Ich habe eine Vorlage kreiert, und selbst die prüfe ich bei jeder Überweisung neu. Deshalb glaube ich nicht an Fehler in meiner Überweisung. Wenn ich in deinem Hammer-Dokument nach "Aufsicht" suche, finde ich auch den Eintrag in der Zeile mit "RR04" mit der Klartextangabe "Aufsichtsrechtliche Gründe" Ich habe inzwischen Hinweise, dass die polnische Bank selbst die Zusammenarbeit mit gewissen Banken verweigert, die Zahlungen zurück fordern. Da könnte meine Bank dabei sein. |
|
|
|
|
Nach mehrmaligen erfolgreichen Überweisungen an Intersango kam jetzt erstmalig eine "Ablehnung auf Grund von aufsichtsrechtlichen Vorschriften".
Dies ist das Schreiben von meiner norisbank:
####
Folgenden Überweisungsauftrag hat die von ihnen angegebene Bank des Empfängers zurückgegeben:
Rückgabegrund: Ablehnung auf Grund von aufsichtsrechtlichen Vorschriften
Empfänger: Intersango LTD
Empfänger-IBAN: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
BIC: WBKPPLPPXXX
Betrag: EUR 700,00
Verwendungszweck: Intersango Bitcoins XXXXXXXX
####
Dem Schreiben nach hat die polnische Empfängerbank abgelehnt. Dort sind ja auch Mt.Gox und bitcoin-24. Also ein gutes Angriffsziel, um Bitcoins zu behindern. Hat jemand noch andere Informationen?
|
|
|
|
Also wenn du bis 20% akzeptierst, wäre das hier sicher eine gute Alternative, um an Bitcoins zu kommen (mit normalerweise weniger Spread): https://localbitcoins.com/ |
|
|
|
|
Hab' mich versucht darüber im Internet zu informieren, finde fast nur Virus-Informationen.
|
|
|
|
I'd create a schedule for a month and try to stick to it. It'd be a little tempting to do it in one buy. Right now you could buy $1m worth of bitcoins without breaking $13.
History has shown that most of these walls are temporary and can vanish from one second to the other. |
|
|
|
|
I would say to the investor:
1) Be a good guy and invest slowly while stabilizing the price. This includes selling small parts if the price raises too quick (sell the win)
2) Do not build own walls, but buy large parts of suddenly arising big ask walls (could be from a manipulator, that's even better).
3) Perhaps it is not possible for investing this large batches in one month. It it seldom a good idea invest or deinvest large batches at once (but for manipulating the market).
4) Mt.Gox as the market place, perhaps others in addition (for arbitraging and stabilization)
5) I wouldn't use bots
6) I don't know other market place then Mt.Gox for this large amount
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, Matthew isn't this bad guy, I want believe. He prepares a story for his magazine, concerning people who are not able to read carefully enough, and loosing a lot of money this way. And he will not force this people to pay for their incautiousness. I'm so happy...
|
|
|
|
Thank you everyone for showing a huge amount of integrity to bet for your beliefs instead of just arguing, defaming, accusing, aggravating, etc. Many of you truly believe Pirate is a ponzi, many of you are simply utilizing my offer for hedging, and still others are simply happy to take a 50/50 chance bet on anything. Regardless, we are at the 10,000BTC mark and thus I am locking the thread so that no more bets can be received here.
I still believe there is a very high chance that Pirate is just doing a business which we don't understand, and my sinking gut, although questioning his lack of professionalism, lateness, etc, reminds me that no one is perfect and it may all just be a series of bad coincidences. I hope I am right and that I am able to prove to the community once and for all that what we don't understand is not always a scam. If I happen to be wrong, I'm happy to have enjoyed this entertaining time with everyone, and I've actually made quite a lot of new friends (as you can imagine).
The original OP states that the bet ends 3 weeks after August 19, 2012, 04:49:20 PM, so that means it ends on September 9th, 2012, 04:49:20 PM KST (Korean Standard Time, local to me). I think I had mentioned a slightly longer deadline elsewhere on IRC out of confusion (September 12th perhaps?), but this is incorrect as you can clearly see. The bet will also end if Pirate has provided proof of paying back all (not 99.9%) of his obligated debts and interests per agreements, whichever comes first.
Good luck to everyone and thank you for participating in this monumental lesson for all of us.
