payments because it would take increasingly more dollars to pay off your monthly mortgage while your income doesn't compensate for it. I also believe that bitcoin loans will have a pretty high interest rate for the foreseeable future.
As a general rule, you want your debt to be denominated in the same currency as your income. In the long run, I agree that this is probably a needed industry as the bitcoin economy grows.
As they are printing in most MEDCs the inflation will increase so eventually the housing bubble will burst, not only that with high inflation other houshold costs increase and mortgages can no longer be afforded by many, it won't take long for there to be massive foreclosures like we saw in 2008 possibly even bigger and effecting the middle classes, so there will be increased supply, here in the UK the housing bubble is all this country has left along with government Treasury bills / gilts When either of these collapse we will then see the money from the over inflated financial industries start to rain down into the real ecconomy and we will see massive inflation in my oppinion, Interest rates may have to rise but then may be the time to buy and hopefully people will start waking up to the reality of the economic and banking situation and realise bitcoin as viable alternative. I think before housing though we need to see food and other commodities being bought with bitcoin before regular people will consider it as a 'real' currency for large purchases like housing. There's a housing bubble? I thought the 50% reduction in value over the last 4 years was the bubble popping already... |
|
|
|
Did you purposefully link to a blog that accepts Bitcoin donations? |
|
|
|
|
What's the story behind this? Someone else transferred 110,000 NVC to BTC-e, then BTC-e decides to destroy it? Or BTC-e is behind NVC?
|
|
|
|
Not sure what all this apple hating is about, no one likes their censoring and that part makes sense. Although a 5 year old could jailbreak a iphone. When you produce the best phone and have the largest selection of apps, I guess you get jealous haters. Only one android phone even turns a profit these days, you can hardly get upset that a company likes to turn a profit on thier products.
I will start with the fact that Apple's business model for IOS poses a threat to the integrity and security of Bitcoin. Why because if one gives centralized control over computing devices to a single authority by means of DRM, then one has already set the stage for all sort of attacks against Bitcoin, since the security of Bitcoin depends on individual users having complete control over their computing devices. Do not get me wrong I do not expect for example a 51% attack against Bitcoin to work at all, in-spite of the efforts of Apple with IOS or Microsoft with Windows 8 RT. Nevertheless it makes very little sense to me why anyone involved with Bitcoin would want to support a business model that poses such a security threat to Bitcoin. Please state a specific example of how Apple could attack Bitcoin or Bitcoin users. |
|
|
|
I'm don't visit reddit so I have a few Q: Is reddit gold something that a lot of people buy/use/want? Or is it a real small portion of reddit users in the first place?
People can buy premium memberships with reddit gold, or donate reddit gold to other members (which I see happen frequently). A premium membership does carry some nice perks to solve annoyances that one might come across if they are at least a moderate user of the site: http://www.reddit.com/gold/about |
|
|
|
Considering Bitcoin mining is forbidden at the AMD offices, I don't see this happening.
Spending all their time playing video games is probably forbidden as well - what's your point? My point is, I don't see them devoting significant resources to a nascent technology. Gaming is another matter entirely, and arguably contributes more to their bottom line than SHA256 hashing. Furthermore, I imagine spending all your time playing video games is probably forbidden, even at a video game company. Cool, learned a new word today. And yes, I agree with you. I'm just saying that the day will come when Bitcoin isn't so nascent, and AMD will pay attention.  |
|
|
|
|
We're gonna fly right past the 2011 high today...
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
