|
Court?
Over 25 BTC? actually 22.5 BTC.
hmm... Petitions court for a seat in the gallery.
|
|
|
|
Well, of lately, it seems the only reason to provide identifying documents is to have them spread around the world from 'hacks'.
To me, it doesn't matter. Any information about me listed in my passport or utility bill is almost public information anyway and distributed in any number of online systems that could be hacked anyway. The traditional banking system will protect/refund/replace any of my dollars that are fraudulently taken from any of my accounts - there is insurance for that kind of thing. Its a small risk in order to get out from under that shitty, outdated, corrupt, and immoral system. Really? I can see your point to some extent but you do expect a level of privacy. Lets test it. If it doesn't really matter since everyone can get it anyway, post a picture of your Passport. Once the information breaks your bubble space, people realize that it actually does matter but they have been ignoring it. |
|
|
|
It's a bit of a shame really, he has a decent voice and camera presence, and he could have put that to work by going off other people's scripts. But instead he tried (and failed hard) to start a business, first vacillating between for-profit/non-profit status, and then presenting a business plan that consisted mostly of fail.
Does this really constitute a decent camera presence? He's trying to sell ads and he can't even make a medium quality video or present himself as a professional. Nothing about that ad wanted to make me give him money. LOL, Ok, He isn't Steven Spielberg. However, he could possibly be a Diamond in the Rough. Name one of your famous actors and then go back to one of their early productions. If the standard is to start at the professional level, then it is a high bar to meet when trying to expand a community. However with that being said, I wouldn't loan him money either. Currently. |
|
|
|
...
Pro-Tips: Don't be shady, submit your identification information, and comply with all the banking requirements on your last trip out of the system (just hold your middle finger high to the banking system as you transfer your Bitcoins to your personal wallet).
great tip dude, i already did the first part without protesting but missed middle finger one  Well, of lately, it seems the only reason to provide identifying documents is to have them spread around the world from 'hacks'. |
|
|
|
*there's always a possibility that the attacker tampered with the database. But it's nearly impossible to tell which data was tampered with and which wasn't, so either way they're in pretty hot water. If only database technology was available for financial services where there is the ability to store transactions with auditable history as well as there being an archive log such that recovery to a point in time is possible. If only such a thing existed .... Is there such a thing? WOW... who would have thunk it. |
|
|
|
We have new (old) information on this, though: In November, an investor approached me to acquire Bitcoinica. Due to regulatory concerns, I agreed to the deal and signed the agreement. Bitcoinica was sold for a good price. However, since the investor is unable to arrange for a replacement team, I continued to become the sole operator until Team Intersango took over two weeks ago. The investor let me keep all profits until late January, the official handover time. After handover, he continued to offer generous salary and performance bonus every month. The investor demands his identity to be protected so I won't share more information on this.
This does not sound like Intersango hold most of the shares. I fully disagree with guruvan’s sentiment, in my view at the very least genjix (Amir Taaki) and phantomcircuit (Patrick Strateman) are some of the most trustworthy people around here. I would distrust this ominous investor if I was you. Especially since he demands privacy. I see both sides here. However, if you don't respect his/her privacy as instructed, give back his/her money. |
|
|
|
We are building an account claim page. You can submit your account information, financial information (balances) and trading information to verify your identity. We will then match with the records we have.
If only there were some technology that used a second form of authentication, perhaps a one time password delivered to a mobile, as sufficient verification of identity. Oh wait .... there is. I believe even MT requires to be woken up in the middle of the night on large movements. Sometimes, I believe, by actually talking to the owner. |
|
|
|
|
Why does the wallet even need to reside on the server?
But I'd like to know if it is usual for a 18K BTC transaction to take place without review?
I mean, if I goto the bank to withdrawal 50K+ USD, I would expect a little more scrutiny.
A stepped system of checks, I believe would have, if not stopped, delayed it.
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone I'm a graphic designer looking to do some work for bitcoins!
I need a new avatar to fit my magnanimous bearish position. How much?  1LukeWKhrTacxhxgSvXJQ7banTeZK53kk3 LOL, Accepted. I'll send you some coin. Thanx. |
|
|
|
I am not trolling, I want to understand what makes the difference in the essence of things, when stripping away all that funny legislative and finanical terminology. Place your bets. Is the terminology. You have 1:1 Odds to 10:1 Odds with the spread going to the House. |
|
|
|
|
How do you get a complete expanded view of the blockchain.info/tree view in a .png?
|
|
|
|
I didn't mean to give the impression of disagreeing with the math but the ones controlling the choice to add another digit can control the supply and demand to some extent. Is this not what is being done with the FED?
