They did much more than steal some bitcoins according to the indictment. The investigators, in an effort to conceal their criminality and in bad faith did systematically conceal and destroy material evidence collected during their investigation. The investigators had administrator access to the Silk Road systems which they used to rob the silk road service and then framed the original owner of their admin account for the theft (and then, with another account, offered to conduct a "hit" against that admin to extract more money from DPR) in one of many (successful) extortion attempts they carried out over months-- spanning back long before the government had any idea who DPR might be (e.g. in April 2013 they believed it was "A.A."). Their unlawful actions were not limited to SR, e.g. Force ripped off a random user of the CoinMKT exchange to the tune of a quarter million dollars where he was moonlighting (against policy and in a conflict of interest) as their compliance officer. When Force's improper use of an administrative subpoena (to attempt to unblock his rightfully suspicious-flagged account) was reported to his superior by Venmo (a payment processor subsidiary of Paypal) he responded by attempting to seize Venmo's accounts. Lets put aside for a moment Force and Bridge's roles as law enforcement and read their indictment as though they were just private individuals. Considering their access, strongly established involvement (e.g. the money trail connecting _them_ to SR appears to be much stronger than the money trail connecting Ross to SR), established pattern of fraudulent and vindictive activities including framing C.G. for the theft of bitcoin; they'd make a nice direction to throw doubt at the prosecutions claims and support of Ross' "it was someone else" argument. Consider the counterfactual with the character portrait painted in their indictment in mind: If Force and/or Bridges had had the opportunity to take over the operation of SR (from which they could rip people off on a greater scale), would they have done so? I think the picture painted by the indictment says yes. If they had and Ross pissed them off, would they have framed him? I think the indictment says yes (or even without pissing them off: They seized MTGox's US accounts immediately after successfully getting their own funds out (to the detriment of everyone now suffering from MTGox's insolvency)). I think this is a much more powerful line of argument than "maybe magicaltux did it", at least. They destroyed evidence related to their own interactions with magicaltux (and appeared to have made a successful unlawful forfeiture against MTGox as part of their criminal activities). In the story told in the indictment, these parties had the motive, the means, and opportunity that would have permitted them to frame Ross in order to conceal their own criminality (or to protect someone else who was paying them more); and the defense was apparently prohibited from presenting this in the trial. No doubt the prosecution did their hardest to separate out any potentially poisoned evidence, but these parties were the states only inside eyes inside silkroad. It seems unlikely to me that any of the later evidence was derived in isolation of their input, but regardless: it appears that they'd heavily spoiled the crime scene before any of the other investigators arrived. What this actually means in terms of the actual law and procedures in the court, but I can't imagine that it would have had no effect on the jury unless they were prohibited from hearing it, nor can I really imagine them being prohibited from hearing it if it had been anything other than law enforcement agents (e.g. if it had just been other random criminals). But they were. I can't imagine why the defense didn't delay the trial so that more of this information could be presented. This information has certainly made a number of strange things I observed make more sense. Edit: Ah, I see Ross' attorney has made a statement: http://freeross.org/ulbrichts-attorneys-statement-regarding-silk-road-corruption/ Seems that I called at least part of their approach, plus apparently the state used the existence of this other prosecution to suppress other evidence from being presented. Hopefully Dratel will now move to have whatever relevant filings or orders were made regarding this unsealed, so we can get a more objective view of how much this prejudiced the case. See my above response regarding "poisoned" evidence. Ultimately, your argument comes down to, "From reading this indictment, I think that there must be evidence that these agents planted some or all the government's evidence that was used against Ulbricht." Given that it appears that defense made that argument under seal to the judge, and the judge rejected it, I'm guessing that there was no evidence of the sort. Thus, this entire series of events with the agents is simply irrelevant and speculative: simply because these law enforcement officers essentially stole and embezzled money does not mean that Ross Ulbricht did not commit the crimes which a jury convicted him of doing. Had the officers testified, then of course it comes in, because it's relevant to their personal credibility. But they did not (wisely) testify. Indeed, they may have been able to assert a privilege had they done so. Are you basically saying that these two corrupt cops, one of which was a lead detective in the case (not just the murder for hire charge), that stole money from Ross, entrapped him for murder, blackmailed him, had access to the sys Admin account, etc. - that that has no bearing on the validity of the evidence which puts him behind bars? Are you saying that having key corrupt officials on the prosecution is a separate issue from what Ross did when their evidence/work arguably had a decent factor in his conviction? This makes no sense and I'm trying to really see your point here. All the defense now has to work on is how these two corrupt cops had help in giving but 1 little tiny bit of false evidence. It appears they got them for damn near everything and they are deeply tied to not only the evidence, but to the actual SR site, Admin account! Had they been legit you would just have hoped they were not corrupt, but now they are. We see: what they did, the depth of what they did, the ways in what they did what they did, how the judge disallowed obvious connections/questions, etc from being admissible in court. The list goes on. This is an absolute travesty. I will not look at this situation, as disgusting as it now has become, through simplified legal jargon when every sense in most peoples bodies right now is screaming to them: "Alert, Alert, Alert something is really really wrong here." Sometimes those within the system (any system really) can't see outside that system. They are so "in"trained in that system the craziest of things make sense to them, because it fits that "systems" way of think, and ironically enough can be disproven in a court of law (just need reasonable doubt). And right now it seems like there is much much more than reasonable doubt going on about that trial. I feel a lot of your argument is trying to use (legal) semantics to make your point valid but all it does is try to exclude people from really seeing what is right in front of them by controlling perspective. Sorry but my subconscious just let this through.  |
|
|
|
IMO - Monero is what people thought Bitcoin was in 2013... Anonymous!
