|
"om nom nom"
"Bo knows how to serve."
"Woof Woof"
"STFU and Take this."
"Putting the Talk into your Walk"
"Our box is bigger than your box."
"Taking the Haze out of the Cloud."
"Tsk Tsk Take This."
"Tizzle me once, Tazzle me twice"
|
|
|
|
The architect of dreams (for my upcoming film production company on real life once a plan and paperwork is sorted) Send BTC to my sig please if you like it.  ohh, movies too. "Real Life is but a Fiction on the Internets" Or Fictionless, Adventures in Time. |
|
|
|
"We put the byte back into the bark." This is fun, have to waste another hour or so before the big weekend. |
|
|
|
|
"We backup, when you don't"
|
|
|
|
|
9001 Satisfied and counting...
|
|
|
|
Take thou TLD to TizzyTazzy |
|
|
|
Going to be really amazed because I had no current positions.
|
|
|
|
I also said this can take long, but its not a question of IF only WHEN I like your technical analysis. But, couldn't this be said about anything? It's not IF the world will end, it's WHEN. No, it can't be said about anything. For example: It's not IF BTC_Bear will take it up the ass, it's WHEN. Or: It's not IF everyone will burst into flames, it's WHEN. Not everything is inevitable. LOL, what are we talking about here, fingers, dongs, gerbils, etc... I might be able to narrow the 'TIMEFRAME' for you. But then by your own admission: "not everything is inevitable" would invalidate most Technical Analysis, welcome to the club. Now, about those gerbils. |
|
|
|
What are you talking about? 7% is economically unsustainable. There is a simple, hard, mathematical ceiling to bitcoin, and at 7% a week you double every 10-11 weeks. This is so profitable that it will draw people to create anonymous identities and deposit with pirate. It will cause pirate to close it's doors to new investment. That's not a claim, it's a mathematical certainty. It doesn't really matter how he's doing it, which has nothing to do with what I said. And I think it's pretty obvious from following what he has said above that he is NOT laundering coins. Ah... Ok. Yes, there is a limit, once, the market is saturated. Even cornered markets follow certain rules unless you want to destroy your control over a market and the value of the market itself. |
|
|
|
|
What you call interest doesn't necessarily mean interest. There is a limit to accounts within a certain range. But if others choose to call the payments 'interest' that is on them.
Relating it to stocks, bonds, etc... isn't correct. Something might tell me if he was paying 'interest' on a company bond from the company, it would be very low indeed. But he has no need to issue bonds. Stocks, well the value of them isn't controlled by him but the people buying and selling them. (Usually based off of news and earnings but who knows these days with stocks regularly trading at 400 times earnings.)
Start thinking along the lines of Profit Sharing. Or it could be something completely different like sha256(ponzi(ponzi(sha256(ponzi)))).
Or Sha256(honey(sha256(pot))) lol...
You know someone said somewhere in one of the many posts, follow the money. Not bad advise. Along with know who you give your money to, at least in large quantities.
meh... tired. Night night.
|
|
|
|
I can not show you a case of a prosecution from something involving Bitcoins. There might be one out there but I am unaware of it. So, I guess you're safe. Unless, somebody just wants to drag you through the court system to cost you a lot of money just for the fun of it. Even though, they don't expect to win. Nah... No one does that, correct? |
|
|
|
Bitcoins are as much of a property as WoW Gold, potatoes or USD, you retard. The law doesn’t care what it is, as long as a contract exists.
BTW, don’t you have 25 BTC to repay?
