MPOE-PR is a scammer.
Who are you and what are you talking about. |
|
|
|
Near as we can tell, we had a run of bad luck. We are looking at it more, but don't see that anything is (or was) wrong. Now there are a bunch of new blocks maturing, with no changes on our side...this will get worse as difficulty rises and variance becomes more apparent. We are planning to create a private pool so that we can pay out the 500TH shareholders on a more regular basis. Not sure when that will be ready, but we've got most of the work done.
As to the question of whether we will expand - it has been stated many times, very clearly that this was a fixed size project. Initially it was 100TH, but Tytus expanded it 5x to try to give a good return to investors. For early investors, the mine has hit ROI weeks ago. For investors who would buy shares now, I'd have to say compare our price/GH to that of cex.io and make your own decision. Comparatively I think we have a good price/GH for leased hashpower.
Dave
You had ANOTHER run of bad luck. Which is what scammers like you call their scamming, for as long as fucktards such as "your investors" keep eating it up. I told it to you before, I'm telling it to you now, No, actually, the reason is that you are a professional liar. Having broken your credibility over the bASIC fiasco, you perceive yourself immune from prosecution and generally further ill effects, in the sense that once it comes to that there's already enough to sink you, and meanwhile might as well turn a buck doing more of the same, not like it makes a difference. That, for your side. For his side, tytus is eager to insulate himself from the actual responsibility for the scam he's running, much like convicted felon Sonny Vleisides prefers to use Inaba to insulate himself, and much like the Jonathan Ryan Owens-Alberto Armandi troop of scammers used the services of random clueless busybody Meni Rosenfeld. Nothing's changed, because that's what you are. Scum. |
|
|
|
Everything they are doing, how they communicate, how the portal is built is directed to real live functionality. I say this as IT professional related to hosting and web dev. If they would scam, they wouldn't invest that much time to build everything. This was the reason I've invested into 10 shares and affiliate them. I never would affiliate something what is looking suspicous.
I'm really sure if they would get the needed hardware, they have personal possibilities (hardware is from scandinavia and they are also) to get their money back and refund their customers. It's also covered in their FAQ that they will get the harware at latest at the middle of february.
As it seems, somehow, to not come up, it bears pointing out that an argument as to why someone wouldn't want to scam is not at all an argument that they won't. Not in the slightest. Akin to how looking at a picture of an unrelated ID is not at all a solid means of identifying who you're talking to. Standards, such as establishing competence, such as having a valuable product or service to offer, such as using the WoT, such as everything listed here, exist to divide the worthy from the wannabes. What you're doing is pretending such standards do not exist, and that variously weak attempts to cover up an inability or unwillingness to meet such standards is somehow acceptable. It's not. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone with a WoT rating willing to do escrow for this deal?
|
|
|
|
Mr. P has a guide on accepting BTC without having to use a third party processor. Here you go. |
|
|
|
A civil war is emerging between Bitcoin's earliest and most libertarian adopters, and a more commercial wing seeking to embrace regulation as a means of legitimizing Bitcoin businesses. From: http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoins-new-civil-war-2014-1The divide came into focus this week with two key events events. One was a hearing on Bitcoin regulation by the New York Department Of Financial Services. The other was the arrest of BitInstant CEO Charlie Shrem on money laundering charges. Until the moment of his arrest, Shrem, 24 had been something of a darling in the Bitcoin venture capital community — the Winklevoss brothers were one of BitInstant's earliest investors, and Shrem was scheduled to co-headline a Bitcoin conference in Miami this past weekend. But on the first day of hearings about the future of Bitcoin regulation convened this week by the New York Department of Financial Services, a panel of VCs were quick to disavow Shrem as an example of a more immature wing of Bitcoin. The Winklevoss twins said they were gratified the Department was discussing ways to help legitimize Bitcoin commerce. Their Bitcoin ETF is awaiting regulatory approval from the SEC. The division is not just about sheer dollar size. Appearing at the Tuesday hearing, Fred Wilson — whose Union Square Ventures spearheaded a $5 million investment round in Bitcoin wallet firm Coinbase warned against anything but the lightest-touch regulations. He compared the dangers Bitcoin startups would face to what happened to early-stage music streaming platforms, which were inundated with lawsuits from record labels. Should Bitcoin startups be subject to similar legal scrutiny from financial regulators, he said, they would be snuffed out before they even had a chance to bloom. Wilson's views were countered by no other than Fred Ehrsam, Coinbase's co-founder. He told DFS regulators Wednesday, "Although I love Fred Wilson, there's probably some minimal requirements and procedures that should be put in place if you're facilitating that kind of exchange." Perhaps it is not surprising that this ultra-libertarian faction was not represented at this week's hearings. But it could be seen at the NYC Bitcoin Center on Broad Street in Manhattan — where a follow-up cocktail party was held Tuesday to discuss "fallout" from the first day's hearing — and online, where this faction railed from afar against regulators. These individuals may seem extreme, but, until recently, they represented the core of Bitcoin evangelism. But their influence seems to be fading. Barry Silbert's Bitcoin Investment Trust is now worth 10s of millions of dollars. In an email Wednesday, he said he agreed the crypto-anarchists who dominated the digital