Why don't use an existing standard like eg. FIX protocol?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Information_eXchange

Theoretically it alrady has everything that's required.

What we need is a third and impartial party, who helps to clear up this mess. Call it a escrow or what ever.

So you have a better idea than playing by the rules the person makes that have all the power in this game? Let me know what you have in mind then.

When has "let's wait a little longer" ever had a good outcome for the victims of Bitcoin enterprise clusterfucks?

Start a fake company that is going to release an ASIC 'soon' and offer pre-orders though bitcoin.
Be sure to post non-relevant and photoshopped pictures of electronics, as well as bogus stat tables that don't make any sense to any sane electronics-savvy person to convince people.

Watch the preorders flow in.

Maybe you feel better when you take a look at the first (updated) post of this thread if you didnt do already. It means that already 17% of the usermoney (if it was 8000BTC in total) was returned yet. So something is moving.

hello burtw,

Would you be interested in a investment?
The 60 giga hash ASIC miners are estimated to come out at the end of November.
Each cost $1299 (Each)

I was interested in getting two.
Which at today pricing would be about $2598/($10.59801)=245.14(BTC)
The loan would go that once I received the two units,
I would pay you weekly, and until I have payed back 120% of the original amount.
Sooner the better, then sooner I can place the orders for the ASIC miners.
Let me know if interested.

Best regards
Lightlord

Yeah I wouldn't really call it "mastermind".  When your plan requires the abject stupidity of others in order to work it is hardly a mastermind.

Pirate borrowed BTC and sold them for USD.  TL/DR version he was massively short (probably the shortest short in the history of Bitcoin).  He had no way to pay the interest obligation at the current exchange rate.  However 500K BTC is pretty easy to pay off if BTC fell to say $0.10 USD:BTC.

So:
a) Pirate had no end game, he was just as delusional as his investors
or
b) Pirate was the worlds worst ponzi operator but lucked out that he found a group of people more idiotic than him who ALSO didn't really mind losing millions of dollars (actions speak louder than words here).
or
c) Pirate's "plan" was to tank BTC exchange rate and thus massively devalue his debt.  Doesn't matter if the plan was dubious or not.

**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Fri Aug 10 08:06:25 2012

Aug 10 08:06:31 <mircea_popescu>   listen i actually wanted to talk to you.
Aug 10 08:06:38 <patrickharnett>   hi
Aug 10 08:06:54 <mircea_popescu>   hey. your deposits still bs&t free ?
Aug 10 08:07:21 <patrickharnett>   I run a slightly complicated business, but most of the deposit accounts I run are BS&T free
Aug 10 08:07:39 <patrickharnett>   that's what the market wanted
Aug 10 08:07:58 <mircea_popescu>   you deem yourself able to repay your depositors in the event bs&t goes bankrupt, and nothing is recovered ?
Aug 10 08:08:00 <patrickharnett>   back in a couple of minutes - grabbing a glass of wine - friday evening here
Aug 10 08:09:57 <patrickharnett>   back
Aug 10 08:10:17 <patrickharnett>   in the event BS&T goes bust, I have more than enough assets to cover that
Aug 10 08:10:41 <patrickharnett>   mainly because the 15,500 coins I hold on deposit are not invest in BS&T
Aug 10 08:10:56 <mircea_popescu>   well that works. i'd like to put 500 bitcoins with you
Aug 10 08:11:02 <mircea_popescu>   do you mind id'ing with gribble ?
Aug 10 08:11:28 <patrickharnett>   I was only planning on being here a minute so didn't id

[...]

Aug 10 08:40:02 <mircea_popescu>   anyway. deposits are recallable on how long notice ?
Aug 10 08:41:10 <patrickharnett>   deposits, straight forward, on call
Aug 10 08:41:22 <mircea_popescu>   179MtpYiG2sfVmPopsrHF6i2KimEmjCimY
Aug 10 08:41:25 <mircea_popescu>   is mine. what's yours ?
Aug 10 08:42:18 <patrickharnett>   your unique deposit address is: 1PYEzELdHT1EhLHV7ePsHCai6pF2UH1475
Aug 10 08:43:08 <mircea_popescu>   on its way. you compound on request correct ?
Aug 10 08:43:19 <patrickharnett>   your new balance is 500.5250
Aug 10 08:43:26 <mircea_popescu>   why .5 ?!
Aug 10 08:43:29 <patrickharnett>   compound is default
Aug 10 08:43:48 <patrickharnett>   because you deposit started at 12:01 a.m. and it's 5:43 p.m.
Aug 10 08:44:11 <patrickharnett>   it's one of those little things