As such, a lot of the earlier adopters of Bitcoin who were the ones that took it over $100 (before it was famous) are the ones that are looking at Monero to carry the torch forward.
litecoin offers nothing of value over Bitcoin, so you may as well buy Bitcoin. Whilst I did hold Litecoin for a while - i will not do it again.
Monero lacks basic ecommerce APIs or simple 'newbie, clients or even a Direct USD to Monero exchange but it does have an optimistic roadmap and I think that its own community can easily drive the price higher than it is now (even without these things) and a lot higher when the infrastructure becomes more robust.
The speculators have only just started to wake up and many of them are looking for a better payday than .004 per Monero and will probably hold longer to see if the roadmap materialises as promised.
I think the bolded is quite true. Just as BTC was (and will continue to be) a revolution of sorts, it appears that another Trojan Horse (perhaps several) is due on the scene to push the boundaries/tech further. And in many of our opinions here, it appears Monero has an incredibly good shot at this "pushing". Many of us BTC "followers" get the disruptive anti-fragile technology and what that really means. But I wonder how many really do. This is not about getting rich, though that is a bit of a revolution as far as money disbursement goes. This is about pushing the envelope of what we thought money was, what it is and further what it is becoming (e.g. how we define it). This Black Swan is only getting started (BTC, XMR, etc.) and it is going to organically morph and adapt... and destroy (or rather help to) what we no longer need. The Ross trial is a teeny little glimpse into disruption. I get a feeling the boundaries are going to be really stretched here. And I wonder, just as those early BTC adopters created liquidity out of nothing and helped to create a whole space, we are going to see a subset of them further take this space via XMR to a perhaps more "extreme" place. And for the betterment of us all, don't forget the other. Its about sharing |
|
|
|
I don't think the agents made up "claims" or "crimes" that Ulbricht was supposed to have committed. But rather they committed crimes themselves, by stealing some BTC. I don't think anything that they did demonstrates that Ulbricht did not do what he was convicted of doing.
