He was seeking easy money, not to improve society. Nor was he joking. Didn't look like a joke, didn't sound like a joke. Looks like a scam, was a scam. Not a joke.
Matt's "bet" was obviously a 100% trollish prank. Only those with a compulsive gambling problem would want to believe it was somehow (herr durp, maybe pirate is seekretly backing him???!!!1?) legitimate. Just as with pirate, people were warned, repeatedly and loudly, not to take him seriously. But they didn't listen. Are you the same guy who was accusing "team ponzi" of not understanding "investment liquidity" and spreading "pirate FUD"? Do you understand anything about investing?
Has it never occurred to you that money 'tied up' in investments is not perfectly liquid, and that fact is part of why you get paid for the use of your cash?
Throwing a public tantrum because you were not instantly gratified is ridiculous. And thus, you are being ridiculed.
You aren't the leader of Team Ponzi, but amplifying their FUD makes you a fellow traveler.
After a tiny 3 hour delay, you made yet another Pirate FUD thread about how awful it was that your ass wasn't being kissed fast enough.
If so, I must admit that you sure are a fast learner. Matthew, you magnificent troll. I salute you!
Anyone want to bet me that MNW won't pay out on his bet about his bet about the pony scheme?
I'm sure he's good for it!
|
|
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I am a dumbass. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.orgiQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQS97TAAoJEEA+/hj9AfY+skEP/jQl/TKgOO/f57oiM4Drsma4 1QS/clAEapEtNdPZcp1Tn24XFOFn+ZOW/B4YXxifB9LaHEV95tthrja2jUa6MBzI f6IiwxYzEqY+BGCPCoCGCs4KoRkRscqXttL2W3lREZ2fgmwqx50ZP2GEkLplwO/B DpjwHVvCK/zTT44kR4RxB2ycsWafad158FLeTPgZHV503yM8e+WYCAHn6spFYIun DGGfBMibpyY02cHuAHbEf/uTQY1VWuzr7oGAi3HRu7PpQAC4wNizvxKWyzGoB+EI VAn6OZtkiwPSu0qL85Jz71DtcMurC8m+a47QT6juaYbq9ede+M+JMcw4gisDI/Us FtjOfhSnrPi0XdBGSl3By+74UqrZraZNSXSMNQK4SXuZrGAYADqHhslCI9RElmeh 0zIU03r6hUuN9/8x6QgdKSSGcIJw6hEg4DtIM4UR2ayrj/s/Omzi8mim+CgQNGM6 8jNI7pZrQ70sv32SyRR+cTdvSehYjpYkAKNRzZolR+Y50YdySZsIJoOsYdPu8cbv Xt2CTeHYxZTFqlgwca5HwybQjLLBRgbBSc2lflu1MHh+zE2p2qHX7LKwJID7ZHCr 48nzrVbYJ7dm+k5IHF1uFcgBxJmcLlEk/5OWQGd5a9OgdldWghSK7kS3uKTtDvcm jzdOYrFkxRy0l5un++gq =4SXY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- As I think about acts of integrity and grace, I realise that there is nothing in my knowledge to compare with Frege's reeses's dedication to truth. ... upon finding that his fundamental assumption was in error, he responded with intellectual pleasure clearly submerging any feelings of personal disappointment. It was almost superhuman....
-- Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
It beats the market in the time period that I test in, that is my fitness criteria. Even despite spotty execution I have more BTC than I started with every month.
What time range for holding periods does your model calculate? I'm not quite sure what you are asking. In order to follow the model I would be resetting orders with each candle. As a new candle comes in the curves are recalculated and converged, risk levels are optimized and a new set of orders are placed. I have found it to be fruitless to issue any kind of public report from the model because the output doesn't really mean anything unless you are trading the model rigorously. There is no set 'holding period'. Candles come in according to how fast the market is trading according to volume. Right now I am using candles of a constant amount of volume, about 14k BTC. Ah, well that leads to my follow-up question: do you use market orders or limit orders? |
|
|
|
It beats the market in the time period that I test in, that is my fitness criteria. Even despite spotty execution I have more BTC than I started with every month.