currencies earliest incarnations were getting left behind. "There are certainly a handful of folks that are hardcore libertarians (some anarchists) that believe that bitcoin should be completely unregulated, but I believe they are in the minority and, as a percentage of bitcoin believers, is shrinking very quickly. I respect their viewpoint, but unfortunately, don’t see how there vision is viable in today’s society." On Wednesday, New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said the greatest concern about digital currencies among law enforcement was anonymity. In a Bitcoin transaction, all transactions are essentially conducted between e-addresses that lack any kind of user identification. "The difficulty, when criminal activity is involved, is for investigators to identity how the money is moved where and for what purpose.," he said. But Jeremy Allaire, founder and CEO of Circle, a company that develops digital currency products, showed little concern that regulators could start scraping away at Bitcoin's anonymity element. Asked Tuesday on the panel whether new regulations affecting Bitcoin's anonymity would undermine the popularity of the currency, Allaire replied, "That depends on your definition of the essence of Bitcoin." As Bitcoin continues to emerge, this fight over Bitcoin's essence, and how much of a role government should play, will only get more intense. This, of course, has been fully described on Trilema, two years ago. Things are finally getting interesting. There’s two parties to Bitcoin as it stands right now. Well, two that I see at any rate, maybe a lot more I don’t see. Let’s delve a little into their history. Bitcoin, in and of itself, is in no need of any particular government or any government at all. It doesn’t need the Internet, as proven by the existence of brain wallets, and it doesn’t need computers : you could do the whole blockchain thing pen-on-paper if you had the inclination. It doesn’t even need people : it’s perfectly possible for gas molecules somewhere to play out keypair generation, hashing, blockchain creation and all that. This means that people, computers, the Internet, and ultimately any particular government and government in general is irrelevant to Bitcoin. This is after all how it should be, as the most recent embodiement of an Essence it couldn’t work any other way. States, in and of themselves, always regard their sovereignity as “over everything”. Indeed, you’d be hard pressed to find a Parliament which earnestly believes that there’s any limit to what it may, in principle, consider. Sure, some places have Constitutions, but as shown by the political crisis in Romania this summer, even the Parliament of an EU member state has serious difficulty coming to terms with any limitation of its rule. Governments are even worse, as perfectly illustrated by the decades-long Constitutional crisis in the US : the Presidential administration there feels perfectly entitled to outright ignore Congress on most matters by now. “For the children”, or “because of the terrorists” or something like that. Excuses there shall forever be. These two realities then will have to come in conflict, and they have come in conflict at the point of contact : there where bitcoins are exchanged for fiat and fiat is exchanged for bitcoin. States see any such exchange as something certainly within their empire (as this involves their currency). Bitcoin sees this as just another transaction, perfectly identical to any other transaction. Dollars are worthless in Bitcoin just as states are irrelevant in Bitcoin. The argument is usually brought in reverse (”Bitcoins are worthless in Dollars”), and that is obviously true, for instance for someone who has no access to Bitcoin. However, in any conflict between two systems it is witout fail the more encompassing one that comes out a victor (much like in the battle between two snakes : that snake wins which can fit the other within his gullet.) Out of the fear of very much imaginary terrorists and very much risible “threaths to the safety of children” coupled with the very desperate need to limit people’s access, control and free disposition of wealth (which in turn arises from the desperation of the bankrupt welfare system coming to terms with the exact causes of the collapse of the Soviet Union) states have currently introduced a complex program of mostly illegitimate dickery known as “Anti-Money Laundering”. It is this instrument, created to prop the collapsing giant with clay feet, that comes into conflict with the adamantine rock of Bitcoin. From this contact then sprout two parties : the Obsequious, mostly the opperators of the largest exchanges, who have for instance proceeded to introduce some shoddy and possibly illegal “KYC” procedures in their business, demanding various things from their prospective customers (in many cases after the relationship was already established) on the grounds that FinCEN (the enforcing arm of the US Dept of Plenty) stated orally and unbindingly that Bitcoin may be included in their most recent power grab ; and the… well… I’m part of it so I will leave the naming to the opposition. Seems only fair. Perhaps the Irresponsibles. Whatever it may be called, this latter party cares not one whit for the difficulties of the exchanges, nor does it care that their hopes of creating fiat-businesses out of exploiting Bitcoins are pretty much quashed by even a cursory examination of some aspects of the legality of the matter. Sure, they had hoped to one day be listed on NYSE on the strength of their marginal position in this virtual but probably last currency, and make the bright original investors a pot of… well, not gold, anything but gold, some government scrip (which you may not spend and soon enough may not hold, either). Bully for them, but that’s a way of being part of the problem, not part of the solution. All that aside, the other party sees little of any import coming from their quarter : some minor benefit, possibly some minor hindrance. Overall, their relevancy is a temporary and self-limiting accident in the evolution of this thing. Or at least that’s how I feel about it. PS : pigeons you live in a place where fighting back worked. the rest of us live in the rest of the world where we got crushed.