They did much more than steal some bitcoins according to the indictment. The investigators, in an effort to conceal their criminality and in bad faith did systematically conceal and destroy material evidence collected during their investigation. The investigators had administrator access to the Silk Road systems which they used to rob the silk road service and then framed the original owner of their admin account for the theft (and then, with another account, offered to conduct a "hit" against that admin to extract more money from DPR) in one of many (successful) extortion attempts they carried out over months-- spanning back long before the government had any idea who DPR might be (e.g. in April 2013 they believed it was "A.A."). Their unlawful actions were not limited to SR, e.g. Force ripped off a random user of the CoinMKT exchange to the tune of a quarter million dollars where he was moonlighting (against policy and in a conflict of interest) as their compliance officer. When Force's improper use of an administrative subpoena (to attempt to unblock his rightfully suspicious-flagged account) was reported to his superior by Venmo (a payment processor subsidiary of Paypal) he responded by attempting to seize Venmo's accounts. Lets put aside for a moment Force and Bridge's roles as law enforcement and read their indictment as though they were just private individuals. Considering their access, strongly established involvement (e.g. the money trail connecting _them_ to SR appears to be much stronger than the money trail connecting Ross to SR), established pattern of fraudulent and vindictive activities including framing C.G. for the theft of bitcoin; they'd make a nice direction to throw doubt at the prosecutions claims and support of Ross' "it was someone else" argument. Consider the counterfactual with the character portrait painted in their indictment in mind: If Force and/or Bridges had had the opportunity to take over the operation of SR (from which they could rip people off on a greater scale), would they have done so? I think the picture painted by the indictment says yes. If they had and Ross pissed them off, would they have framed him? I think the indictment says yes (or even without pissing them off: They seized MTGox's US accounts immediately after successfully getting their own funds out (to the detriment of everyone now suffering from MTGox's insolvency)). I think this is a much more powerful line of argument than "maybe magicaltux did it", at least. They destroyed evidence related to their own interactions with magicaltux (and appeared to have made a successful unlawful forfeiture against MTGox as part of their criminal activities). In the story told in the indictment, these parties had the motive, the means, and opportunity that would have permitted them to frame Ross in order to conceal their own criminality (or to protect someone else who was paying them more); and the defense was apparently prohibited from presenting this in the trial. No doubt the prosecution did their hardest to separate out any potentially poisoned evidence, but these parties were the states only inside eyes inside silkroad. It seems unlikely to me that any of the later evidence was derived in isolation of their input, but regardless: it appears that they'd heavily spoiled the crime scene before any of the other investigators arrived. What this actually means in terms of the actual law and procedures in the court, but I can't imagine that it would have had no effect on the jury unless they were prohibited from hearing it, nor can I really imagine them being prohibited from hearing it if it had been anything other than law enforcement agents (e.g. if it had just been other random criminals). But they were. I can't imagine why the defense didn't delay the trial so that more of this information could be presented. This information has certainly made a number of strange things I observed make more sense. Edit: Ah, I see Ross' attorney has made a statement: http://freeross.org/ulbrichts-attorneys-statement-regarding-silk-road-corruption/ Seems that I called at least part of their approach, plus apparently the state used the existence of this other prosecution to suppress other evidence from being presented. Hopefully Dratel will now move to have whatever relevant filings or orders were made regarding this unsealed, so we can get a more objective view of how much this prejudiced the case. Very well thought out post, not to mention reasonable. I think many here are being caught up in what some are trying to portray as a black and white issue of Ross Vs. the State and are overlooking the actual State's workers throughout the trial. You can't separate the two. You can't say "legally" that what Ross did is wrong when the actual evidence collectors had access to the site (the Admin account no less!) and were blackmailing him for money and setting him up with murder for hire. ALL THE EVIDENCE is now tainted. I really wonder if the Judge was influenced (a lot) by the governments demands of this case being too "important" to lose (especially in light of Cannabis legalization spreading like wildfire and the whole basis for the War on Drugs going with it in most likely hood.) I say the former as the judge disallowed all of what is coming to light now. I mean, that is ridiculous and seems more like the Judge was hell bent on putting Ross away rather than having anything resembling a fair trial. This is going to be much more than a made for TV movie. This is a 5 year series in part on how the war on drugs failed, for starters. Ross' lawyers have gone into some detail here regarding things: http://freeross.org/ulbrichts-attorneys-statement-regarding-silk-road-corruption/
Ulbricht’s attorney’s statement regarding Silk Road corruption
March 30, 2015 ● Lyn's Blog
The government’s considerable efforts at keeping this monumental scandal from being aired at Ross Ulbricht’s trial is itself scandalous.
In addition to:
1. Keeping any information about the investigation from the defense for nearly nine months;
2. then revealing it only five weeks prior to trial;
3. then moving to keep sealed and secret the general underlying information so that Mr. Ulbricht could not use it in his defense at trial;
4. then stymying the defense at every turn during trial when the defense tried to introduce favorable evidence;
the government had also refused to agree to the defense’s request to adjourn the trial until after the indictment was returned and made public – a modest adjournment of a couple of months, since it was apparent that the investigation was nearing a conclusion.
Throughout Mr. Ulbricht’s trial the government repeatedly used the secret nature of the grand jury investigation as an excuse to preclude valuable defense evidence that was not only produced in discovery, independent of the investigation of Mr. Force, but also which was only at best tenuously related to that investigation. In that manner the government deprived the jury of essential facts, and Mr. Ulbricht of due process.