BTC is electrons in a computer mate as far as the law is concerned or a crypto message not money or a possession. So is a CAM file of The Avengers.... So is, USD, GBP, EUR, etc... at banks. The 'cash' is in the bank to pay out from what those 'electrons' say you have in your account. Stop the FUD. Show me where law enforcement has been involved with BTC or shut up. BTC is nothing in the eyes of the law. Under UK law the only thing he is guilty of is Computer Misuse Act for hacking into the systems and modifying the database to cause damages. Do you think if they catch him he will be told to pay 18k BTC back ? LOL. BTC is not money, as much as anyone wants to believe. Would they charge him MtGox exchange rate ? How do you determine BTC exchange rate if there is no central issuer / bank ? Police care more about pirates copying movies than our BTC and hacks ... because of corporate lobbying against file sharing etc. Show me where BTC has gotten law enforcement involved and thus we saw that BTC is recognized as "property". Movies are "intellectual property". What is BTC so far ? Nothing. My point is BTC has a long way to go till legal recognition and till then anyone that steals / hacks them is innocent in eyes of the law. What happened to shakaru guy ? NOTHING, even if people knew his personal details. If they came and called him then he could file for harassment because he stole nothing at all. Guess you haven't been around. There is a 'case' or two involving theft of BTC. They are not that hard to find. What BTC are, is irrelevant. For Example, if BTC was 'Monopoly Money', and you had $5000.00 worth of Monopoly Money that was stolen then that is all LE needs to know. The only possible problem, is if BTC is considered a currency. e.g. If you steal $500 USD dollars and the judge orders you to pay back, you have to give back $500 USD not BTC. NOW, if it is considered a currency, then they don't have to give back the current exchange rate from BTC to 'traditional fiat' but just the BTC. So, if someone steals 100 BTC worth 500 USD but then BTC drops by 50% then when they give it back it is only worth $250. So do they give back the value of what was stolen in a currency or do they give back 'what' was stolen. OFC, I understand why 'you' are so concerned that Law Enforcement doesn't get involved. Don't worry, 22.5 BTC isn't worth the trouble. 87,000 USD just might be though. |
|
|
|
Bitcoins are as much of a property as WoW Gold, potatoes or USD, you retard. The law doesn’t care what it is, as long as a contract exists.
BTW, don’t you have 25 BTC to repay?
BTC is electrons in a computer mate as far as the law is concerned or a crypto message not money or a possession. So is a CAM file of The Avengers.... So is, USD, GBP, EUR, etc... at banks. The 'cash' is in the bank to pay out from what those 'electrons' say you have in your account. |
|
|
|
Incidentally, this is why I never sign NDAs, even though they are sometimes presented as "standard practice".
(Lots of people don't sign them, actually. If you go to a job interview at Google, you will be asked to sign an NDA. But if you don't sign the NDA, you still get the interview.)
An NDA is not needed when the parties are all acting in good faith. And if one of the parties is not acting in good faith, the NDA can be used to stop the good guys from doing what they should be doing.
You can't deny someone the application process. It is protected under the law. You, however, can deny someone the job for not signing a NDA. Edit: But considering the non-business business theme's that go with this community, NDA is pretty irrelevant as to someone signing them. Especially when more than 2 people are protecting information. |
|
|
|
One def on inflation is expanding monetary base. Regardless of price of products if the money supply expands 5% you have 5% inflation.
Another def of inflation is a PERSISTENT RISE in GENERAL LEVEL of prices. One product going up in price isn't inflation. If all products (on average) are rising in price it isn't because of a rise in demand it is because the amount of money has expanded faster than the available goods & services. Each unit of currency is worth less thus is requires more to get same amount of goods.
Scarcity driven price increases isn't inflation. If a war with Iran broke out and oil spiked to $400 per barrel we wouldn't say we have 400% inflation. Scarcity can drive prices up irregardless of inflation just as a lack of demand for a particular product can drive prices down.
The only "debate" on inflation is:
a) inflation = rate of monetary expansion
vs
b) inflation = rate of monetary expansion / rate of economic expansion
Sorry to be a grammar nazi, but everyone here is trying SO HARD to sound smart, and the use of the word irregardless just destroys it in my mind. Sorry to pick on you DeathAndTaxes, others here have done it too. Can we please agree that irregardless is not a word? Whilst 'irregardless' might not be a word in a known dictionary, the mere utterance of the non-word word in a constructed sentence that conveys a comprehension of its intent into an understanding of what is being communicated suffices. Ain't was a non-word word that became a word because of excessive use of the word. So, irregardless of the arguments, it might just be a non-word word that is waiting for inclusion into the great grammatical dictionaries of the time. |
|
|
|
I also said this can take long, but its not a question of IF only WHEN I like your technical analysis. But, couldn't this be said about anything? It's not IF the world will end, it's WHEN. |
|
|
|
Hi all. I'm making my first post here to offer my heartfelt apology to those affected by the security breach at Bitcoinica.
