|
Hi,
freecashsoftware com actually got me to visit their site. I thought I can investigate their facebook page to carefully analyze what's going on but the click-video-reflex was stronger than my caution. I instantly closed the tab before anything visual loaded but I'm still scared. Any of the uber-geeks mind investigating? I wgot the index.html and it clearly has some obfuscated shit in it so I reported it to facebook but maybe somebody else feels more inclined to hurt this scammer before we read stolen wallet reports.
|
|
|
|
In a worst case situation in which a satoshi becomes very valuable, all that would be need without the need to inflate the Bitcoin is to add more decimal places, and have units such as milisatoshi, microsatoshi, etc, but we are very far away from that.
Wouldn't adding more decimal places be effectively be printing money though? As it's creating more money potential out of thin air.  omg |
|
|
|
Hajahahahahaha! Hilarious!
Hmmm. Bitcoin in a country with almost zero infrastructure and nearly no Internet connectivity. I'm sure people will fight over themselves to sign up. Oh wait, they don't need to have computers, they could just do bitcoin over their mobile phones? Have a wildly fluctuating currency on an easily stolen cell phone?
Somalias got issues. Bitcoin isn't going to solve them. Once they do solve their greater issues, if banks still want nothing to do with them, bitcoin might be good as a substitute for remittances. But right now? You send BTC to a Somali, they sell them on mtgox and have no bank account to transfer to, and even if they did, Goxs' bank will surely refuse to send there.
I know a lot of people want bitcoin to supplant every other currency. Who knows, in the first world where everything is already electronic, maybe it or its offspring could one day. But it's a luxury. If you don't have the basics, its not nearly as applicable.
Safaricom managed to turn cellphone minutes into money in Kenya. Why do you think there isn't a chance Somalis turn Bitcoin into money? |
|
|
|
I posted this issues in a separate thread at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269443.0, but somebody suggested I also post this here since it is a Blockchain related issue. Yesterday when I logged onto Blockchain.info, I noticed the 40+ BTC I had in my wallet were gone and had been sent to this address 1GvmpUY1RdR5zf7jDZnpjfuBnoCz3S2xSS at 12:20am Aug 2nd. I'd appreciate some help to understand what happened, and if possible, how I can get the BTC back. I'm not a tech person, so it's been a struggle to learn what I have about Bitcoin... Here is the transaction information. https://blockchain.info/tx/3ea2a7343d5623058ac7cc403d82e4fc9a351ef0e8818f1fe0d1b3351e6ad434 Please let me know if there is more information I can provide that would help. I had previously used a paper wallet, but transferred my money back to Blockchain to enable easier transactions. When I imported my paper wallet back to Blockchain, it was to my original wallet address that I'd used from the beginning. I was using 2 factor authentication with an SMS code being sent to my phone to be able to access my wallet. I did not notice this at the time, but now that I checked, a wallet authentication code was was sent to my phone at 12:17am Aug 2nd. I do not recall ever seeing this until now. After doing further investigation and digging through old emails, I've learned the following: When I first signed up to Blockchain, I stupidly emailed myself my Blockchain username, password, mnemonic/security phrase, and wallet address. Later on Blockchain emailed me an encrypted wallet backup. After reviewing the IP addresses that have accessed my Gmail ( https://security.google.com/settings/security/activity), I noticed one that appeared to access from an iPhone that I did not recognize. It was also a Verizon network iPhone and the IP address was mapped to about 30 minutes outside my city. This was on July 18th (and the theft happened on August 2nd). Potentially also of note, I used public wifi at a hospital on July 30th. Is this the likely scenario? That my Gmail and/or iPhone was compromised? And would this explain why I recieved an SMS text from Blockchain 3 minutes before the theft? If so, is it possible to locate the person who accessed my Gmail from that IP address? Thanks in advance for your help. Hmm, if the thief convinced blockchain.info to give him the 40Ƀ, yeah, this is a blockchain.info issue. For such a sum (any sum actually) they should do everything to get your real world identity and charge you for the process or cover your loss if they didn't take the effort. Else anybody could harvest one account after the other. If I "steal" my money now by forgetting my password and forging proof of identity from publicly available data and claim the theft after that, what would they do? Where are the TOS anyway? They brag they transferred $5,000,000,000 but have no TOS? Just some FAQ? They are being trusted with millions of $$ and hide (I can't find it) the TOS? |
|
|
|
The significance of the 21 is what I wonder about.
Yes! Why 21??? Why not 35? or 20 even? Knowing Satoshi's genius, it must have been picked with some sort of formula or insight or REASON. But this reason is never revealed. isn't 1 for him, 20 for us pretty round? |
|
|
|
Just wanted to bump up and let you guys know i am very excited with this.
These advanced features are what might just prove to be the important advantage bitcoin has over other payment systems.
