If your sources are legit you will get murdered today with 195% payouts in the binary option world.
no, we do not think like that. we want only to know what payback is reasonable with this event. we think that the current 170%-175% payback of other sites is too low and is unfair. of course, as you say, we may lose. in case of this, we will consider that as advertising cost. we will trid to find what payback is reasonable in binary option game constantly. and our sources are very legit. as you are concerned, we lost a bitcoin for the weekend. but we obtain advertising effect and can think about a reasonable reward we hope that more people have a more interest for our site. thank you. I doubt it. As I stated until you open up your algorithms and can prove the price you have on your site is made a certain way no one knows that your not just making the price up. I offered to help you but you just went quite. |
|
|
|
If your sources are legit you will get murdered today with 195% payouts in the binary option world.
no, we do not think like that. we want only to know what payback is reasonable with this event. we think that 175% payback of other sites currently is too low and is unfair. of course, as you say, we may lose. in case of this, we will consider that as advertisement payment. we will trid to find what payback is reasonable in binary option game constantly. and our sources are very legit. Feel free to pm me, I will gladly help you with your site so that the 6.13 yuan isnt a fixed number and will auto adjust as well as help you plug in the data to make your site more transparent |
|
|
|
I would avoid this site. I dont know where you get your feeds from but I have watched your site say the price is 324 while on the top 3 exchanges the price was 326, 328, and 326. So im not sure where you get your feeds but refusing to post it publicly and not giving your site transparency just means that potential traders can go else where. I would highly recommend using btcoracles. They are transparent and easy to use.
sorry. our data have had a problem because of exchange rate(yuan/usd). and fix it right now. we get data from bitc-e, bitstamp, kraken, okcoin, bitfinex, huobi, coinbase, btcchina. and select three exchange from those by volume. BTC/USD data formula is (bitstamp+bitfinex+huobi X 2) / 4 now. huobi volume is big , so double it. LTC/USD data formula is (okcoin btchina btc-e)/ X 3 now. Three exchange may change by reason of volume, exchange trouble, etc. yuan/usd exchange rate is 6.13 now. we will announce before changing exchange rate or exchange. that really isnt a clear equation could you please state it again clearly. The goal is anyone should be able to go and confirm your price is accurate using the equation you post here. |
|
|
|
|
I would avoid this site. I dont know where you get your feeds from but I have watched your site say the price is 324 while on the top 3 exchanges the price was 326, 328, and 326. So im not sure where you get your feeds but refusing to post it publicly and not giving your site transparency just means that potential traders can go else where. I would highly recommend using btcoracles. They are transparent and easy to use.
|
|
|
|
|
I could do it if your interested. Shoot me a pm.
|
|
|
|
What happens if buyer doesn't release escrow and claims he never got it?
What if seller claims he delivered it and the buyer refuses to release escrow?
Well as most escrow services, we have dispute resolution built into the service and at launch we will also allow users to select there own judge. Good question, there are so many escrow's here but if your service is safer i will use it for sure.
Well the goal is to be as safe and secure as possible. We will keep as much funds as possible in cold storage to limit the risks |
|
|
|
Cool sites, but what makes you different than all the other escrows offering their [free] services?
Well for starters you can select your own judge to judge a transaction and you can also fix the deposit to a fiat value. |
|
|
|
 Just posting to let you know about my new escrow website, escrowmybits.com is now live and accepting beta signups. We plan to offer escrow services that are very simple to use and even offer escrow services that are fixed to a fiat value. |
|
|
|
Looking good, Signed up for beta.
Okay great, also if you or anyone else has any suggestions or feature ideas feel free to post them and/or email me them. |
|
|
|
Hello all, Just posting to let you know my new website, escrowmybits.com is now live and accepting beta signups. We plan to offer escrow services that are very simple and even offer escrow that is fixed to a fiat value |
|
|
|
Hello all, Just posting to let you know my new website, escrowmybits.com is now live and accepting beta signups. We plan to offer escrow services that are very simple and even offer escrow that is fixed to a fiat value |
|
|
|
|
What features would you want to see in a mining pool to encourage you to switch to it?