The investment fund I work with first put money into Bitcoinica because I had identified it as a promising start-up in this exciting space. It is my job to find potential investments and conduct related due diligence. In doing so, I learned a lot about bitcoin trading and Bitcoinica.
Like many early stage companies, Bitcoinica experienced growing pains as its success outgrew the capacity of its initial founder to handle alone. It was I who sought out expanded management to help take Bitcoinica forward.
I chose the Bitcoin Consultancy team due to their early involvement with bitcoin, their experience operating an exchange, and their reputations for expertise in online security.
Bitcoin Consultancy was first retained to perform a comprehensive security audit on March 27 and they became owners and operators of Bitcoinica LP on April 24. As General Partner, they have exclusive legal authority to manage the company.
Because their time with the company is relatively short, the present situation is especially challenging. Zhou Tong has continued to assist in an unofficial capacity. I've offered what insights I can based on my knowledge of the business. In spite of the challenges, I know the Bitcoin Consultancy team would like to bring about the best possible outcome.
Per standard practice, Bitcoin Consultancy entered into a non-disclosure agreement which extends to Bitcoinica's proprietary systems and processes. They are free to discuss their role and history with the company.
For those who wish to blame someone, blame me. Perhaps if I'd pushed for expanded management sooner or in a different way, the incident might have been avoided.
For avoidance of confusion, I wish to reiterate Bitcoinica Consultancy's prior statement: Mr. Heaslip is an accounting professional who assisted with company formation. He has his own business interests in New Zealand which are otherwise unrelated. I have facilitated investments in dozens of other companies, including some in the bitcoin space. Those companies are also unrelated.
I’m unable to follow most public postings here, but you can reach me through this forum by private message. Questions about processing of funds should be directed to Bitcoin Consultancy as they alone control that process.
I've advised Bitcoin Consultancy to focus their efforts on processing claims rather than public debate. Please extend them your continued patience.
So I take this as, you or you and others you represent are Venture Capitalists that put Bitcoin Consultancy in charge of your investment. e.g. Cisco but the team you put in charge flubbed up somewhere. Which, if I read right, Bitcoin Consultancy is the Executive Management (CEO's, CFO's, CSO  etc...) and you and/or you and others are the investment group with any rights that you maintained in the agreement. NDA agreements for proprietary material are normal and used often. There are, from what I am aware of, some limits on them when a crime is committed. So I have only one two part question: Has this been reported to the respective locality authorities as a crime being committed in theft of peoples money (or belongings)? and if so, where and what is the report number? Zhou, another noted here, please maintain discretion in you talking (typing) about business matters. Businesses value discretion over many other attributes. No one will include you in meetings or decision making positions if they believe you will go around spouting off. That doesn't mean you can't view your opinions but cut all ties and don't use any inside knowledge in those opinions. In your future, you can be a complete asshole but if you maintain DISCRETION people will tend to trust you. Bitcoin Consultancy, if someone breaks with expected discretion, it doesn't pay to publicly point it out and/or try to shame or embarrass them. It is better to let it go quietly into the night otherwise you will cause a division and create a possible enemy for a long time. Much better is: Zhou has been a innovator, has shown an entrepreneurial spirit that has expanded the knowledge, and has given more outlets for the use of bitcoins. It is unfortunate that we have grown apart and have had some disagreements of direction of management decisions. We respect all that he has done with the community and wish him well in his future projects. Remember: Someone will be writing things about you so it might behoove you to use the BCB method of criticism. |
|
|
|
So, you think that’s what Pirate is doing? I dunno what Pirate is doing. I have formed my opinion from a question I asked in public a long time ago, knowing what I know about markets and his overall idea. Basically, I have formed my own opinion and believe I know exactly what he is doing. Here is my problem: If you figure out a correlation, you don't tell anybody otherwise it doesn't work anymore. Or if it does, it does so less profitably. I propose 'what ifs' that are not negative or nefarious in nature where others simply go to the negative. Sometimes, if it walks like a Duck, quacks like a Duck, it's a Goose. I try to defend those that are getting attacked without evidence. Lynch Mobs run rampant around here. Sometimes it turns out they were right so people use that to squash others. Why is Pirate being attacked? Because he is making an impact on the market and the way it operates and people can't figure out how it is being done. They are not attacking the HYIP guy that stopped paying people because he didn't affect the market in a big way so they don't care. Vlad brought up Occam's Razor which most take to mean: "other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a more complex one." not only is this incorrect it definitely wouldn't apply to finance if it was correct. Imagine apply it to CDS', etc... In practice, the application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion.[1] The razor asserts that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers point out also that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced. ~wikipedia BTW: IF I was to set up a business model, I would design it so 'others' would come to false conclusions by utilizing reliance on the above in order to protect the model and market share. |
|
|
|
I'm not paying interesting interest (see I'm just tired) in fiat, it's in Bitcoins. My lenders do whatever they want with the profits I pay out.