What time range for holding periods does your model calculate? |
|
|
|
A corrupt society always punishes those that seek to improve it.
That's true, hence the corollary: He was seeking easy money, not to improve society. Nor was he joking. Didn't look like a joke, didn't sound like a joke. Looks like a scam, was a scam. Not a joke. |
|
|
|
"walks like a duck" fallacy
 |
|
|
|
MNW, that was good job you did getting the ball rolling on the magazine. thanks for that Oh, also.. DUCK!  |
|
|
|
I don't see Matt as being in league with that level of evil. I think (here's my take on intent...) that he meant to point out how desperate it is to go chasing after more bad money when you have already lost good. The phantom is the thought of making good on our first stupid decision, by making more of the same stupid choices.
If that's the case, then I think you may have thoroughly misunderstood what happened here. While yes, Matthew is not, and likely can never, sink to the level of that kind of evil, Matt's intent in this bet was to teach those people who were crying "Ponzi" a lesson; to shut them up, because he believed they were hurting these ridiculously-high-interest HYIPs with their FUD, when Matt thought they were legitimate businesses. He actually believed that people crying "Ponzi" were in the wrong, and dared them that, if they believe these businesses are so wrong and such scams, to "put their money where their mouths are." The people who bet (initially) were not those who "already lost good." The bettors were those who wouldn't even think of investing with BTCS&T, and were vocally horrified to see how many others were falling for those scams. Matthew seems to have been defending pirate and HYIPs, so they bet to, I guess, prove their convictions about believing that Pirateat40 was a scammer. They also bet because they thought that Matthew was totally wrong about believing that Pirateat40 was running anything but a scam. Things only got way worse when those who did lose money on BCTS&T decided to use Matthew's bet as a hedge. Luckily, they were the minorty of the bets apparently. Most of those who bet have not lost any money in any of these scams, and so were not "chasing after more bad money." I never lost any money to any scams, or crashes, or hacks (luckily). I personally bet because I thought Matthew was wrong to defend Pirate, since I also believed he was running a ponzi. Matthew not paying me anything did not hurt me in any way, but I still think it was a shitty thing for him to do (the whole bet and weaseling out of it the way he did, not the not paying me, since even if he did, I'd have returned the money). ESPECIALLY since he took attention away from both Pirateat40 AND all the other HYIPs out there for three whole weeks, when people should've been putting the pressure on those bastards. Well said. MNW (and some others) tried to spin it like he was trying to "point out how desperate it is to go chasing after more bad money when you have already lost good". That point was at best tertiary to MNW's main point: to "teach a lesson" to people crying scam "without evidence" or using the "duck fallacy". Indeed, the scam-criers lost nothing in betting against MNW and learned nothing. It was the gullible pirate investors hedging their "investments" who lost the most and learned the most. |
|
|
|
I'm not willing to share my PMs with Matthew, but I'll confirm that as late as last week he fully expected pirate to pay (I don't know why and didn't ask). This fits with his original post about the community being too quick to label people as scammers (which is what started the bet).
I'm sure he did, but the fact that he wasn't able to follow through on his side of the bet proves that it was just a simple theft. Think of it this way please: IF PIRATE HAD PAID, THEN MNW WOULD HAVE STOLEN NEARLY A MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE COMMUNITY. When you see it that way, you'll realize just how bad his scam really was. He was gambling his entire reputation on the chance of getting a quick million, and he lost. Do you honestly believe that Matthew would have taken people's money if he'd won the bet? If so, you know a different Matthew than I do. Yes. He even started a thread on how he planned to buy everyone a copy of the magazine with part of the winnings. The fact that he chose not to use/require escrow was a sign that he planned to reneg all along, but was hoping not to have to. |
|
|
|
I have seen pictures of their mining hardware. If you ask, and you have bitcoin invested with them, they will send you a link so that you can see pictures of their hardware.