pigeons so we use a different stategy than head-on
mircea_popescu that is a good point, yes.
mircea_popescu but i intend to hold up that legacy.
pigeons i respect that
mircea_popescu after all, the main advantage of btc is exactly that we may cooperare.
mircea_popescu cooperate*
pigeons aye
mircea_popescu understand, i have no problem whatever with a myriad strategies being employed.
mircea_popescu quite the contrary.
October 2012. |
|
|
|
I thought by now I would see a few Bitcoin millionaires living large on youtube, but I'm seeing a lack of videos. Where are they?
They are laughing at what a fucktard you are. |
|
|
|
And of course anyone who speaks up will be the next target of the gov't stormtroopers.
As part of its ongoing efforts to blablabla and all that, MPEx is happy to offer interested users the following arrangement: any forum participant with a post count of at least 100 who changes their signature to BTC doesn't care about the SEC. MPEx rules! will receive his post count * 0.001 BTC at the end of one month, provided he doesn't switch his signature in the meanwhile. Please post here with your new signature so we can have dates. Include payment addy in that post. And last but definitely not least: Bitcoin is here to end government. Not any particular one, just absolutely each and every last one of them. To work! ######################## THIS OFFER IS NOW CLOSED ######################## Will not lock the thread, but no further offers accepted past post #28. Thanks all, and will update with payments. Note the 2012 date on that. [17:55:38] shareholder2 you don’t stand a chance against mpex
[17:55:41] shareholder3_ makes sense
[17:55:44] shareholder2 with its low overhead
[17:56:01] da2ce796 shareholder2 we will be competing in a completely
differnt market to mpex
[17:56:04] shareholder2 IF it is even possible to do legally
[17:56:07] shareholder4 shareholder2: actually it’a dofferent target
[17:56:19] shareholder4 if it’s not wishful thinking
[17:56:20] da2ce796 as in, mpex will stop being our compittion.
[17:56:26] shareholder1 mpex will be classified as money launderers and
terrorists
[17:56:26] shareholder2 really? satoshidice and bitvps look pretty legit
to me
[17:56:30] shareholder2 bitvps even hosts GLBSE
[17:56:31] ColdHardMetal this is irrlevant at this point.
[17:56:39] shareholder3_ agree with da2ce7, its a different, larger market
the new GLBSE would operate in
(From The stockexchange shareholders on welfare) Note the 2012 date on that, too. Geddit? Read here, and understand it this time. But, but, it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that DPR was at all times Ross Ulbricht, and nobody could have possibly stolen his identity or been in control of the SR servers in order to set up that peacenik for hiring multiple murders! :p
Is your source what you've read on Trilema back in Oct? |
|
|
|
/praying here that Mircea Popescu never pulls his finger out of his ass... we'll not survive the smell.
Dude, you keep inserting yourself in conversations that in no conceivable manner include you with this whiny bullshit. I get it, MP publicly humiliated you at some past point. Get over it, he does this to a dozen fucktards a day, you're not special. Moreover, he probably forgot all about you and your idiocy within the week, what the fuck are you still carrying your bullshit months later for? Learn from it, be less of a fuckwit next time. What do you imagine, that if you whine enough reality somehow changes for you or what is it exactly? Kids today I swear.... |
|
|
|
D00d, using majestic plural to fleece suckers is fine - every pickpocket in this MMRPG does that. I'm not here to judge.