If I had time and the missing piece for a product I have in mind, I would be all over it. This and many more things contracts can do will help bitcoin's break through. |
|
|
|
Great! The WSJ correction still is behind a $1 pay wall? So I have to pay $1 to read that Joe Lewis will not and never planned to invest in Bitcoin? Copying the url to Facebook still gives me a great insight: Famed Trader Joe Lewis Backs Bitcoin
online.wsj.com
Joe Lewis, a billionaire foreign-exchange trader who teamed up with hedge-fund manager George Soros in 1992 to bet against the Bank of England, is the latest high-profile financier to throw his weight behind the virtual currency called bitcoin.
Like · · Share · Promote · 21 minutes ago ·
|
|
|
|
Screenshots and links and quotes and stuff … Mind writing a TLDR. It's late and my brain doesn't parse what's your point. |
|
|
|
|
I agree this looks fishy. Why would anybody put 200M into mining? Is that good or bad news? Do they want to destroy or support bitcoin? I mean maybe this is the amount it would really take to defend against attacks but it certainly is an amount that is enough to put all existing miners out of business and destroy the next 3 versions of a proof of work algo, too. I hope he is greedy and has not too much fiat to loose as then it would not make any sense to destroy Bitcoin.
Ok, so if he is greedy, why is the bitcoin price not sky high from him front-running his good news?
So if you want to invest 200M, why would you need Avalon? The only advantage I see is that even with 200M you wouldn't be able to ramp up production big scale 2 months from now. With Avalon, you can. Why hurry? Did somebody whisper in his ear that Flintheart Glomgold will go all in and he wants to be even faster?
|
|
|
|
Exactly two years ago, on August 4, 2011, Roger Ver promised to pay $10000 to anyone who would challenge his predictions: that bitcoins will outperform gold, silver by 100X over the next two years .
On August 04, 2011 the price of gold was $1,664.25, silver $41.62 and bitcoin $9.26.
He himself said, that bitcoin should have reached $1000 a coin for him to win the bet. Others explained, that If either silver or gold is up no more than, for example, 1 % and Bitcoins are up 100 % (to ~5.4 BTC/USD), anyone betting against Roger Ver will lose $10,000.
One has to admit that stipulations for the bet were unclear. So long as Roger Ver would find some point within the 2 year span where his predictions hold true - he would have won. Or should the bet's outcome be evaluated exactly on the final day, i.e today?
Let's see the results.
Gold hit an all-time high in September 2011 when it touched $1,921 per troy ounce.
In late April 2011, silver reached an all-time high of $49.76/ozt.
On 10 April, the bitcoin exchange rate reached maximum $266.
Gold's maximum gain during 2 year span was 1921/1664.25=1.154;
silver gained 49.76/41.62=1.196;
bitcoin gained 266/9.26=28.73.
So, bitcoin outperformed gold by factor 28.73/1.154=24.9 and bitcoin outperformed silver by factor 28.73/1.196=24.0. Not by factor 100, as Roger Ver had predicted.
Bitcoin did not reach $1000 as Roger had envisaged himself.
On the other hand ... if we look at today's prices, then we see that prices of gold and silver have decreased compared to prices two years ago. Bitcoin instead has increased in price more than tenfold. In this respect Roger Ver would have won the bet.
Unfortunately nobody challenged him.
Thanx for the summary. I can remember that I was bullish like he was back then and found it quite likely the $1000 would come anywhere in these two years. Clearly anybody who would have taken the bet would have made clear what would trigger a win/loss with extreme caution. |
|
|
|
One of the assumptions built into this system is getting the transactions into blocks.
Aren't these transaction non-standard? There would be a risk that they won't be mined.
There is nothing time-critical about this scheme. Either it works or it doesn't. If it works and the timeout is approaching both parties have a chance to publish whatever they want (and have signed from the other party) and that can be days before timeout so plenty of time to find a node that mines it. I am not sure how this step would actually work. If my timeout is one year and I constantly broadcast transactions for this, they wouldn't end up in a block unless int_max or the timeout is reached, but what would miners do with it? totally ignore it if t < timeout - 1day/hour/minute? Can they mine all of them, putting pruneable stress on the network after all? As I understand it, the last such transaction may just not have a timestamp > timeout, but that could occur even hours (?) after the timeout if the miner stretches the limits of the protocol (that allows timestamps to be non-monotonous) in order to get the fees. Maybe that last thought is kind of a stretch but I could imagine a merchant that is programmed to finalize channels at timeout -1h and has a power outage. He would broadcast his finalization even at timeout +1h when power comes back and that would give an incentive to miners to mess with the timestamps. Imagine always somebody being late so timestamps start to diverge from real time until some non-greedy miner creates a block, but this miner would also have to mess with the time-stamp if the time-skew is already so critical that the "actual" time would look skewed to the other miners. |
|
|
|
|
ok, so now I have all the bitcoins reclaimed I had asked for. I wonder what will happen with the other 5 bitcoins I handed out and that recipients might only get aware of when it's worth thousands of dollars. will they sue me for falsely having claimed their money? did they claim them? what will happen to the money if nobody claims it, or did a full list of all wallets leak? in the latter case, is there a link? I'd be curious to see the non-random ones.
|
|
|
|
MtGox has created a perpetuum mobile to give us infinite mtgoxUSD!
