|
I'm thinking about the BFL customers who paid $4000 over a year ago to make $2 per day, when they receive their cards in maybe a month or two.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin was created to fight this mentality of the top 1%.
'Satoshi Nakamoto' has been silent for years on the topic. Chances are he / she / they are a bit disgusted with what has happened to bitcoin during that time. If, as alleged, bitcoin was created to fight the 1%, it has just been replaced with a new 1%. Most bitcoins are concentrated in very few hands. They got those bitcoins when a CPU could make a few per week and the cost was cents per bitcoin. Now the new 1% look upon the rest of the population who must spend $1k on a miner that will over its entire lifetime produce maybe 0.5 bitcoins. |
|
|
|
|
Well, this is very curious. Mateo goes on an improbable winning streak and almost crashes the bankroll. Now it returns and hands those profits back, with interest. First time mateo was rather exceptional in its luck, second time around it played exactly as expected: the house won.
I don't know what to think right now. Maybe, maybe mateo was an all in, balls and all YOLO type gambler who couldn't resist having another crack. Without the ability to verify bets I still have my doubts.
|
|
|
|
|
The bitcoin ETF has already been priced in, as has increased retailer acceptance of bitcoin. We know it's going to happen, just not exactly when. Market participants read the same forums we do.
We need some good old markus and willy inspired manipulation of the market to make this rocket go boom again.
|
|
|
|
Earn 3%+ from a bitcoin investment per day. A scam? I'm shocked it collapsed  This forum is overrun with Ponzi schemes and the accompanying sycophants |
|
|
|
|
Well, looks like DB is still running and investment is slowly rising and profit growing. All appears to be good and stable. I just hope some freakishly lucky player doesn't suddenly show up out of nowhere and take a few hundred bitcoins from investors when the bankroll becomes more healthy.
|
|
|
|
|
How to kill bitcoin:
1. Declare it illegal within a country. Local banks can't cooperate with exchanges and it makes buying bitcoins more difficult.
2. If 1 is not possible, require users to hand over passport/driver's license info to trade. Many people feel uncomfortable with this (hello MtGox).
3. Declare bitcoins a commodity for tax purposes. This means calculating capital gains tax every time the user buys or sells. Accounting nightmare for most people.
4. Launch campaign against bitcoin stating it's used for little else but trading drugs, child porn, and funding terrorism.
5. Ask the NSA to build a mining cluster and launch a 51% attack. Instantly force the value of everyone's bitcoins to zero as no one will want to trade a commodity that is invalidated by a third party.
#5 is the nuclear option. Don't see it happening unless whole countries start using bitcoin and the USD$ is threatened.
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen 10 losses in a row on dice sites on 50/50 bets quite often. It's not unusual. You've only had 5. Verify your bets with the site if you feel something is not quite right. If everything checks out then just chalk it up as a lesson in life not to gamble.
|
|
|
|
|
Send a message. Buy a bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Come on people, if you can't provide a date it's not a prediction!
"We'll have affordable flying cars by 2020." <-- prediction
"We'll have affordable flying cars someday!" <-- fapping
Many people would consider both statements to be caressing the fun sausage. |
|
|
|
BTC is for the poor, not the rich. I travel to india quite a bit, and people there are just starting to get it. 6 -12 month fluctuations are irrelevant. It's time is coming, in the short term in may not make a bunch of lazy assholes super rich like they were planning, but it will full fill its promise.
Offer a poor Indian US$1000 of bitcoins or US$1000 of gold. Which do you think they would prefer to store their wealth? |
|
|
|
|
Good move. Stick to bitcoin. Sure, you might miss a hyper bubble in an altcoin but there are always far more losers than winners chasing that dream. Ever heard of a well recognised business proudly declaring to the media they now take dogecoin or litecoin as payment? Neither has anyone else. It's bitcoin or it's nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
You will not win in the long term gambling against the odds. Please, stop now before you lose more. All the bonuses, enticements, lucky rabbit feet, triple 7s, praying, etc will not change the mathematics. Find a place that allows you to invest in the bankroll and play on the winning side.
|
|
|
|
So what's the total damage here, players got some money refunded, investors took their money out. There is that 500-600BTC loss but no one complaining on forum that they got screwed. Did any investor whale complained on the forum about this?
Chances are the people with the highest investments were the ones watching the closest and pulled out before mateo arrived. Whether someone had 100 btc invested or 1, questions have been asked and no answers have been provided from DB. |
|
|
|
Magic internet net money accounting
 |
|
|
|
With a Z-score approaching almost 5, the evidence points more and more to something virtually impossible happening. It could happen, but at the probability of 4.8x10^-7.
 |
|
|
|
|
Currently DB is reporting:
Bankroll: 522
Profit: -320
Invested: 1131
Don't all invested funds get added to the bankroll? Why is the bankroll less than half of what's currently invested?
|
|
|
|
This is a very toxic community. I have seen through so many scams and now I have stopped digging. Thankfully, there are these 2.0 cryptos which are quite interesting to look into.
I'm not sure how a '2.0' crypto would help in a case such as DB where the site was rigged to function incorrectly, or a MtGox that disappears with funds, or a Bitconica where funds are stolen, etc. Some '2.0' cryptos make things worse by making tracing stolen funds harder. |
|
|
|
I guess the other 1% would be ACTUAL EVIDENCE then. Suspicious timing is not evidence. Someone winning is not evidence. Someone winning at a suspicious time is not evidence. I believe Matteo was an inside job too, the difference is I'm leaving open the possibility it wasn't. All this BS talk of improbability and unlikeliness and suspicious timing is just unsubstantiated speculation.
We would need an independent audit of the code, books, betting, etc. In a state governed casino or lottery such oversight is available. As DB was an unlicensed and therefore unregulated entity then no such investigation is possible. Hence the speculation. We have no better alternative. Under the broken logic and dubious math you're all using, you know what else is suspicious? Everyone who's ever won the Powerball. It's SO suspicious that anyone would play or win a game with a 0% chance of winning!
Incorrect, although I take the point you're making. The chances of winning my local version of Powerball is about 1 in 43 million. It's never zero and chances are someone is going to win every week or two, given enough entries. What mateo did is quite different. It wasn't one jackpot win of 500+ btc. It was consistent betting over thousands of 'rolls'. Looking at the results I would say mateo had the 1% edge against the house, not the other way around. The above posters who stated the chances of mateo doing what he did as zero chance are clearly incorrect. There's always a chance mateo could get very lucky. But given the certain facts surrounding DB it's natural even a casual observer would have questions to ask. Don't confuse someone who knows the difference between suspicious circumstances and evidence as someone who believes Matteo and manl are two different people. Just because you've convicted manl with missing pieces of information and while high on emotion and based on speculation doesn't mean everyone has such a low threshold for judgment.
We do know the site was rigged for around two weeks and did not work as advertised. One could reasonably argue that given the other suspicious events at the site the threshold for judgment has been markedly lowered to the reasonable observer. |
|
|
|
Rolling back code to remove the commit written by the new employee was rational.
Thinking that rolling back his commit would leave a secure codebase was reasonable too, if that was his only commit.
DB rolled back the code, but did DB check all the PCs and servers for backdoors that would allow remote access and rigging of the game again? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
