Just based on that alone if I was the one running a scam investigation into BFL I'd stick to the facts and be a little plainer about what I had against the company personally.
Fact: BFL collected preorders 7 months ago and projected October 2012 delivery.
Fact: BFL is associated with Sonny V., who has a criminal record of mail fraud.
Fact: Delivery of BFL ASICs was pushed back to November, December, January, and now end of February.
Fact: BFL DID NOT bring a working prototype to demo at CES thus proving they don't have a working prototype to showcase their specs the list on their site.
Fact: Josh gave no guarantees that the timeline he posted a few days ago will hold up. (even given all of the 4 months leeway so far)
Fact: Those who have preorders with BFL are biased.
Fact: Josh/Inaba is the worst PR for BFL they could have in place. Who cares if people troll his ass. He is a public figure that represents BFL which tarnishes the name Butterfly Labs.
Your first four facts are perfectly fine points. The last three are more subjective to me, and they don't necessarily prove anything. |
|
|
|
But can you please tell us what part of this is a real tangible issue and what part of this is you saying Josh would regret what he said to you? I mean, from the video you posted I can tell you don't like the guy and "thats how you roll" -- going after someone with a vengeance -- but it tends to cloud the real issues here. Can you please stop your personal vindictive campaign and come up with some actual evidence? The FCC rule violation is a great start, but this poker-tell stuff is pretty lame.
I agree 100%. The closest thing to proof of this being a scam I've seen is "he looked nervous." Poker tells don't cut it when it comes to issues like this. For the record: I don't have any faith in BFL delivering either. But I wouldn't be shouting it into a virtual megaphone on the internet branding it with my name as a conclusive scam report if I didn't have factual and tangible proof to back it up. |
|
|
|
There are a lot of sites you can use to get free bitcoins to help you start out: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade#Free_Samples_and_OffersI went to dailybitcoins, earnfreebitcoins, cointubetv, and bitvisitor when I first started using bitcoins to help get me started. I'd recommend starting with those  |
|
|
|
|
This is definitely the type of attitude required to get people interested in your business ventures.
|
|
|
|
|
Should this be under newbies? Seems like an attempt to snare some new people bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Everyone who thinks the metric system is hard to understand should take a look at this   Well, when you put it like that, of course it looks bad!  |
|
|
|
The problem with brick and mortar stores for small business owners is that they're gonna want money, not Bitcoin. And it'll be a hell of an uphill battle to convince them that Bitcoin is money. Many small business owners simply won't be in a financial position to take on what they perceive as a risk with their livelihood. You'll have to convince them on a personal level that Bitcoin is a legitimate currency and explain it to them in a very clear and concise manner. In the end, even if they agree that Bitcoin is great, it may not be worth it for them to adopt it as a form of payment. The Bitcoin user base was estimated to be around 60,000 in September of 2011. If that's at least double in the little over a year since that estimate was made, that means there are around 120,000 Bitcoin users (could easily be more or less). Using the US as an example since that's where I live, there are about 311,000,000 citizens in the country: a brick and mortar shop may not find it worth the trouble to accept Bitcoin with such low odds that they'll have customers who demand it as a payment. It's not that adopting Bitcoin would be hard, but that the owners may not see the merit in learning about it for such a small revenue change. As has been said already, online merchants make much better targets for Bitcoin right now. If the online market grows, and if a few big name retailers begin to accept it, crossing over into the "real world" (so to speak) will be much easier. None of this is meant to discourage you, of course. I just want to give you an idea of what you'll be up against: be prepared and all that. Know your challenge and rise above it |
|
|
|
Scottish independence is a possibility? What's changed recently? I don't do a good job keeping up with world events, I'm afraid. Anyways, welcome!  |
|
|
|
Admin and staff were first approached December 21, 2012 regarding the topic of illegal sales of hacked/compromised accounts and illegal secondary sales of unauthorized transfers of accounts based on provisional access to database services. Over the past 18 days individual staff have been approached top to bottom including developers. Nobody wants to challenge Theymos on this issue which he would prefer to ignore, nor does anyone want to clean up this mess before it spirals out of control and harms the reputation of the currency and this forum. I've provided enough evidence publicly and privately to indicate an issue persists. I'm not going to stick around and continue to defend the best interests of the currency or the forum in this thread if none of the staff or development team want any real change to occur. It's pointless to do so. I'm also not going to stick around while mods ignore continued defamation. I only hope that enemies of the currency don't use this unresolved issue as ammunition, I would be deeply saddened if that happened.
I'm done with this thread.
Lol you cant judge a currency based off what its spent on, that's like saying you wont ever use the $1 USD because most of them have been inside strippers thongs and tits (which I'm sure some have STD's), used to snort cocaine, and various pills. It's not that you can't judge a currency based off what it's spent on, but that you shouldn't. The problem is that people will do just that when they're looking for any reason to try and take Bitcoin out before it grows bigger. It could also scare off any new users who don't want to get mixed up in anything that seems shady. It's already an uphill battle, so why make it harder? |
|
|
|
I'm just puzzled. Did 120 posts really appear within a day because I owe squall money? Why are they not just as focused on the criminals that funnel in billions through taxation, while simulataneously devaluing an entire population's wealth via inflation?
