This is a pretty unique and cool concept. I'll definitely be following it. And while some will argue that the videos don't pay much atm, I think they pay more than they have to -- people do this stuff for fun. Like the high five 30 people in 30 seconds -- $6.50 for a quick little run. I like it, .

This is still risky. There are people that rack up tons of great reviews and then go rogue (steal) using their reputation or sell their account on various sites so others can steal. You never know who you're actually dealing with.

Do you have a highly trafficked site? One thing I worry about in regards to their cost is how much they oversell... most oversell to the point where if you aren't getting just a handful of visits, you have issues.

Pretty cool idea, except it brings about a huge concern. A lot of people don't want their BTC addresses linked to their phone/email -- it takes away from its anonymity.

The other part is... what if someone never claims theirs? Does it get returned to the sender after a certain period?

It's quickly becoming legal in the U.S. Most states now allow it in some form and the list is growing. The question is... where are you locating this business? What's backing it? How do we know you won't run? We need a business plan.

Was there any information given on why there were issues with the first one? This is a bit questionable. Especially if servers are all supposed to be in the U.S. and your first wasn't.

Can you guarantee that all clicks are legitimate users and not bots/other fraudulent traffic?

Would it not be possible to affiliate yourself, and then pay out based on what you earn from that? Like if someone buys something through your link and you get $5, you split it with the user.

Not sure if this is a spam post or not, but to be nice:

interestRate/365*deposit=interestPerDay
ROI = amountYouWant/interestPerDay

Plug in your own values here.

If you want to know what you have to deposit to get x per day:

InterestRate/365*x=AmountYouWant
(Plug into WolframAlpha)

FWIW, I never said that PV, as a project, is bad. In fact, even when I said it was a horrible investment, I noted that the idea and concept behind the technology was awesome (and is why I still follow it to this day). The issue is their business model was going to be an absolute failure. Whether the creator ran or not, you were not going to ROI. It wasn't just improbable, it was nearly impossible. A good investment requires a greater chance of successfully returning ROI than not. This wasn't going to match that.

People bidding up the price on the coins was exactly what a Ponzi would do. There was nothing backing it. The business wasn't profitable, it had no way of really returning enough capital to MAKE it profitable, and therefore the only thing propping up prices was hoping someone was stupid enough to buy it for more than you did. Protip: that's exactly what a Ponzi does and how it works. You're paid by people putting money in after you, in a system that can't possibly exist in a profitable manner.

It's the same concept in the fiat world. You don't invest your money because something looks cool, you do it because their business model makes sense, you have faith that they will earn a profit, and you're banking on their success. If you just throw your money at everyone who says "I have a cool idea" but no business sense, you're going to go broke quickly.

"My friend put $100 into a known Ponzi and got back $200 before the owner ran and everyone lost. But that was a good investment. I mean, I made 100% ROI so that's good, right?"

That's how I read your post.

Just because you profit off of people stupider than you doesn't make something a good investment. It's like saying going all-in with 2/8 OS in poker is a good move because "one time I won!" No. Statistically you're screwing yourself.

Interesting way to look at it, and that does make sense. I'd love for a competitive one to pop up that accepts BTC as well. Love my current host (cheap, effective, and the staff is knowledgeable) but can't get them to take BTC.

I'd stay away from YoBit as well. They have broken wallets where devs have contacted them for weeks/months, never responding and leaving the system broken. They could be a good site if they would do one thing: actually respond to support requests when stuff is broke. I still have a support request about an account bug that's been pending for almost 8 months now (and a few pings sent months after with no response).

It's kind of funny to me... I warn people that this is a bad investment *BEFORE THE ICO* and get bashed for it. Now the same people are crying because they feel like they got ripped off. Seriously? I told you. I even explained WHY it was a bad investment. I can't even feel bad for anyone who threw money into it at this point because the signs were so clear and obvious.

I want to point out that based on my findings so far, any hosts that accept crypto are actually going to be (oddly) more expensive than fiat ones. You can save a lot by just paying with a credit card. It's weird, though, because it'd make sense for them to be CHEAPER if they accept crypto since their costs are lowered.

I want to add that Cloudflare personally sent out emails to all affected parties, as well as those that were unaffected. Here's an excerpt from the email sent to MP:

"In our review of these third party caches, we discovered exposed data on approximately 150 of Cloudflare's customers across our Free, Pro, Business, and Enterprise plans. We have reached out to these customers directly to provide them with a copy of the data that was exposed, help them understand its impact, and help them mitigate that impact.

Your domain is not one of the domains where we have discovered exposed data in any third party caches. The bug has been patched so it is no longer leaking data. However, we continue to work with these caches to review their records and help them purge any exposed data we find. If we discover any data leaked about your domains during this search, we will reach out to you directly and provide you full details of what we have found."

Interesting. Thanks for the clarification. I'm apparently using an older one then (with no issues). Just checked and mine is def. 1.2.0.2. I apologize for the misinformation.

What version is the client you currently have? 1.2.0.2 is the latest and should have no issues syncing.

Is this fact? I did see another post claiming the same thing, but wouldn't that essentially also put them at fault for the Bitfinex "hack" (if they were supposed to stop the tx and didn't)?

May help to offer a backlink to a site of their choice as well, for a business benefit. That in itself helps give return for donating.