As I wrote in another topic, pirate could be seen as an honest hedgefund trader, who simply invested inaccurate and with too much leverage, and this failed now (as any other hedgefund could). Perhaps you can not prove pirate guilty, ask Matthew, I think he knows it. And that doesn't make Matthew a better guy, his reputation is nothing worth any more. He thinks he has won his bet, it's a big loss of trust for the Bitcoin community altogether. |
|
|
|
|
First I have created a number of keys in my wallet, as place holder for later use.
Second I encrypted my wallet with a strong password. It's against theft.
Then I saved the wallet file on at least 3 USB sticks, and distributed them over different locations. It's against damage or destruction.
If I wished to use clouds, I would use truecrypt also.
My problem at this time is: How can I transfer the wallet password (with description) to my relatives in case of death of me and my girlfriend (through accident, for example).
|
|
|
|
I think there is no easy solution if the scammer is going to scam you on the spot, eg. run with the cash. This can happen with any traditional trade, not just with bitcoins. The thing is, that the buyer has to understand the system (request the verify code) before he hands out the cash, and he should be safe. Of course the scam can happen other way as well, the seller releases the transaction and the buyer runs after that without giving the money. If you fear this kind of robbery, then probably local trading isn't for you. I myself feel pretty confident doing the trades IRL, but I understand that it is not for everyone.
We will look at the fee policy.
I will use your trading platform, it's fine. I know the risks, and I can cover them. These are simply other risks than on traditional trading platforms, Intersango for example. What I want to say, these risks have to be treated by oneself, you cannot do anything if there is trouble between the traders. |
|
|
|
|
Nice marketplace, made entries for Hannover and Heilbronn in Germany now. Some bugs vanished in the past few weeks. I tried with escrow/transaction and with smartphone with internet connection. Internet is really a hassle, escrow/transaction works very fast and well.
Nevertheless I think 0.5% fee is enough (than 1% fee now). If I'm trading with a real crook, oneself has to find a solution, you can not and will not help (money is given, but escrow not released, for example). This escrow mechanism is very helpful, but not scam proof.
Trading platforms take around 0.5% fee, and they have a lot of trouble with customers and the banking system and e-trading platforms, that you never will have.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure there are indeed investors.
It's obvious we need an award.
And the winner iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis fabrizziop
|
|
|
|
|
What to do now?
Freedom, or save the stupid ...
|
|
|
|
|
Phantastic!
143313% in one year!
Me too, me too!
|
|
|
|
Exactly... costly in terms of reputation for all involved. Would you trust anyone who gave pirateat40 a rating > 1?
Guilt by association.
Perhaps it's only stupidity. But like in politics, stupid or bogus, it's bad either. |
|
|
|
|
Gold is a better competitor to Bitcoin, as in my opinion many western currencies will vanish in a global crash soon.
My prediction is that Bitcoins doubles his value to gold every year (If technology resists, what is unsure).
|
|
|
|
The author described it as "digital hedge fund". From this point of view the "..., +7%, +7%, -100%" becomes realistic, it can happen with every hedge fund. The leverage was simply too high ;-> |
|
|
|
In contract law, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is a general presumption that the parties to a contract will deal with each other honestly, fairly, and in good faith, so as to not destroy the right of the other party or parties to receive the benefits of the contract. It is implied in every contract in order to reinforce the express covenants or promises of the contract. A lawsuit (or a cause of action) based upon the breach of the covenant may arise when one party to the contract attempts to claim the benefit of a technical excuse for breaching the contract, or when he or she uses specific contractual terms in isolation in order to refuse to perform their contractual obligations, despite the general circumstances and understandings between the parties. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith_%28law%29You can't sneak a secret "I win, you lose" clause into a contract and use it to deprive the other party of the benefit of the contract. If you could, every contract would have to be gone over by teams of lawyers and probably include many more pages of carefully-worded terms which would likely require more pages to clarify them. It would be bizarro world. I'm sure, you are right, but of course the -100% was ironic only. What I wanted to say, it was obvious, that 7% a week cannot be earned in some legal or permanent way. So whatever yelling arise, so what? Tell these 7% a week to one of your relatives and see what happens. |
|
|
|
A contract is a contract, even if it does say 3300% interest.
In the real world this interest is no problem: simply print more money. But in the Bitcoin world, you know, it can resist only for some time. So this contract is invalid. At some time I red, pirate could change his interest, so in my opinion he did not default: ... +7% +7% +7% -100% All fine, or not? You better read whatever you read, once more to be sure. The rest of us already know, as we HAVE actually read certain contract terms, but feel free to post more SHIT. Of course you have to defend the obvious ponzi system, because you invested in it. That's a constraint, I feel so sorry for you. Run to the officials, I will ignore you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
