I would be happy to get that much over a couple of years. No need to be greedy.

Have you read this thread?  TradeFortress has disappeared with our money.

Did you try looking on their website?

https://www.coinjar.com/contact

It's not worth his time to get out of his chair and take pictures.

I too am concerned that allowing Ukyo to liquidate the funds is a bit like letting the fox guard the henhouse.  He hasn't disappeared, and he's paid out a whopping 6% of owed funds, and he claims he's working towards repaying everybody.  I have to say I have a bit of trouble taking his word for it, and this whole "I can't tell you what happened to your money without your money disappearing" bit seems just a bit too convenient of an excuse.  I look forward to publicly acknowledging that my fears were unfounded one day, but right now the only person I trust less than Ukyo is TradeFortress.

Maybe we should be looking for someone else to liquidate the assets that can be seized from BTCINVEST/TradeFortress.  Someone either truly trustworthy and impartial, or someone willing to put a significant surety in the hands of a trustworthy third party as insurance against going missing with the seized assets.

I know I'd be willing to pay a reasonable percentage of seized/liquidated assets as payment for service.

Any ideas how we'd go about making this happen?

What we need is a liquidator.  Short of chasing TF personally for what he owns (plan C?), someone who can confiscate some of his assets to distribute to his shareholders sounds like a great idea for a plan B (plan A being TF manning up and doing what's right).

As the person who used to run the exchange upon which a good number of BTCINVEST assets were held, I agree that Ukyo would be in a good position to do this.

If BTCINVEST held assets in weexchange then this also puts Ukyo in a good place to reclaim those assets on behalf of shareholders.

If memory serves, not only did BTCINVEST hold exchange-listed shares, it also held direct shares in AM - and in this case, convincing Friedcat to either liquidate the shares, or give them to Ukyo to liquidate on behalf of BTCINVEST shareholders, would also be a good move IMHO.


Fingers crossed.

I'm not sure it's fair on Friedcat to ask this of him, nor do I think it's the correct thing to do.  Between me as a shareholder in TF's little disaster, and FC, there are two other people that IMO should be stepping up to clean up the mess.  TF, of course is number one, but good luck with that.  And Ukyo (manager of G.ASICMINER-PT?) is number two.  Ukyo is the issuer of the shares that TF held in trust for his investors, not FC.  Ukyo holds AM shares in trust and issues G.ASICMINER-PT shares one-for-one.  If one of Ukyo's shareholders messes up as TF has, it's Ukyo's mess to clean up.  FC has zero relationship to TF.

I'm also not sure what Ukyo means when he says that the G.ASICMINER-PT shares are in a "questionable state".  Either TF owns the shares, held in trust on behalf of his investors, or he doesn't.

So assuming that the shares are real, seems to me that, barring TF actually stepping up and doing anything at all positive (why start now?), then the logical course of action would be to liquidate the shares and distribute the proceeds pro-rata to his shareholders.  Personally I would prefer to take ownership of the shares, but the chances of there ending up fractional shares is probably very high.

This bears repeating and elaborating.

It's not like you go to bed and SHA256 is fine, and you wake up in the morning and it's broken.  The chances of this happening to SHA256 are zero.  The chances of this happening to anything written by you or I that hasn't been reviewed and examined by thousands of brilliant minds is pretty much guaranteed.  

One day a researcher will publish a paper that shows that they can, say for example, drop the size of the brute-force keyspace for creating a collision by an order of magnitude or three.  So instead of SHA256 being 2^256 strong, it will be "only" 2^252 strong.  

Then someone else discovers another flaw that, say, allows them to partially recover the input based on a given hash, such that repeated hashing of messages that differ by a known amount allow an attacker to recover the original message.

In ways such as these, the strength of the algorithm is weakened over time.  But the key point is that it happens over significant time - years.  As soon as the first real dent is made in the strength of SHA256, we can begin discussing what should replace it, and how we move there.

Yes, mining hardware that utilises double-sha256 will be useless (although as was pointed out above, just because SHA256 is broken doesn't mean double-SHA256 is broken).

Such a move will take years.  The first step would probably be to alter the Bitcoin protocol to allow a different hashing method.  This hashing method would not be valid until the majority of miners and clients had moved to the protocol version that supports the new hash method.  Then we enter the time of dual hashing.  Old-style double-SHA256 hashes would be valid, but new style DERP512 hashes would also be equally valid.  After enough time has passed, and enough blocks are mined using DERP512 instead of double-SHA256 (say, 10 to 1) then the network could cut over to only accept the new hashes, and the old miners would be retired.  At least, that's one way to do it.

It would please me no end to log in and withdraw my meagre share of my owed funds.  However I need to reset my 2-factor authentication.  I have sent three emails to weexchange support, plus IMs to Ukyo.


Any chance this will be dealt with, ever?

I don't see how an NFC/Bitcoin implementation is a bad idea.

For the right price, it could replace the smartphone as the Bitcoin tool of choice for day-to-day use.  Given that everyone with an iPhone has trouble using Bitcoin today, this can only be a good thing.

Add encryption, and a safe private-key backup so you can take back the funds as soon as you realise the NFC card is lost and I think you have something that could be quite useful.

I love the idea.

What proof do you have that you and your team are capable of delivering such a project?

People use scrypt because double-sha256 altcoins got royally screwed when people with huge hashing power used that power to mess with the altcoins.  Forking chains, double spends, ramping up the difficulty and then leaving the altcoin with high difficulty and no hashing power, stuff like that.

When litecoin was first introduced it was sold as a cpu-only coin, and being gpu resistant (if memory serves there were no asics back then).  Then people figured out how to gpu-mine scrypt, and bitcoin asics were common, so they rebranded litecoin as asic-resistant.

Of course, litecoin (and scrypt) is only asic-resistant as long as it's not worth the time/money to build an asic to mine it.  Now that litecoin is around US$20, I wouldn't be surprised if there are some enterprising young folk out there working on scrypt asics.

Pretty sure you mean hyperdeflation, not hyperinflation.

Like it or not, the economy still runs on fiat, and people will still look at your bitcoin price in fiat-converted terms.

Don't send anyone your wallet.dat

You should be able to pull up the transaction IDs from your client, and look at the on the blockchain.info website.

If the txIds don't exist on blockchain.info, then they were never sent out.

I bought an ultrabook, and several humble indie bundles.

Effectively, yes.  Mining is a race, winner (of the block) takes all.

Ditto.  And thanks for being honourable and trustworthy.

The only problem I've had with coinjar is slow deposits.  A friend had a problem with a slow order fill (all day) during the crash earlier in the week.

I use bitpiggy as well as coinjar.

฿0.98569374

Stuck in bitfunder, would withdraw to weexchange but lost login details and support ticket not answered.  Besides, weexchange withdrawals seem to be not happening.

1LUU9MtYV3S9yZoCcopGa5SgVErFaaDesH

The big problem with gox is getting your cash out.

The delays are not merely weeks, but months.

These delays have meant that the cost of bitcoin on gox is higher than other exchanges (because there are more buyers than sellers, because sells can't get their money out).

So, gox is shitty place to buy (if you care about price), and a shitty place to sell (if you wish to withdraw your cash).