**** ENDING LOGGING AT Fri Aug 10 11:50:21 2012

**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Wed Aug 15 00:53:50 2012

Aug 15 01:11:18 <patrickharnett>   hi
Aug 15 01:11:56 <mircea_popescu>   gheya!
Aug 15 01:12:11 <mircea_popescu>   im about to do a tranched cdo based on mpoe debt, my bond with you and another asset
Aug 15 01:12:14 <mircea_popescu>   you see a problem with this ?
Aug 15 01:12:47 <patrickharnett>   which bond? you mean the deposit?
Aug 15 01:12:51 <mircea_popescu>   yeah.
Aug 15 01:13:31 <patrickharnett>   well if it is a collateralised debt obligation, what's to stop you asking for your deposit back and removing the collateral?
Aug 15 01:14:02 <mircea_popescu>   umm what, and perjure myself ?
Aug 15 01:15:10 <patrickharnett>   not sure if purjure is the right word
Aug 15 01:15:21 <mircea_popescu>   well ya, but whatever it is.
Aug 15 01:15:58 <patrickharnett>   so, if I understand, basically you're asking people to trust that you will not remove the deposit.  But there is nothing on the account to prevent that
Aug 15 01:16:16 <mircea_popescu>   except im quoting the exact line from your reporting in the contract
Aug 15 01:16:35 <mircea_popescu>   do you want to see a copy of it ?
Aug 15 01:17:08 <patrickharnett>   might be useful - you can email it if that's easy
Aug 15 01:17:18 <mircea_popescu>   whats your addy again ?
Aug 15 01:17:36 <patrickharnett>   in principle I don't have a problem - and couldn't stop you

[...]

Aug 15 01:18:03 <patrickharnett>   I held ShadowAlexey's reserve deposit for a few months for him

[...]

Aug 15 01:32:55 <patrickharnett>   anyway - yes I am completely fine with the doc as provided and happy to help underpin a new offering.
Aug 15 01:33:31 <mircea_popescu>   cool.
Aug 15 01:34:22 <patrickharnett>   hmmm, looks like the traded PPTs are having fun this morning
Aug 15 01:59:30 <mircea_popescu>   http://polimedia.us/bitcoin/mpex.php
Aug 15 01:59:33 <mircea_popescu>   yup, they're live.

Aug 15 02:27:19 <mircea_popescu>   o hai.
Aug 15 02:27:37 <patrickharnett>   yes, there is a lurking starfish
Aug 15 02:28:10 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 40 @ 0.05 = 2 BTC

Aug 15 02:28:20 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [TYGRR.BOND-P] 3 @ 0.9999 = 2.9997 BTC

Aug 15 02:28:56 <mircea_popescu>   patrickharnett so i guess this has the side advantage to you that you know when you'll be asked to repay : 30th of october or thereabouts.
Aug 15 02:29:02 <assbot>   [GLBSE] [DMC] 1 @ 0.05 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:34 <patrickharnett>   I didn't notice the 30'th date - wouldn't be a problem anyway
Aug 15 02:29:47 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 32810 @ 0.000383 = 12.5662 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:48 <mircea_popescu>   well since the bonds die and repay on the 1st of nov
Aug 15 02:29:49 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 18714 @ 0.00038423 = 7.1905 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:50 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 797 @ 0.00039267 = 0.313 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:51 <assbot>   [MPEX] [S.MPOE] 5615 @ 0.00039477 = 2.2166 BTC

Aug 15 02:29:52 <mircea_popescu>   it'd be a few days prior.
Aug 15 02:30:09 <patrickharnett>   it's only 500+interest, it's not lots

Yes, 2.0 was pretty much the beginning of all this, though I'd prefer the perspective they had when it was implemented as a command-line client. GLBSE errs: becomes less like MPEx.

Thanks.  Most of my experience is back end processes. I thought about just having it done via SSH.  
Wonder how popular that would be?

It could be that while I was monitoring, no double spends happened, but that recently they've started again.  I expect the site operators have a similar monitoring system in place, and would have shut down operations if they were being ripped off by such a scheme.  They are in an excellent position to know whether they are having an unusual number of large losing bets never confirming.  I very much doubt they would still be allowing 0-confirmation bets if they were seeing such an attack happening.

IMO #4 is our best issue so far (but #5 should be better).

That's unacceptably "vague".  What constitutes "most"?  What happens if James is unable to recover "most" of the overpayments?  James needs to commit to a timeline.  Anyone who is going to return their overpayment is likely to have done so already.  Refusing to move forward until some arbitrary amount of still outstanding overpayments is returned is just power-tripping.  People are running out of patience with James' bullshit excuses and are likely to look for retribution rather than restitution if this drags on much longer.