I'm here to show you a handy trick -- the tilde test -- to help you cut down on typing.
It goes like this:
If negating a term makes your statement nonsensical or absurd, the original term is unenlightening (redundant). I'll show you:
"Our prospectus was created over a long drawn out process that took many months of thoughtful consideration."
1. a long drawn-out process negated becomes:
a short drawn-out process - nonsense. Scratch.
2. thoughtful consideration negated becomes:
Thoughtless consideration - nonsense. Scratch.
We're already down to something more manageable, without losing any information:
"Our prospectus was created over a drawn out process that took many months of consideration."
Wait. That reads funny. Did we delete too much?
No.
We simply exposed another fuckup -- another shitpile of words to delete.
Without losing a rat's fart of content.
Observe:
"The prospectus took us months to write."
See? The meaning intact, less typing.
Some might argue the statement itself is bull -- the "we" stands for an out-of-work d00d from Florida, the "prospectus" is a forum post that was typed up over a slice and a can of Bud, etc., etc., but that doesn't bother me.
Basic grammar and writing skills help for random teenaged retards aspiring to pose as businessmen. Commendable, and quite amusing. |
|
|
|
Oh look, Bitcoin's biggest fucktard has opinions to share. GET LOST TAAKI. You're still the shit stain on Bitcoin's discarded old suit. |
|
|
|
|
OP, this isn't an Internet Marketing forum. Take your nonsense elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Scharmbeck shares are now available again 100k shares released a day ago. This is the 2nd set of shares open to the public. Now anyone with 1 share has a chance to win 500 BTC. Don't believe us look it up. $30-40 bucks is a share value today and it allows anyone the chance at a 500 BTC raffle. More shares you own the more chances, best part is even if you do not win you still got your shares. They were .005 back in Nov I believe. Now they are almost .04 after only a few months. During that time you get your small percent as they grow. SBFS on Cryptostocks.comhttps://cryptostocks.com/securities/60If the only information you've got to post re a share sale is about a raffle, you're signaling pretty hard that you in fact have nothing to offer. |
|
|
|
So, I must find the restaurant with the lowest poison level to avoid foraging or exchanging with the mystery natives in a parking lot.  That is until someone comes along and does it right. Do you know what "else" means? The very point is that no, the answer is not to use a service that doesn't work on the grounds that you can't find any that are better. If you cannot find a service run by competent people delivering what they propose to deliver, then you're stuck figuring something else out. Not "avoiding" the less convenient options on the grounds that they'll take work and thought, or that they're different than what you expected and therefore scary and bad. Seriously, if this is how your attitude towards poison works, how are you still alive?! Why are you even interested in Bitcoin? If you're so married to convenience you'd rather be swindled with a fake smile and hand-holding than take advantage of the very powerful tools available to you for figuring out for yourself how to not get swindled, it may well be that BTC isn't really your thing. |
|
|
|
No idea of the validity of these claims. But it should be a good reminder for people to be careful using services/sites where owners are anonymous and unknown . Especially a service as historically shady and dirty as gambling.
If you lost your money chalk it up as a lesson learned and really try to be careful who you give your bitcoins too, especially in the gambling industry which has always been a shady business whether legal or illegal.
Anyone know if there's any bitcoin related gambling sites that are legally licensed and or the owners/companies info is public for all to see and hold accountable? So far any gambling sites I've ever used the owners are always anonymous, which is highly risky regardless of how good of a track record they may have.