Oh there are doubts what you are paying interest in. Or more accurately that you prefer to have 2-3 orders of magnitude higher cost of capital when denominated in BTC as compared to cost of capital denominated in USD. This much is clear and really indisputable. My statement is still not refuted: there are only two possibilities:
1. The issuer is acting irrationally.
2. The issuer is offloading to "investors" some enormous risks. As such these are not really "investors", but simply gamblers. And they should be really not so much concerned about return on capital as about return of capital.
Is there a third possibility? If yes what it is? If not, is it 1 or 2? P.S. I am aware of only one biz model where 10% per month cost of capital would make sense. It is a ponzi scheme. I'm really not sure what's so hard to understand. His business requires holding on to a ton of bitcoins. It's more bitcoins then he's comfortable risking in his own portfolio. So he would want to offload that risk to people and share the profits with them. So it's a win-win situation. So why does he prefer to borrow btc at such a high rate versus borrowing usd at a lower rate? notme answered it pretty well. Borrowing btc means he returns btc and borrowing usd means he returns usd. So there's no currency risk involved in holding the capital. (They is still currency risk involved if bitcoin price shoots up when he's trying to exchange usd back to bitcoins.) Now think of it in reverse. If you had amazing business idea that can for sure make 10% a week on an almost unlimited amount of usd capital, would you want a usd loan that costs 5% a week? Or would you want a btc loan that costs 5% a month. Sure you would make a lot more with the btc loan. But what happens when btc prices shoots up to $30? You're left holding usd that you need to convert back to btc to return to your lenders. You would have to have increased your capital 6x in order to return that loan. Now that's a risky loan for the lenders! So the smart thing for pirate to do is to take however many bitcoins he feels comfortable owning and put that into his business. As his business demands more bitcoins than he has, he should borrow the rest. It's true that he won't make as much from the bitcoins he borrows, but then he has no risk on them either. I used to question why pirate would need to borrow so many bitcoins and not use his own. But now that I understand why, I believe that pirate's lending is legit and not a ponzi scheme. Well the only other thing is I think he may be paying too much (7% a week) to his lenders when most other people are only paying half as much. He could probably reduce it to 5% a week and still be able to get as many lenders as he needs. But maybe he is not greedy and want to share the wealth. What collateral is used to secure these loans? When I get a signature loan at a bank the collateral is my Equifax score. If I don’t pay it back I will never buy anything on credit again (oversimplified). If I don’t pay back btc loans what happens? Well when I have done loans on the forum. The only 'collateral' I used was 'Trust' specifically using the WoT. I offered a rate on the forum far below what others charge. 1-3%/mo. If you don't pay back the loan, nothing happens to you from my stand point. But this is what happens because you didn't, you will have trouble getting other loans and other people borrowing rates will increase to counteract your bad debt. So when people get mad at lenders like Patrick and others, they are misplacing their anger. It should be directed at the people that didn't payback their loans. I don't bemoan others rates, especially for short term loans. Would I like to see rates come down? Sure. Will they? That depends on whether people payback the loans. Coincidently, you can give Fiat(USD) loans with BTC as collateral if you wish. You could have a completely parallel market with BTC as an underlying security and no one would even have to know. It is a truly unique concept that hasn't been around for a long time. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