CIA imports drugs, government taxes the citizens, Ponzi defrauded investors, and Hitler invaded Poland. You can keep bringing up whatever crap you want to try and shift the focus off yourself, but it doesn't change what you did. You stole Squall's money and you won't shut up; the people here won't either. |
|
|
|
What would you say to the following list and descriptions of the principles Bitcoin is built upon: - consistency - the total supply of bitcoins to ever exist is forever arbitrarily limited and fixed
- tangibility - issuing new bitcoins requires labor in the form of finding a specific tangible number as a solution to a specific cryptographic math problem
- transparency - all Bitcoin transactions are public and forever stored in the blockchain for anyone to see
- anonymity - all Bitcoin transaction are only between cryptographical pseudonyms without the need to have their true identity revealed
- security - all confirmed Bitcoin transactions are with mathematical certainty irreversible, all bitcoins are with mathematical certainty non-counterfeitable
- decentralization - Bitcoin has no central authority and is voluntarily run by consenting autonomous peers in a peer to peer network
- self-ownership - only the owner of a pseudonym gets the password to spend his bitcoins in effect making them his property unless he chooses otherwise
- integrity - all bitcoins are counted equally(are fungible), virtually can’t be frozen or blocked from being spent
- practicality - Bitcoin works anywhere, for anyone, non-stop, and the protocol allows for many practical layers on top, just like email, http..
- rationalism - the Bitcoin software is written under the MIT open source license and is not a logically inconsistent intellectual property of anyone but merely organized information everyone can use as they wish
Did I miss/too loosely describe anything? So I've amended the list and made a few other improvements. I threw out scarcity and replaced it with consistency. I was debating between consistency and predictability and in the end decided that predictable doesn't quite capture the certainty of the fixed supply, soundness is also an option that I'm still considering. I changed the description of tangibility. I followed the advice given and replaced virtually with mathematically. Decentralization I felt needed a bit clearer description so I changed it. I replaced capitalism with a lot more politically neutral and philosophically clearer self-ownership. I also found the 10th principle to round up the number of principles: Looks pretty damn good. It could maybe be cleaned up a little bit, but the basic principles are good to go. |
|
|
|
By the way. Isn't this illegal? Bitcoiners welcome to do what you want with their bitcoins, but I don't think we should be supporting and/or encouraging this activity on Bitcointalk.org.
The existence of this thread has always boggled my mind. It doesn't offend me but I'm sure it offends visitors. It is legal to import prescription medications into the US as long as you have a prescription and the goods are properly declared to US customs. Given the "stealthy packaging" mentioned, I doubt the latter is being done. |
|
|
|
The values are stored in the blockchain and handled in the software as integers. The decimal point is only placed there by the client software to make the values more manageable right now for humans while they require so many zeros. There is already a rather common nickname used for the value without the decimal, it is often called a "Satoshi", so 100,000,000 Satoshi is 1 BTC. It's a lot easier to say something that is valued at approximately $150 USD costs 10.61 BTC, rather than 1,061,000,000 Satoshi. As has been mentioned, just like US currency has names or nicknames for various denominations (cent, dime, greenback, fin, sawbuck, Jackson, Benjamin, etc) there will likely be other nicknames in the future for other multiples of Bitcoin.
At that point the value of BTC may have changed enough to where it wouldn't take so many Satoshis to equal one dollar. If it got, for sake of argument, to the point where two Satoshis = one USD, then you could say something that sells for $150 would be BTC300. Of course the values probably won't be that easy, but I would think the value of lower denomination Bitcoins would be closer to USD for it to work as long as Bitcoin grows large enough. So theoretically the decimal wouldn't have to be removed until such a time where it grew big enough to warrant it. Of course, as you guys have mentioned, by that point people may have gotten used to using the denominational terms for BTC and it wouldn't be needed. I guess this idea could also end up causing confusion trying to end confusion, lol. |
|
|
|
No and it never will. A change like that would require literally 100% support of all users as it would be a hard incompatible fork.
No need to use tiny decimals though. 5 mBTC vs 0.005 BTC. 5 uBTC vs 0.000005 BTC. It is possible people will call these by slang or informal names. i.e. millies of mikes.
I didn't take into effect how it would change the mining process. That stuff goes a bit over my head, to be honest. Would something like that require a major change in the software? The values would essentially remain the same. |
|
|
|
|
One of the arguments I've heard to disarm the deflationary nature of Bitcoins is that Bitcoins are divisible to eight places, resulting in 2,100,000,000,000,000 total BTC units in circulation. I read a recent topic on the forum about how Bitcoin prices could be posted in the future, as writing price tags for a price of "0.00000050" would be inefficient.
I'm thinking the easiest way to relate Bitcoin totals in the future will be to remove the decimal from the equation. The total units of BTC would remain the same and prices could be easily written and registered in the minds of consumers. Let's face it: the general population likes things simple, so simple steps such as this idea can go a long way towards improving user adoption by cleaning up confusing aspects of the currency.
Is this an idea that has already been put forth? I'm curious to know what everyone thinks about it, and whether or not the decimal should be removed in the future.
|
|
|
|
I do agree with the OP. The pattern is there. Perhaps it might take an extra month to spike (April or May). Anticipation may drive prices to likely skyrocket in February.
April/May would make sense to me since people will be getting their tax refunds around that time (for last minute filers). People take more chances once they receive those lump funds. |
|
|
|
I fear many more Bitcoin users than realise are leaving themselves exposed from having read about the anonymity in the headlines and jumped in without having done their homework first. An excellent point. I see a lot of sites advertise BitCoin as "anonymous" either without notation or with notation that doesn't do justice to the truth. Very misleading, if you ask me. The community should make a bigger effort to clear up that misconception. |
|
|
|
I wouldn't necessarily call the first principle scarcity since they aren't exactly rare. I would find another term to describe the set amount. Anarchy probably isn't a good term for promoting BitCoin to the common consumer. We want it to gain credibility, not infamy Got a better word to describe the same principle? Resolute maybe? It would describe the set amount and the attitude of the BitCoin community all in one. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