Another aspect, is suppose someone is hoarding a lot of Bitcoins say like 10 Million (extreme example), we add another decimal and the hoarder starts spending. It messes with the economics of it. What we might have attributed to attrition is actually just a large saver.
If I buy gas at the station, it's priced down to sub-cents (0.1 cent). I'm not sure if this does anything to supply and demand other than offering gas stations another way to display more nines in the end of a price sign. Hoarding + loosing Bitcoins is not distinguishable. There is also NO way for you to proove with certainty that it's not an elaborate scam of an advanced AI that generates fake transactions + websites + forum posts etc. and is trying to slowly screw you out of money. All Bitcoins that you currently don't possess are potentially controlled by this entity...  To get less paranoid again: Even saying "in 10 years, all your Bitcoins are useless and until then you can exchange them for 1000 Bitcoin2.0 a piece" won't change the fact that someone holding 10 million of BTC that were believed to be lost could crash the economy simply by moving them, prooving that they are in fact NOT lost. Unless something like this happens at regular intervals (depending on where you live, this actually happens in real life too! My grandparents are now probably using their 4th or 5th currency already...) there simply is no way to tell if coins are lost for sure, which (since this is a risk) surely is a factor pushing down on the exchange rate. The longer old coins haven't been moved, the more people will probably believe that they are "dead", there's no way to know for sure though. If I buy gas at the station, it's priced down to sub-cents (0.1 cent). I'm not sure if this does anything to supply and demand other than offering gas stations another way to display more nines in the end of a price sign. Nah, that's just there because over millions of gallons of gas all those 0.1 cents turn into something. Just like all those 0.0005 tx fees. Hoarding + loosing Bitcoins is not distinguishable. There is also NO way for you to proove with certainty that it's not an elaborate scam of an advanced AI that generates fake transactions + websites + forum posts etc. and is trying to slowly screw you out of money. All Bitcoins that you currently don't possess are potentially controlled by this entity... The two biggest problems I see with BTC is blockchain bloat and attrition (lost coins). Determining attrition is as you said very hard if not impossible. The purpose of BTC to prevent the ability to print money or decrease it so that it maintains a constant supply. Attrition erodes this principle. Coins have been lost, you can't replace them so erosion is occurring. :Tin Foil Hat: It might just be an advanced AI to get our money (or my money) so peg the value of 'something' in BTC to the USD and avoid the hole BTC issue, if you are really paranoid. Hence, making the conspirators spend tons of money gaining nothing while you profit off of their expenditures.  Even saying "in 10 years, all your Bitcoins are useless and until then you can exchange them for 1000 Bitcoin2.0 a piece" won't change the fact that someone holding 10 million of BTC that were believed to be lost could crash the economy simply by moving them, prooving that they are in fact NOT lost. Unless something like this happens at regular intervals (depending on where you live, this actually happens in real life too! My grandparents are now probably using their 4th or 5th currency already...) there simply is no way to tell if coins are lost for sure, which (since this is a risk) surely is a factor pushing down on the exchange rate. The longer old coins haven't been moved, the more people will probably believe that they are "dead", there's no way to know for sure though. Well as you stated it is very hard to determine true attrition. However, if over a period of 10 years people will be aware of the change to BTC v.2 and transfer them at a 1:1 value. Those that have not transferred will be attributed to attrition. And then miners will be able to make up the difference again. Rinse and Repeat when necessary. Ok, back to topic again. So, How many spends have their been on the 'stolen' money? |
|
|
|
Well, there is an entire piece of science designed to bring evidence, it's called mathematics.
As there is no way to send e.g. 1/3rd Bitcoin, only atomic units (and to make it more convenient, we call 100 000 000 of these units "1 Bitcoin"), even dividing these further will in the beginning only add zeroes after the decimal seperator (so you will always have only 1.0 or 4.0000 or 1337.00000000000 Satoshis). Afterwards the atomic unit is simply a millionth (or whatever) of a Satoshi. If this after some time is still not enough, then you cann expand the size again.