In addition, the government failed to disclose previously much of what is in the Complaint, including that two federal law enforcement agents involved in the Silk Road investigation were corrupt. It is clear from this Complaint that fundamentally the government’s investigation of Mr. Ulbricht lacked any integrity, and was wholly and fatally compromised from the inside.
Also, it is clear that Mr. Force and others within the government obtained access to the administrative platforms of the Silk Road site, where they were able to commandeer accounts and had the capacity to change PIN numbers and other aspects of the site – all without the government’s knowledge of what precisely they did with that access.
In light of the information provided in the Complaint, it is now apparent to all just how relevant some of the issues raised by the defense at trial were, including:
1. The payment by Dread Pirate Roberts to a law enforcement agent for information about the investigation;
2. The ramping up of the investigation of Mr. Ulbricht in mid-2013, soon after that paid information began flowing;
3. The creation of certain evidence at trial, such as the 2013 journal that conveniently begins – again – in Spring 2013, after the corruption alleged in this Complaint ripened.
As the evidence at trial – particularly from the government’s law enforcement witnesses – demonstrated, the Baltimore investigation and agents were inextricably involved in the evolution of the case and the evidence, as well as with alerting Mark Karpeles that he was under investigation, and meeting with his lawyers and exchanging information.
At Mr. Ulbricht’s trial, knowing full well the corruption alleged in the Complaint made public today, the government still aggressively precluded much of that evidence, and kept it from the jury (and had other similar evidence stricken from the record).
Consequently, the government improperly used the ongoing grand jury process in San Francisco as both a sword and a shield to deny Mr. Ulbricht access to and use of important evidence, and a fair trial.
Joshua L. Dratel |
|
|
|
Lets calm down- this is starting to sound like the DASH thread a week ago.
I am not sure if this is a specualtion thread. I am sorry if I wrote on the wrong thread... I've put in a request to rename this thread the Monero Responsible Speculation thread. I suggest you start an Optimistic Monero Speculation thread.  I don't think it is optimistic to think that Monero could hit 10 usd this year regardless if btc price. It is realistic view in my opinion, and I never said it will happen but it is realistic to happen. Even now if XMR cost 10 usd per coin it means the daily mining output costs 160 000 usd which is not impossible to eat (with today's reward rate - not to mention with the reward of the end of the year). Correct me if I am wrong but LTC was able to eat even larger emission than that. That being said, most likely 10 usd will not be hit this run. Perhaps 5 usd is realistic peak with the current pump. I actually agree with you on most of what you said. I was thinking that 10 USD seems a little high, unless BTC gets moving again, of course. I settled on a more "fair" valuation of $3-$5, maybe $7, given the current BTC price range. I guess I should have used green front as I thought it was clear I was joking.  As the alt market moves forward we are going to start to see a HUGE separation between the coins with a chance, that are legitimate, etc. at least during these initial run ups as it is done 99%+ by people who are in the BTC scene. As the public becomes aware of BTC and then the alts, I think we will see a boom of the market, BUT, there will still be the Monero's and such at the top and then some mid tier coins, etc. It is EASY to forget we are EXTREMELY early adopters here. Don't for a moment think that what happened in 2012-2013 with BTC is done, nor exclusive to BTC. We will have our moment to shine imo. |
|
|
|
Lets calm down- this is starting to sound like the DASH thread a week ago.
I am not sure if this is a specualtion thread. I am sorry if I wrote on the wrong thread... I've put in a request to rename this thread the Monero Responsible Speculation thread. I suggest you start an Optimistic Monero Speculation thread. |
|
|
|
About 40k monero for about 150 BTC, that makes avg 0.00375
Is this really an efficient way to buy that many? I mean I can give the benefit of the doubt and say they wanted them quick, but still, what about in roughly 2K chunks with delays in between? I am sure many have experimented.... It definately cost him a lot of BTC/XMR, but he might feared that if he started to buy in chunks the market would go up even higher so he might has to buy higher. But anyways buying with half the BTC and then the other half later when more asks are in place in a short time (let's say 15-30 minutes) would probably always have worked out better for him. Maybe he only used a fraction in his buy... Stay tuned. Thx for the comments.... |
|
|
|
Crazy turn of events, you really couldn't make this shit up. Force created certain fictional personas -- that were not officially sanctioned -- to communicate with DPR ...
