|
I would find it useful only if it supported login and watchlist, correctly marking threads as read, just like the forum does.
|
|
|
|
At least Facebook Credits were honest and didn't pretend they were a currency. I'm talking about Amazon Coins instead, which are marketed as a currency when they clearly aren't (i.e. they are just "credits"). The difference between a currency and credits is that a currency may be exchanged between different users, while credits always go through the issuer. |
|
|
|
Cosa ne pensate di creare una discussione da mettere in evidenza con la spiegazione, passo per passo, su come avviene la truffa, come funziona, e come difendersi? (chiedere l'escrow quando si è compratori)
Pensate che creerebbe più truffatori, o che creerebbe più persone coscienti, e quindi che saprebbero evitare la truffa?
Non credo serva. In questo caso per esempio (se non ho inteso male) al compratore è stato consigliato di usare un escrow, ma questi si è rifiutato e ha insistito per farsi truffare in ogni caso. Con gente così non puoi fare nulla, non sono salvabili. Non nel breve periodo. Nel lungo periodo, beh, è questione di alzare il livello di istruzione e di cultura in tutto lo stato... |
|
|
|
Of course I'm likely wrong, because I haven't come from finance and all this is still new to me. So please be welcome to point at my mistakes, as I'm always happy to learn. Thank you!
I really didn't mean to sound harsh, sorry! |
|
|
|
What fake currency are you talking about? it sounds like you know something we may not. Tell us!
amazon, for instance? |
|
|
|
this sounds like way too much trouble -- it shows how this scammer tag system is flawed. I am not going to ask every individual who has absolutely nothing to do with this case to remove the tags. If someone can't make this much easier for me, then forget it..
You confirm deserving this tag more and more every post you make... |
|
|
|
If you do not control the change address listed in your TXID on the first page (i.e., the output address that is not mine), please let me know, otherwise your refund will be lost forever.
IMHO it would be wiser to send refunds only to people who explicitly confirm their address: no money risks getting lost, that way. |
|
|
|
Thanks.
You're welcome! : ) I have some new revenue streams that I found, so I feel like I'll be able to get to above a thousand by the time I need to pay back anything.
List them all here, it would certainly help. I don't think so. Normally I don't spend it and I save it up, but I got a computer la few months back and used that to pay for it. I'm good at saving up money if I need to.
This is very good to know! This is my first shot at photography so I'm guessing I couldn't sell any photographs. A lesser one would probably work, but I want to be able to take some really nice photos:).
This is a very wrong misconception. What matters most is the photographer, not the camera. Having an expensive camera is actually a bad thing if you can't use it at full potential, because it is more risky to bring it along (either for theft or for accidents), it is much bigger so you can't sneak it up if you need to, and it will make you look like a fool to other photographers which instead know what they are doing. The best thing you can do is to read photography manuals, buy a cheap camera, and learn with that one. Only later you will have to chose if you wish to upgrade or not. But if you can't take beautiful pictures with a cheap camera, rest assured you won't do it with professional ones either... I'm fine with that. However, to offer it as collateral, aren't I not supposed to use it and give it to the lender as my collateral? If I can use it on the trip and fofer it as the collateral, I would be fine with doing that.
You can offer it as collateral even if you bring it along, you would just be stating "if I can't pay you back in full, I sell the camera and pay you back with that money". This only works if you don't lose or get it stolen, of course. Also, this works best if you buy it 2nd hand, because it would "still" be 2nd hand when you resell it — if you buy it new instead, it will become 2nd hand when you resell it, so it will lose much of its value. (of course if you wisely decide to buy a cheap one, it doesn't really matter, you should already have the money... this only matters if you buy a professional one) |
|
|
|
Yeah, but those 3k LTC nick took could be worth $150k in a year or so.
This is utter speculation and it is completely irrelevant: it matters how much they were worth when he stole them, previous and later values do not matter at all. |
|
|
|
Meanwhile, is it too early to start estimating the next dividends? I would bet on no less than 0.036, possibly even breaking the record, seeing how much the hash rate increased in the last few days. And I feel the divs are not going below 0.03 anymore until competitors roll out their ASICs en masse. What do you think?
Read the last few pages of this thread, there have already been some estimates, which are very different from yours, and are more informed. |
|
|
|
Unlikely. Currently the trend is creating a fake centralised currency which actually isn't even a currency at all since you can't exchange it with other people; i.e. a credits system which trick the users into thinking it's a currency instead. And Facebook already has credits (at least they don't pretend they are something else, AFAIK). I guess it will be something else, completely unrelated. |
|
|
|
|
Is this thread an idiot test?
I'm tempted to put into ignore all the people who posted a non-testnet address...
|
|
|
|
won't it be a dumb idea for a hero member to run off with just a mere 0.1 loan?
Maybe the account was recently sold? So we can assume that a hero account costs much less than 0.1 BTC? That would be... interesting. |
|
|
|
If I can get a moderators word that all these tags will be removed. They're starting to get annoying.
You said you liked all that red. Now you changed idea? Pity... |
|
|
|
However, my parents want me to figure out how to get the for the loan myself, and doing something like this, they know I'll have to pay it back.