You can multiply all USDs you own by 100, then you have everything in US-Cents, for cash money that would be these atomic units. Unlike fiat money coming from a central bank though, Bitcoins do NOT need to be issued in a new way or shape, they just need to be multiplied by a factor of 10 or 1000 or whatever. Imagine an US-Cent being worth close to nothing (like a Satoshi) - instead of paying with tons (literally) of USD notes, you'd pay with 1 million USD notes. Bitcoin has the opposite direction. Money available to users won't get more and more, but less and less.
By the way, I really believe, there are also a lot of psychological effects playing part in this. I'm for example still strongly for adopting milliBitcoins as standard denomination, meaning 1 current Bitcoin = 1000 milliBitcoins, both amounts valued at ~5 USD currently.
Yes, you won't be able to brag that 1 unit of standard denomination buys you a happy meal at McD, but We would be more or less on par with Linden Dollars instead and people might feel better about themselves, if they hold a 4-5 digit amount of milliBitcoins than right now where even buying 1 BTC is already looking like a little investment.
I didn't mean to give the impression of disagreeing with the math but the ones controlling the choice to add another digit can control the supply and demand to some extent. Is this not what is being done with the FED? Another aspect, is suppose someone is hoarding a lot of Bitcoins say like 10 Million (extreme example), we add another decimal and the hoarder starts spending. It messes with the economics of it. What we might have attributed to attrition is actually just a large saver. I agree with you on the psychology of the currency. People like 1 to remain 1 and not change into 10 or 0.0103 etc... So I would not disagree with the milliBitcoin principle to at least keep a 1 as close to 1 as possible when the value of things change based on resource availability. The -qt client allows this to some extent. For the reasons I have stated, I favor a migration rather than using a division to account for monetary base erosion through attrition. Possibly over a 5 to 10 year period to give savers time to migrate before their coins become useless. Maybe my stock splitting concept wasn't the best way to express my views. And it isn't really about the splits but who gets to decide to split or not split because they will have control. Edit: Sorry for going off topic here. Back to the Bitcoinica debacle. |
|
|
|
Yes, we can decide to add a billion decimals and in fact if the smallest unit buys you a house, we will. Definitely. Most likely we will even when it can buy you a grain of rice. I wish. For now nobody cares about the 10 digits other then when you want to brag about thefts in anonymous messages. Trust me, many people care about them. All those Satoshi's are adding up. I might not have properly conveyed my point though and am sorry for that. Sometimes my fingers don't type what I am thinking. To sum up, I basically look at dividing as a stock split, and shredding as a reverse split. If one can do that, they, imo, can control the value. Shredding will not really be destroying them because we can always divide them again to adjust the amount that it takes to buy things. Do you see where I am going? If not, I didn't properly convey my thoughts on it. And I might be wrong, as there is no evidence for both directions yet. |
|
|
|
Better keep the bounty of other hackers than pretend they got "pseudo-hacked" themselves, I would think.
If you read above it says they destroy the coins to /dev/null or something.
Gox doesn't destroy them. Why in the hell would you EVER want to permanently destroy coins? It surely doesn't make the value rise any, so what would the point be? If we only have 21 Million coins that will ever be created, making that number smaller doesn't help. Coins are divisible... 100 BTC 21 Milllion BTC If you lose 10% per year, which one lasts longer? Coins are divisible, but are you suggesting they are divisible below a Satoshi? If so, then there is a problem. Even the FED can't print money into ∞. I lolled Telling from your other later posts, this is not trolling? Yes, we can decide to add a billion decimals and in fact if the smallest unit buys you a house, we will. Definitely. Most likely we will even when it can buy you a grain of rice. For now nobody cares about the 10 digits other then when you want to brag about thefts in anonymous messages. With the recent sky-rocketing of the USD the FED will soon bring out bills µ$ Yea, that is why I reposted to clarify my position. Please re-read. I know many will disagree, but it is just my opinion. I am not offering empirical proof of it, until it happens. |
|
|
|
100 BTC
21 Milllion BTC
If you lose 10% per year, which one lasts longer?
Coins are divisible, but are you suggesting they are divisible below a Satoshi?
If so, then there is a problem. Even the FED can't print money into ∞.
