sense disagree with mope-pr. ALERT! seek clarification?
are you saying its good practice to out people's security vulnerabilities without contacting them first?
I can appreciate the theoretical outlook you're coming from. Here's what happens when you try to contact idiots first: http://www.google.com/search?q=bitdaytrade+redditLook through the posts there, you have actually competent people trying to talk the guy into safety and some strutting imbecile puffing a lot of smoke about the imaginary experts he's hired, the imaginary expertise he has and on and on. Thus I can certainly appreciate the practical outlook of warning the community first. I guess in the end it all comes down to a judgement call. Did the OP think the failed site is administered by sane people likely to take appropiate measures in a timely and effective manner, or did the OP think the failed site is a scam run by patent liars ( Vleisides, Zerlan etc)? Yes I certainly agree its a tough call between protecting the innocent, and tarring and feathering incompetent admins into taking action. I think the way that guy did it was better, "you register, ill show you I can get your pw hash" a good mix of publicly outing them, without actually posting the vulnerability itself letter by letter. (also sorry for MPOE typo on my previous post... autocorrect :/ ) Maybe my opinion is coloured by me having an outstanding order with BFL, but I'm still giving them the benefit of the doubt, in that I understand what they are doing is hard. Maybe that makes me a sucker, time will tell, and if I do lose that money well that will be another one to chalk up to experience. I'm not so naive as to think that every btc 'investment' I make is gonna pay out. Anyway I think thats a different subject! Me I'd have contacted them at first, and *then* when they didn't do anything start escalating. |
|
|
|
this is my joke, see last weekend on wall thread  royalties - 0.1 BTC per post bah im always a week late |
|
|
|
|
sense disagree with mope-pr. ALERT! seek clarification?
are you saying its good practice to out people's security vulnerabilities without contacting them first?
|
|
|
|
I thought Gates came off as quite complimentary with that little statement. Pretty cool.
Edit: Shit! For some reason I thought this thread was only in "Economics" and not the spec forum. I'm outta here.
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE |
|
|
|
Remember whe the price was largely insensitive to bad news, like the fork? Well now it's the opposite; we've had a ton of great news (Paypal, WU, Facebook ex-exec with Zuckerberg's ear, other big VCs at the Techcrunch conference, China, China, China!) and the price is simply coiling up like a spring exactly on the 2013 exponential trendline at a little over $100.
<chart>
Therefore, I estimate 30-40% chance of reaching $200, with 60% confidence on those odds. In other words, "I don't know" leaning toward "No," but that of course also still implies a not-insignificant chance of "Yes." (I voted "I don't know.")
I approve of these opinions! ZB+1 Holding tight for great justice. |
|
|
|
Just like "Million Dollar Homepage", bitcoin is the cat the got the cream.
Yeah sort of. Except MD Homepage is pointless. Bitcoin isn't. THE MOAR YOU KNOW ============== "The cat that got the cream" is an idiomatic expression equivalent to "early mover advantage". It means the first person to do something has the benefit of being the first. You're reply makes no sense, unless I had posted: 'Just like "Million Dollar Homepage", bitcoin is a great idea' ...but I didn't. |
|
|
|
|
Just like "Million Dollar Homepage", bitcoin is the cat the got the cream.
|
|
|
|
I actually believe this is a pretty big problem in the marketing aspect of this thing, and that it's not really a good idea to have the base-unit that everyone uses be 1/21million of the total units ever.
What's funny is that when I explain Bitcoin to people, the first question they have is "So what actually IS a bitcoin", and I have to explain that there's no such thing, that it's just a ledger with entries, and that the base-unit is actually a Satoshi which makes 1 BTC be 100million base-units. Then the reaction to that is usually "Oh so it's like futuristic "credits" from the sci-fi movies", which isn't all that inaccurate really. And people grew up watching all these sci-fi movies where in the future you just have ambiguous "credits", and that's how they relate to it.
If the base-unit was 1-credit (which is just 1 satoshi), then it would solve all these problems. You'd just buy 1million credits for like a dollar, and there would never be a need to adjust any of this stuff. Even if we start calling it mXBT, at some point that's going to become "too expensive" as well. Why not just use the actual base-unit and call the whole thing by its real name?
Thats an interesting point, and it begs the question, why wasnt the satoshi used right from the start? I'm going to go out on a limb and say its for the very same reason (but in reverse) that we are discussing now with regards the move from Bitcoins to micro-bitcoins. If the first block reward had been 50,000,000,000 satoshis (i may have got my zeros wrong. blame wild turkey) then it would have made everything 'seem' worthless. Even more so when mining 50 coins was no big deal. That first pizza would have cost trillions(?) of satoshi. (as it was 10,000 was quite a stretch). So I think it goes to show how important the location of the decimal point is in the perception of things. I know I've certainly switched my QT miner to show mBTC does wonders for the soul! |
|
|
|
|
Just as there is no point in you saying the same thing that's already been said, there is equally no point in restating why it doesn't matter what you think.
Thread's dead baby.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll find those are the unwritten rules that apply to every customer service dept everywhere.
|
|
|
|
What is the most profitable automated trade program?
Your brain. Hah, when it comes to day trading, definitely not my brain  |
|
|
|
I've contacted the Romanian regulatory authorities to find out the contact information of Polimedia SRL and the status of their online betting license.
That's the step #1 according to a lawyer I'm in talks with.
Looking forward to the threads about how some Internet lawyer scammed you out of .5 BTC by pretending to be Internet-paid for his Internet-expertise. You guys do have an online gambling license, right? And you are aware that a limited liability company is not allowed to sell shares of their company, even less so the shares of other companies. If I had shares held in MPEx, I'd consider cashing out. You use the words gamble, and sell. To me that implies money being involved, are you saying that?. Are you sure bitcoin is legally money? |
|
|
|
|
You posted it because you wanted to flex your e-peen.
I'm sure everyone is glad that you decided there time was best spent fixing this.
|
|
|
|
Just gonna throw my two cents into the ring here:
I know a bet was submitted around that time that was rejected that didn't include the power requirement clause. Now why would that bet be rejected? Seems to me that it would be because our good friends at MPOE wanted to scam more people out of money...
As a side note, the 5 GH/s miner has always been listed at the power requirement and performs within the advertised specs. If the bet was made after the announcement of the 5 GH/s miner, then BFL delivered as advertised. If the bet was made prior to the announcement of the 5 GH/s miner, then therein lies the confusion. I don't know much about this bet, as I don't keep up with the betting sites, but I'm just giving food for thought.
Hate to say I told you so, but this type of resolution is exactly thing kind of thing I'd expect from MPEX heh.
How about that 1000btc bet you made? To be fair they said they were honouring it. |
|
|
|
|
ssh dont tell the non satoshis!
|
|
|
|
|
MAybe he just wants to be noticed.
MAYBE ITS ME!
|
|
|
|
|
Its a surprisingly effective way to bump lag it seems. Clark moody shows them all being removed within a second. Re-adding them though consisistently bumps lag by around a second per ask until they have added 100. Then the engine chews through any real trades, lag goes back down and the process gets repeated.
|
|
|
|
|
"They" are indeed. it triggers every time lag goes below about 15 secs.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