That is very wise, I with luck to both you and them. Now I don't have the resources to support you directly, but I can give you some pieces of advice: 1. find a way to increase your "total" to much more than you need. i.e. if you need to pay back $750, if $880 is the maximum amount you expect to gain if everything goes right, then any small accident might hurt your ability to pay back in time. 2. don't trust an altcoin as a source of income: its value might so easily drop to zero - you'd better sell them to buy bitcoins instead, then buy ASICMINER shares with those bitcoins... AM shares would be a much better collateral then a random altcoin 3. no offence, but I doubt you can afford to spend exactly 0$ of your weekly allowance for 9 months: you will need to use part of it. 4. if you have any skill which can be used to gain some money, use it and directly earn some money working 5. do you really need a $650 camera? I mean, are you sure a lesser one isn't fine? Remember you risk it being stolen or lost... i.e. are you such a good photographer you think you have any real chances of selling your pictures? If the answer is no, then IMHO you should aim lower. 6. offer the camera itself as a collateral: unless you lose it, and as long as you bought it second hand (as malevolent wisely pointed out), I guess it shouldn't drop very much in value over 9 months. |
|
|
|
Seriously, how can they charge $300.00 for shipping of something that ships UPS for 20 bucks? Does a naked stripper deliver it? If they were an ebay seller, they would be banned  Frankly, if you put up with it -- you deserve it. +1 |
|
|
|
La truffa è reato, l'ingenuità no.
Questa linea sottile sembra perdersi nei tuoi discorsi. Certo, in quanto non sto parlando di cosa è "legale", parlo di cosa è "moralmente giusto secondo me". Assegnare la colpa al truffato equivale a legittimare la truffa.
No, vedi sotto. Essere truffati non è come comprare droga al parco (che alimenta l'attività illegale) o andare a prostitute (che alimenta il traffico di donne). Cupidigia, si è creduto furbo e fortunato "hahaha soldi facili", e si è giustamente ritrovato con un pugno di mosche.
Giustamente? questi discorsi legittimano la truffa. Se è giusto che una persona si trovi con un pugno di mosche, allora è giusto truffare. Ricordiamoci che qua la vittima è Pitchotto. No. Le vittime sono molteplici, ovvero: Pitchotto, e tutti quelli che come lui in futuro verranno truffati in modo simile. Il suo lasciarsi truffare ha dato modo sia al truffatore stesso, sia ad altri (potenziali o già attivi) truffatori, di notare come questo genere di truffa funzioni. Ergo, continueranno a fare truffe simili, a discapito di altra gente. Se viceversa Pitchotto avesse tenuto il cervello acceso quel minimo che sarebbe bastato a evitare la truffa (ed era veramente poco, sul serio, anche uno stupido se ne sarebbe accorto se solo avesse provato a pensare), il truffatore avrebbe fallito, e dopo un tot di fallimenti avrebbe smesso di provarci - idem per eventuali emuli o "colleghi". La roba strana è che quasi nessuno da solidarietà al truffato...
Non lo trovate un atteggiamento quantomeno curioso?
No, anzi: dato che come ho spiegato lui ha fatto di tutto per farsi truffare, cacciandosi dentro una trappola che più palese di così non si può, trovo anzi una reazione piuttosto rassicurante che non si siano levati cori di solidarietà nei suoi confronti.  Denuncia, sempre e comunque, il lassismo del truffato è la forza del truffatore Almeno su questo concordo appieno. |
|
|
|
A traditional share arrangement isn't possible because the forum is not-for-profit. I could maybe see temporary bonds if the forum ever needed a lot of money quickly, but this is unlikely because there's already a lot of money in reserve.
Thank you for your response! (and for the good work) |
|
|
|
The mechanism is this (and you'll see it in practice on Monday by the looks of it):
If capital rises above 410 days of (MINING) dividends at current difficulty then a dividend is paid to SELLING so as to reduce capital down to 400 days of dividends.
Imagine mining was paying 0.1 dividend per day and there was 40 BTC per mining share of capital. That means there's 400 days of dividends for MINING put aside so they can continue to be paid.
Now imagine difficulty rose so that the daily dividend to MINING fell to 0.095. We still have the same capital but there's now a bit over 421 days of dividends at the new rate. We only need 38 BTC to provide MINING with 400 days cover - so each SELLING share would get a 2 BTC dividend.
MINING gets its dividends every day. SELLING only gets one when difficulty rises so that there's enough capital to pay them a dividend and still keep 400 days to cover MINING's payments. If difficulty falls, stays the same or only rises below a certain amount then SELLING will receive no dividend at all. If difficulty rises fast then SELLING will receive a large dividend.
And it's more complicated in the long-term - as SELLING could receive huge dividends a few times, then difficulty stabilises and it never receives another. Or SELLING could receive nothing for a while - then suddenly difficulty surges and it gets dividended a lot whilst MINING dividends drop to being tiny.
As with ALL mining investments, results depend almost entirely on future difficulty changes. Payouts for MINING will mirror those from identical MH/S in PMBs and also those of shares in fixed mining capacity (those with no reinvestment). Payouts for SELLING (assuming there are some) represent the return of capital once it becomes obvious that the capital isn't needed to continue paying out to MINING.
Ooh this is a great explanation, thank you! (I'm not sure why all of the previous ones confused me) You have definitely build a very interesting system, gg. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