Actually, there is no problem if bitcoin was modified (I don't believe its currently possible) to extend the decimals out another digit. It wouldn't be the same as printing money, because that simply increases the aggregate supply of money, but only goes into the hands of a few. If Bitcoin were to extend the decimal out further, it would mean nobody's supply in comparison to the total supply has changed. It simply gives the ability to have higher precision pricing, like if the US were to re-introduce half-pennies. Yes, it would be exactly like if the US were to re-introduce half-pennies. Trillions of them. Without taking money out of the supply, introducing money into it, is quantitative easing. Edit: I know technically they are not new coins however. Just the ability to divide ones that already exist. The ideal is to maintain the precise amount of coins, i.e. 21 Million. Buy allowing ∞ division, it is possible to tweak the value. For argument sake: A person holding 1 Satoshi after the split would be holding 10 Satoshis. So if 1 Satoshi was equal to $1 before the split, what is it after the split? Still $1 is what most will say because the base unit was moved lower. I however look at it like a stock split. Assuming all things equal, the former will be true. But, things are never equal in this matter. The value of the Satoshi will change from the $1 range. However, the basic math of the division is true but in practice, at least in my opinion, it will not work. Why not just do it now and Give everyone a Billion Satoshis each? Cause changing the base unit changes the psychology of its value. It is a fiat currency. Plus if you can go one way, you can go the other way. A reverse split? |
|
|
|
Better keep the bounty of other hackers than pretend they got "pseudo-hacked" themselves, I would think.
If you read above it says they destroy the coins to /dev/null or something.
Gox doesn't destroy them. Why in the hell would you EVER want to permanently destroy coins? It surely doesn't make the value rise any, so what would the point be? If we only have 21 Million coins that will ever be created, making that number smaller doesn't help. Coins are divisible... 100 BTC 21 Milllion BTC If you lose 10% per year, which one lasts longer? Coins are divisible, but are you suggesting they are divisible below a Satoshi? If so, then there is a problem. Even the FED can't print money into ∞. |
|
|
|
There's a lot of complaining, arguing, and finger pointing going on in this thread and rightfully so. However, I think the first thing we should worry about is %100 reimbursement as fast as possible. Only after that should we worry who's to blame. Many people in this forum, including me, lost a considerable amount of money. Having that money just vanish is terrifying and until we get it all back will we be able to think straight and rationally.
That is the point of Bitcoin. There is no getting it back. If there was, why are people using it over PP, ACH, etc... at a cheaper cost to them. Even if you physically catch the guy with the wallet.dat(s), unless he tells you his passphrase(s), the coins are gone. And that is assuming it is just one guy with one copy of the wallet.dat(s). I am sorry for your loss however. If people are going to be leaving lots of money in others control, you should get some type of assurance from fraud or risk loosing it all. At least, lets have funds insured up to a certain amount to start. Isn't it time for the BDIC for businesses wanting to handle lots of coin? The nice thing about BDIC is that the wallet can remain a 'cold' wallet until funds need to be distributed by direction of ah... 'Community Board of Directors'. Although distribution of funds would take time to distribute considering if one adheres to a good 'Claims' protocol. There are members already providing their own insurance to funds by setting aside a portion of profits to fund their own self insurance. This is not a bad idea either. I would suggest reputable businesses do this and make the 'cold' address transparent. |
|
|
|
|
Hey I didn't convict you of anything.
I don't think you are a 'Scammer', theymos has said as much, but he doesn't want to create another tag for this case.
Actually, if you handled it different, you probably could have avoided the whole issue.
It is you being unreasonable that has got you here.
For Example:
Smart1985 mistakenly over paid for ads. If you applied those funds to another third party for those ads, you couldn't refund him because they are no longer under your control. However, they are under your control because you admitted as much.
I really don't understand why there hasn't been a compromise here. But meh... It's you business.
Edit: btw: One of the reasons I don't think you are a scammer is 'because' you admitted control over the coins.
|
|
|
|
Have some proof I own that address ? "1Bu1424Lf7y3Jz9p4ZyCo2mRSQDwdaXrHa" NO. Just FUD. I was trolling to get the scammer tag ! I also stole the 18K BTC from bitcoinica !!! I am also Tom Williams ! And MrMoon ! And author of every other theft on here ... Can anybody actually prove I own that address  I can say anything to anyone but in a real court you need proof you did what you said you did. Well if it gets to the jury stage, all you need is 12 people saying: "Guilty" Proof or no proof. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