...Using one of these personas, Force sought to extort DPR by seeking monetary payment... Makes you wonder if DPR was coerced into "hiring a hitman." Read more of the charges. Tbh, I think it is a forgone conclusion at this point. They blackmailed him from multiple angles and on their own. That charge is not only no more, but it looks like corruption from the prosecution may very Well have thrown away their case. Quite fitting actually. That said, with the judges very questionable Actions regarding evidence submission, don't think the corruption won't continue. Remember we said BTC is an anti corruption trojan horse? |
|
|
|
About 40k monero for about 150 BTC, that makes avg 0.00375
Is this really an efficient way to buy that many? I mean I can give the benefit of the doubt and say they wanted them quick, but still, what about in roughly 2K chunks with delays in between? I am sure many have experimented.... |
|
|
|
I recommend to do the same with the coins I do (I do it because I think it is good for the coin). Buy coins from exchange and withdraw them outside of the exchange. Also some bitcoins are handy to keep in the exchange in case zhalox decides to dump some more Moneros. Forget the coins for few years and let's see what is the market in 2018-2020... I think it is higher than today (or Monero has died). Who is this zhalox ? Is he this person : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=9380 ? Why would he want to hurt Monero ? He seems to like XMR. Warz pawned zhalox by buying his wall when he flashed it. 11k or so. There's a link to the trollbox around here somewhere. I think it was at 28 or so. I read through that chat and wondered who the buyer was (wasn't clear to me). Man, that is a lesson. Now, perhaps zhalox can dump some and try to buy in later, but there seems to be money laying in wait. Better to not take the chance but I bet someone is pissed - I mean he gave up 11k without really moving the market. LOL ps - Here is a link http://pastebin.com/pPNf8y6L |
|
|
|
Interesting tweet here: https://twitter.com/JDratel/status/582636014872723456Major Silk Road govt corruption scandal revelation today that we've had to sit on for four months and were not permitted to use at trial. And very interesting replies: jlaw @jlaw101 56m56 minutes ago @texteditorSA @ClausHoumann @JDratel @valdesjo77 Carl Force was heavily involved in the investigation.0 retweets 0 favorites jlaw @jlaw101 56m56 minutes ago @texteditorSA @ClausHoumann @JDratel @valdesjo77 " The DEA official, Carl Force, was "the lead undercover agent in communication" with DPR"0 retweets 0 favorites Sam Braverman @SamBraverman 38m38 minutes ago @JDratel I would say I'm stunned, but nothing stuns me about these prosecutions. The more they want you, the more they'll do to get you. 0 retweets 0 favorites Anonymous @AnonyOps 28m28 minutes ago .@JDratel Surely this info was extremely relevant to the trial, since it speaks directly to the trustworthiness of DEA testimony. #SilkRoad IAS |
|
|
|
"Sadly there is about as much chance of Ross seeing freedom in his lifetime as there is Chelsea Manning. Zero percent." IIRC, there was no plea bargain, and a jury trial. Now, imagine you are a juror, and the defence has just demonstrated that the prosecution witnesses are liars, thieves, and felons. Would you convict on that testimony? In most countries there would be no question, he would walk. "Bridges allegedly diverted to his personal account over $800,000 in digital currency that he gained control of during the Silk Road investigation. The complaint alleges that Bridges placed the assets into an account at Mt. Gox, the now-defunct digital currency exchange in Japan. He then allegedly wired funds into one of his personal investment accounts in the United States mere days before he sought a $2.1 million seizure warrant for Mt. Gox’s accounts." http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-30/federal-agents-investigating-bitcoin-money-laundering-stole-over-1-million-bitcoinThis is a HUGE HUGE blunder by the prosecution. If there is ANY precedence here, and I would bet that there is, Ross might very well get off. Any legal experts? It is hard to put into words how the prosecution must feel right now, but I'll try with a picture.  And Ross... |
|
|
|
It is not a Bitcoin clone, and the wallet is only officially available via command line – no graphical user interface is available for this piece of technology yet. lol, why do they have to mention it doesn't have a GUI? How come this is always so important. Shouldn't the privacy features be more important in a article such as this one? Its comical with the GUI wallet. That's all anyone ever picks on. I was a computer expert a few years back and honestly had problems installing the wallet(s) on my Mac. I did finally get it installed but didn't have faith in the installation due to so many problems I experienced. (I got the blockchain downloaded no problem.) I was only able to run the wallet by (excuse my lack of terms here) double clicking an exe file, not from an actual installation. (Something about my Mac environment stopped me from being able to do a true install and it was in the instructions but I couldn't get past it.) So, I didn't want to chance using