Well, many people ask me for the value of bitcoin. I then explain it may either go to zero or to infinity depending on whether USD or BTC collapses first. What an irony that now $MtGox show signs of collaps  |
|
|
|
localbitcoins seems to follow gox for pricing, that's a way to pull off the bitstamp arb.
at localbitcoins you can set your own prices. I just today set mine to MtGox+0% and I buy at MtGox-10%. Could as well pick another exchange with different fees pegged to it. |
|
|
|
I can understand how clicking on a single button can become a nightmare in this context.
But you can't really blame that on us, can you ?
That translator thing with iran surely can't be attributed to you, but the expired certificate (that makes my firefox not even offer a "continue anyway", thus cuts me out of the procedure) can... PS: fortunately it were just a few peanuts in my instawallet, so I don't care too much, but others might have the same problem with certificates and more money at stake... Without the rather useless necessity of "click that one more link", this would be a non-issue... (and like some previous posters I don't really understand what real (not-already-refuted) advantage there is to that extra click. Well, the translator thing only puts an x20 to every time estimate to resolve issues but as I said before I don't see a good reason for having this extra step at all. It serves no purpose at all but costs 10k users 20k minutes. And yes, the certificate was one minor issue when I chatted with my friend. She said it won't open, using some browser that didn't offer "ignore" neither. |
|
|
|
Umm... We're talking about clicking a button here : in my case [...] it cost 2 hours and involved 3 people yes. language barrier, chatting with a translator friend, him trying various times to call the friend in Iran who is not really online a lot, the friend not understanding a thing about bitcoin, the whole thing not getting done in days, me again and again checking back with my friend and my "translator" + the fact that I checked on my bitcoin wallet various times to see if the claimed money was released yet. |
|
|
|
It did not cross your mind that the payout amount could be less than what people expected ? This extra step is a simple precaution to make sure people will let us know that they are in such situation (in those rare cases, they will then be requested to show a cryptographic proof).
Now you are writing that clicking on a button is such a difficult task that you can suggest we did it "to gain money"?
Pathetic.
"It didn't cross your mind" that paying out without requiring to click a button would also be a nice gesture? So if the wrong person got the link, he will press the button no matter what. If the right person receives a smaller amount than expected, he will complain no matter what. Clicking the button would have no legal implication if later it occurred to me that you only sent me half of my money as the amount is kind of hidden below, so why bother thousands of users with this extra step? I assume that clicking this button costs on average 2 minutes taking into account all the people that regularly checked their wallet to see if their claimed money arrived (in my case with my Iraninan friend it cost 2 hours and involved 3 people) so the justification to having this button in the first place are pretty lousy compared to 10.000 * 2minutes = 13 days of your users' time. |
|
|
|
I think a trusted 3rd. party escrow service would really help your business.
It may be nice, but the one thing I really like about bitmit is how low the fees are. That's why I sell here. You start having to pay 3rd parties, and now the fees go up. Also, I'm a little confused because I used to be qualified to list things without escrow, and now I'm not. Did the requirements change? If low fees is an argument to trust a shady business, you most likely didn't learn a lesson with pirateat40? Sure, if the money bitmit holds at any given time is only about what they earn in a month, it's quite unlikely they will run with it as they can make more money running the business unless they have to terminate their business anyway for other reasons in which case they have to evaluate the value of the brand vs. the immediate profit they could make. How much reputation do they have if they start a new business? How many $$ would the brand be worth? I guess they shouldn't be holding more than that amount to be trustworthy. Unfortunately they can forge these numbers if they had an interest in sharing numbers. |
|
|
|
The big take-away, is (for the umteenth time) if you give someone the ability to take your money, there is every possibility that they will do so. In Bitcoin-land it is a near certainty.
We can see that you keep going with your endless, paranoid, calomnious ranting even though you have been paid back in full. Why do you linger in bitcoinland then ? Why don't you tvbcof travel off to your paracoinland (Note: paracoin, strangely an anagram for paranoic, is tvbcof brainfart )? Don't turn unprofessional for him stating the obvious. You barking back certainly won't gain you trust. Me, too I got my coins but bitcoins I sent to a friend in Iran are still unreturned and I guess mostly for the fact that I needed a translator to call her to walk her through the process at your site to initiate the claims process. They did that and now you require her to go to the very same page and click "yes I'm sure" 3 months after the process started? I mean, seriously? It was hard enough to reach her before and this extra step just doesn't add *any* security as whoever filled in the data in the first round will obviously have a way to go there again and click that button and I want to hear from you how many people went through the first, complicated (at least for iranian non-bitcoiners) step and never came back for the second. How much money did you gain through making things more complicated than necessary? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