Stop being retarded. There are maybe five services in all of BTC where the owners are not anonymous and well known. Bitbet is MP and Kako, in this case. It's universally a bad habit to speak on matters you don't understand. Put in the effort to find out what the fuck you're talking about first, so what you have to say may actually be worth reading. Someday. Yes Keyser: 631 0.01100000 14gP8 0.01093285 1KXzg Clearly the credit(s) came from me (14gP8) and went to some https://blockchain.info/address/1KXzgzndQnugs5P8dmao1nj2AVviJQAmFVThe jerk refuses to correct his error. Of further note, if vegas paid out the way this Matic "Tic, hence bloodsucker" guy pays out, they'd be entirely shutdown in less than 24 hours. BITBET.US where even if you win, you lose (at least some, if not all). Furthermore, notice that a winning bet of .011 returns less than the bet itself (despite its weight), if you even happen to get it. Something is clearly seriously wrong with that guy!! It would be nice if someone were to hack him (and all companies industrializing/profiting off the bitcoin with expensive rigs) and donate the bitcoins to charity (bitcoin100 or etc). There's no "error" you boob. When you enter a new bet, you get to specify a new address. This is published on the site, right then. Once the bet is resolved, that address receives the payment. This is verifiable on each and every bitbet bet, by simply clicking on the respective payout addresses as listed. That said, your communication is defective in the following ways: 1. If you indeed control the originating address, you have failed to prove this. Go ahead and do so. 2. If indeed you have had a problem with some BitBet bet, you have failed to indicate which. All you have there is some blockchain tx, which, whatever - there's fifty thousand of these each day, anyone can find a list by just surfing the blockchain site and I'll be damned if I'm going to search BitBet for random addresses just because you're retarded. 3. If the payout address you used when you made your bet isn't one you control this is YOUR PROBLEM. Next time, use an address you control. Meanwhile, make posts about how fucking stupid you are, not about how you'd like to misrepresent some excellent service that had the misfortune of you bringing your stupidity to it that day. 4. Vegas got nothing on BitBet. The day Vegas has 1900 BTC proposition bets settled we may care, but until that day go tell Vegas how to be more like BitBet, not the other way around. tl;dr: You being stupid does not give you license to go around throwing random insults at well respected sites. They won't stick on the market leader, they'll stick on you. |
|
|
|
Hi Bitcoin Community,
I am a co-owner of a technology company. My partners and I decided to jump into a huge project and the first part of that would be the creation of the ultimate bitcoin exchange. We have begun fundraising and have obtained enough funding to pay coders to start the development of the exchange. The project is starting Monday and it will approximately take 4 weeks to 6 weeks to finalize our first phase.
As time goes, I will keep everyone updated who is interested about the progress on this forum. We will soon have our homepage up with a countdown and a subscribe option as well.
In this thread I would like to ask for your opinions. We have the proper funding and coder resources to create the best and most user friendly exchange. But in order to do so, I would like to reach out to you guys: the users. If you have anything you lack form exchanges, anything you are annoyed with, anything you would like to add and use, please let me know! We have resources and ideas, all we need is your input!
Thank you so much for your time and your ideas. As I mentioned earlier I will keep everyone updated on bitcointalk. We'll have our Facebook, Twitter, and our homepage up and running very soon, with the option to become part of our mailing list. If interested, please sign up so that we can keep you updated with regards to our progress.
Yours Truly,
Coinster
See here. Bitcoin is inundated with services started by anonymous, unestablished "I"s and "our team"s "reaching out" and so forth. What's needed is competence. What you're offering is marketing babble. |
|
|
|
Sure, man, it's my fault and I'm all to blame but they can fix this in a few seconds if they wanted to.
You should probably meditate on these statements for a while. Think about what they mean, not what you'd like them to mean. |
|
|
|
And who exactly would you consider "non-crappy"?
It seems to me that ALL the exchanges are crap. Just different crap levels.
Learn to WoT, for one thing. For the other, it's not a matter of choosing the least bad participant in a group that yields results. It's choosing those participants that are actually good. If there aren't any, you'll have to figure something else out. Imagine you're in a restaurant. On reading the menu you notice that various poisons are listed as ingredients in the dishes. Is your reaction to stay and order the least poisonous thing? "But MPOE-PR, we must eat!" Well, until such time as you're able to recognize a sane restaurant with real food, you'll have to forage. It won't be especially convenient. But as long as you commit to doing it right, you'll survive, and it'll make having a cooked meal later on all the more splendid. |
|
|
|
Not if you want to sell it for bitcoins..
Fun fact: asicminer with 200k btc dividends past year is evaluated at 200k btc
mpex.co with 14k in dividends is valued at 1,000k btc
How can a dying company which has less than 1/10th asicminers profits be worth more than 5 times asicminer.
Does that make it 50 times more expensive than asicminer based on dividends alone?
Do you honestly think mpoe will pay out a significant percentage of share price in dividends over the next year or two? My guess is it doesn't even pay out 1% (or 10k btc) in the next year.
Who knows maybe some extremely rich idiots will join and blow a few thousand btc gambling. Doubt it though since the increasing cost of joining is going to exclude potential customers (idiots) from joining.
You're too new to be aware of most of the basic facts of the matter, such as the basic fact that MPEx was here before Asicminer, and is still here (showing gains, apparently?!) as Asicminer is vanishing into thin air (not least because of their own poor management skills). There's a lot more stuff you just don't know about, is all. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