it. I moved half my XMR's from Poloniex to Mintpal and the latter are history (and it was a nice chunk for me). Rather, those were history as I got them returned a few weeks back, as did others. Anyway, Had there been an online wallet or even a wallet less problematic on my Mac, I wouldn't have moved any to Mintpal - but my bad as I didn't research the place. It was literally like within a week or two of the move! I've mined BTC, run a full node, worked in IT, etc. so I really should have figured out the wallet problem within a few hours, didn't, so gave up. I went beyond a typical user install imo. Suffice to say, there is a whole world of users out there who want a GUI (nothing command line except for higher functionality) due to ease of use. Knowing I was a computer expert and should have figured it out I can understand how lack of a GUI is really holding people back (at least if they experienced problems on install like me, Windows I hadn't heard of being problematic.) IAS I can confirm this. Idk what a computer expert is, but I'm more capable than 98% of people atleast. Back when i had to compile it myself that was a huge pain. I'm so glad i could just grab some binaries this time. It was easier with binaries but still a pain. It needed so many dependencies. I wasnt about to sit there and install them all manually one at a time so i went looking for a solution and learned about aptitude. It was a great find, im glad to know about aptitude now. But yea i mean that was a process and involved some research and some time, i had to search around to find something like aptitude then i had to spend a little bit of time with it learning how it worked. Its a very real barrier that not everyone can overcome. I was a database administrator and systems administrator on Unix and Linux, with a teeny bit of Windows when I had no choice. I knew Perl and could write some basic scripts. I knew about dependencies (which was what I was talking about before - it did me in with the Monero wallet install, so many probs for me.) Yeah, so I was (key word) extremely knowledgeable when it came to computer related stuff. No longer an expert but I still dabble here and there with Linux and so when I failed at the wallet install that was both a hit to my ego and I was pissed! LOL And as your suffice to say, comment said, I really do think a GUI is needed. That will open us to so many more people. Luckily the game is early in the going so we are probably not really too bad time wise. In a sense we need to think along the lines of what BTC'ers have been saying for a while now - " We need that killer App." and to a point, a nice wallet (on smart phones especially) is going to be that Killer App imo. |
|
|
|
It is not a Bitcoin clone, and the wallet is only officially available via command line – no graphical user interface is available for this piece of technology yet. lol, why do they have to mention it doesn't have a GUI? How come this is always so important. Shouldn't the privacy features be more important in a article such as this one? Its comical with the GUI wallet. That's all anyone ever picks on. I was a computer expert a few years back and honestly had problems installing the wallet(s) on my Mac. I did finally get it installed but didn't have faith in the installation due to so many problems I experienced. (I got the blockchain downloaded no problem.) I was only able to run the wallet by (excuse my lack of terms here) double clicking an exe file, not from an actual installation. (Something about my Mac environment stopped me from being able to do a true install and it was in the instructions but I couldn't get past it.) So, I didn't want to chance using it. I moved half my XMR's from Poloniex to Mintpal and the latter are history (and it was a nice chunk for me). Rather, those were history as I got them returned a few weeks back, as did others. Anyway, Had there been an online wallet or even a wallet less problematic on my Mac, I wouldn't have moved any to Mintpal - but my bad as I didn't research the place. It was literally like within a week or two of the move! I've mined BTC, run a full node, worked in IT, etc. so I really should have figured out the wallet problem within a few hours, didn't, so gave up. I went beyond a typical user install imo. Suffice to say, there is a whole world of users out there who want a GUI (nothing command line except for higher functionality) due to ease of use. Knowing I was a computer expert and should have figured it out I can understand how lack of a GUI is really holding people back (at least if they experienced problems on install like me, Windows I hadn't heard of being problematic.) IAS |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all the ideas guys. I didn't see a hardware expert jump in with the security answers so I'll probably go for a Galaxy S3, Moto G or something in that price range.
Thanks xDan for mentioning that phone and the tips about visiting websites, I will heed your advice, especially since the phone is mostly being gotten for BTC spending.
And yeah Amph, thanks for clarifying that (though I was clear!) I want to help BTC out by using it along with storing a few.
Thanks Meuh6879 for hte refurbished idea, I'll see what pops up.