I don't see why one should need to have bitcoins deposited to see pictures. That would be like BFL not showing pictures until after you pre-order. And pictures alone prove nothing, they would also have to demonstrate that the rig performs as they claim. And even if they did that, they could still run with all the deposits (or claim a "hack"). Bitcoin deposits are not to be done lightly, if at all. |
|
|
|
oh boy.
don't like the sound of that. It's about time for this one to end too, and if there are multiple people waiting for withdraws, it's just super likely it's a scam. If you have been waiting for more than a few days for a Patrick Harnett withdraw, please post so here.
If anyone ever deserved a punch in the mouth, it'd be you. No, it would be pirate, MNW, and Patrick. in that order. |
|
|
|
When I say mining operations offer real, stable returns, I mean return of bitcoin on bitcoins invested regardless of what it is worth in fiat. That is how Pyramining works.
Pyramining says they use your deposit to buy Xilinx FPGA's. The amount of FPGA's bought depends on the price of coin. That's one factor which makes consistent, stable returns impossible. Future difficulty changes are another. Do you have any evidence that Pyramining isn't an honest operation? I'd like to hear it if you do...
Yes, there is a pronounced evidence of absence- No pictures of custom FPGA rigs
- No records of earnings from pools
- Apparently anonymous operator
|
|
|
|
I just don't see why BFL should sell their product for much less than you can expect to earn with it,
Its impossible to estimate expected earnings with any degree of certainty unless you can predict the future price of bitcoin and difficulty. That's what traders do. BFL profits from manufacturing hardware, not bitcoin trading. So they sell their hardware at a markup for guaranteed profits, not expected profits variant on future bitcoin price. |
|
|
|
Receive. Awesome +1  good thing you're getting interest payments, because you will lose your principal. |
|
|
|
I am a little surprised that people haven't given up yet considering the zeek story and the now official "SCAMMER" tag.
I haven't seen any #bctst logs in a while. Anything recent? |
|
|
|
and a very close runner-up. |
|
|
|
 I think Matthew is a new meme for stupid. winner. |
|
|
|
Matthew welched on a silly bet, to try and prove a point.
The reason he welched on the bet isn't the same reason he started the bet. What point was he trying to prove? This is what the purpose of the bet is, to allow them the right to make blanket accusations. If they're right, they win big. If they're wrong, they'll make less blanket accusations in the future cause I got their rent moneyz herp derp
|
|
|
|
Psy let's put him on ignore.
That will piss him off if everyone does that.
What for? He's not posting. And I'm not mad about him not paying, just about his lame excuse. I would respect him more if he just said: Fuck you all, I'm not paying a dime. That's what you get for trusting me. Agreed, I could give him a nominal amount of respect if he did that. But his statements prior, and subsequent weasel words show he was actually hoping for a payday. Despicable. Also, trying to equate MNW bettors with pirate investors is ridiculous. MNW bettors lost 0 coin. On the other hand, to invest in pirate and then used MNW as a hedge (instead of selling PPT bonds for whatever they could get), is truly sad. Worst part is, MNW acted like he was helping pirate investors. But they're the ones who got hurt, not the scam-callers he was attempting to "teach a lesson". |
|
|
|
All but the most retarded here assumed near zero chance the Pirate would legitimately pay up. That includes Mathew.
No, MNW stated clearly and in so many ways that he expected pirate to pay. I believe that everyone is being ridiculous and that Pirate is probably not a ponzi for several very good reasons. When the bet is over, I'll give my reasons, but it won't have any bearing and is still based on something that I cannot prove.
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).
If you invested in pirate without even bothering to research his business model, find out his info, etc, you're also basically gambling, but only -you-. Others who invested in him may not be gambling, they may be just taking risk. I am taking a risk with this bet. I believe I know what he's doing and I believe it is not a ponzi.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