If you have a suggestion please post it below and I will add it to the poll
|
|
|
|
Sigsafe at a CrossroadHopefully some readers can help me decide what to do next because this project is now at a crossroad. I've proven that a passive NFC device can parse and sign a bitcoin transaction and demonstrated that in a video. I've obtained hands-on experience with elliptic curve cryptography, I've learned how bitcoin transactions are structured at the bit level, and I now I have a working device I can use to secure my personal bitcoins much better than the wad of paper wallets that inspired the project in the first place. In short, I've achieved a lot of what I set out to achieve. Of course, I was also hoping this would turn into something that others could use; non-bitcoin R&D is no longer as fulfilling to me  ... So the question is, do I keep pushing forward? The next steps would be time and resource consuming. If I had a firm commitment from one or more developers of popular Android wallets that "yes, if we can prove that this works, we will add NFC hardware wallet support to our main line of code" then I think I would probably continue. But this device has limitations:- It would only work seamlessly on Android phones at the moment. Many computers would need an external USB NFC reader, and it's unclear if/when the NFC chip in the new iPhone 6 will be "open" to custom Apps. - There's no screen. But of course it has advantages too:- It's very simple and intuitive to use. - It's low cost. - It's more secure than using multisig paper wallets without also having an offline machine (but less secure than a fully offline machine). - NFC will likely become more widespread given Apple's new payment system. - Android is > 80% of the smartphone market worldwide. - Since the device has a sophisticated Cortex M3 processor, it's a good platform for developing more sophisticated devices (for example, a device with a tiny low-power screen that could draw power from the NFC EM field). So, what should I do? Just wanted to mention that adding windows phone support shouldnt be a problem either. Tho windows phone is a smaller percentage of the market but it is still something that should be considered. |
|
|
|
Neat idea, personally I think just adding to the device a small button or way for the user to just approve signings before they happen would be great.
Lack of a screen/button is the most common criticism on the sigsafe thread at r/bitcoin, but of course that also increases cost and complicates the user experience (it's now more complex than "tap to sign"). This is the response I posted there: It's immune to key-loggers (e.g., when used with your computer). It's immune to wallet.dat stealers (since your important private keys are offline). It's resistant to attacks on the sigsafe supply chain or poor random seed selection (since the other seed is generated by an independent party). It's resistant to man-in-the-middle attacks (see below). Regarding signing rogue TXs, I avoided too many details in the video (it's described in the white paper), but the device will only sign transactions authorized by its "signing rules." For example, the device can set "per tap" spend limits (or daily spend limits with the optional battery), verify an ECDSA signature (to reduce the threat of a MITM attack), check a PIN, etc. Consider this scenario: My tag is configured to only sign up to 1 BTC "per tap." In the (IMO very) unlikely event that my wallet app "goes rogue" and remains undetected through several "day-to-day" transactions (even tough it could just steal the online funds) until the moment that I'm about to transfer from my sigsafe, then modifies the TX in an undetected way, authenticates successfully with the sigSafe, and then I sign the rogue TX by tapping, the damage is sill limited to the per-tap spend limit. The attack must occur in the brief moment when your tag is in contact with the NFC reader and would be very difficult to execute. There's no perfect security and there's certainly benefits to having a screen, buttons, etc. But we should also weigh probability of loss versus the cost and complexity of the security solution. I think a device like this is simple to use, low cost, and reduces the attack surface significantly. That being said, I'd still like to make a more expensive version with a screen and capacitive touch sensor  Well I agree that the signing on transactions with a key can ensure that this doesnt happen, but for the less tech savvy of us, I think a button of some sort still provides the best protection. I do understand that the button can add a cost, but then it may be cheaper to just make it some sort of a small switch or even lever. |
|
|
|
|
Neat idea, personally I think just adding to the device a small button or way for the user to just approve signings before they happen would be great.
My reasoning for this is that someone who knows you have a sigsafe and dont have a password can just approach you and by accident hit your sigsafe. Having a button or something that needs to be pressed makes it alot safer.
While I do agree having a password is the safest way to make your coins secure I think just a small discreet button to approve transactions would be easier. Something like once a signing request is made you have 3 seconds to press the bottom to approve the transaction signing request.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure pm me too about the s1's
|
|
|
|
|
Posting to say I now have 50 posts. Thanks
|
|
|
|
s0br has in fact hired several folks to help with day to day questions and support. We're checking the forum, as well as the IRC channel, PMs on IRC, and emails/support tickets.
No one is denying there has been a bumpy road but there's additional help. Please keep reporting the issues and we'll do our best to get back to you in a timely fashion.
Regarding the S3s, several winners posted confirmation of receiving their units, and at the request of some users here, I posted a pic of mine, and provided UPS proof of delivery to anyone who asked.
What is the IRC Channel? Thanks |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