Agreed calme but I'm just prevented from an Iphone due to price. I would spend the money if I really needed a better smart phone.
|
|
|
|
My first cross post but I'd really like some input from any of your regarding my question about buying a cheaper smart phone for spending BTC (and Monero). I didn't mention Monero in the thread as that just crossed my mind. Having the ability at least makes it possible, when you go the shops and such that do except BTC. I guess I need to consider the O.S. should Monero put out a wallet app for smart phones. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1006244.new#newAppreciated, Its about sharing |
|
|
|
Hey guys, I'm looking to start spending BTC but I don't have a smart phone. My purchases have all been online but I thought I really need to contribute to BTC by more than just the occasional talk or such. So, I am going to buy a cheaper smart phone as I don't need tons of features, really will use it for the occasional call, business, few apps and BTC. Rather have a mini than full sized as well. Is a semi older phone like the Galaxy S3 mini a good phone to get? - I'm talking for the money. Is the security good enough considering I don't think they do any major Android updates for it? (I would only keep .5 BTC or so in the wallet to lower the security risks. (Web based or App, I lean towards the latter for use of ease.) I also understand that there is security built into the hardware (chips) so is a more expensive (newer) phone better in that regards? I'm talking of Trusted Execution Environment and they spoke about it on the recent BTC game podcast (and hence it got me thinking.) - https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/the-bitcoin-game-13-rivetz-and-trusted-computing-with-steven-spragueI see small plans for like 13 Euro a month (total), 250-500mb data, 100 minutes of calls (more than enough), 2 year contract. Thanks in Advance, IAS ps - I'm in Germany, what is the best app/site to find places to spend BTC at in your city? |
|
|
|
decentralized-anonymity-through-double-encryption/
What are you guys going to do when someone comes out with Triple Encryption? Then you're fucked. I still find this funny, 2 days after I first read it and I was LOL then. I was also pissed for not having realized the obvious in Triple Encryption. I gave that some thought and then glanced at the idea Quadruple Encryption and backed away. A man enters a shop: - Hey, I'd like to buy a wallet. - Which color would you like it, sir? - Red, please. - 1GCAfZdNjU4ZjQuUKosZ1xcR2SZJK3uCBeFunny thing, I just checked that address and there are 190 transactions, with a balance of 0.39396638 BTC. Looks like this is a way to earn a profit by integrating a BTC public key in... a joke in this case. I just get the feeling Crypto is not going anywhere and it will explode in ways most can't imagine. https://blockchain.info/address/1GCAfZdNjU4ZjQuUKosZ1xcR2SZJK3uCBe |
|
|
|
I really hope XMR will make a bedrock strong support at 0.0032 which is the previous resistance just around BTCX fear mongering.
The greed impulse and FOMO make that unlikely. I can't really visualize so many people just sitting on their hands such that less than 15kUSD daily of emission suffices (after hoard-mining) to meet demand. Animal spirits will chew up all of that and more. I could imagine some appalling impulse of extreme folly resulting in a large dump, as seen on TV, and spiking us down to 0016 or so for probably a very brief time. But imagining XMR under a dollar in two successive calendar months? That requires a more willing suspension of profound disbelief than I can muster. Just my gut here, but I think 2USD before Dominion Day, 4USD by Boxing Day. ( I seem to have swallowed a Canadian.) Do you really think people "view" XMR in terms of USD? I mostly look at the BTC ratio, probably as that is the only way to get in. (I think) I do think, eventually, Alts will detach from the BTC ratio (once USD are easy to convert DIRECTLY to alts.) IAS |
|
|
|
I really hope XMR will make a bedrock strong support at 0.0032 which is the previous resistance just around BTCX fear mongering.
I think the Emission rate is going to play a larger and larger role in support. It takes around 48BTC a day to buy the roughly 16,000 XMR "produced" daily. That is small fry and we know there are whales acquiring Monero. I do think many early adopters of BTC are looking for a place to put some of their BTC, a bit as a hedge. Then there are the dark markets looking at anonymous coins as well. When we look at the the previous resistance/support, yes, it occurred at current levels but it was months ago, and due to the emission constantly decreasing, I think it gets easier and easier to support a coin. I'm just looking at the math, add to that rising interesting and T-10, T-9... Because of where XMR is right now (Price is low, Emission is decreasing, interest rising, etc.) I do think the near future looks bright and most certainly, Extremely Interesting.  Its About Sharing |
|
|
|
I'd love to hear what rpietila, ArticMine and other donators have to say about your shitcoin extracurricular activities... Not sure if it is fair, but outside of your posts being accusatory in nature, this is what we get to see, so I doubt many take what you say seriously:  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
