They conveniently failed to bring up the fact that terrorists also use technology like cell phones and automobiles, not to mention fiat cash. Agree. But at least they quoted this: Peter Todd agrees.
...
"Obviously terrorists use the internet, terrorists use freedom of speech and we've accepted that's a trade-off we must make." |
|
|
|
|
Question regarding referral system - 'Amount to receive' is shown in BTC, what about other currencies?
What if my referrals use DOGE or RDD? Are you going to convert to BTC or will I get paid in DOGE/RDD? How does it work?
|
|
|
|
Do we even know for sure how many coins are the "Satoshi's coins"? From what I know, it has been estimated that he mined about 1 million coins himself, distributed some and the rest is spread over the multiple different wallets. Do we even know which wallets are assumed to belong to Satoshi? Cannot find any info. I found this old article from WIRED: http://www.wired.com/2013/12/fbi_wallet/Satoshi stores his wealth in a large number of bitcoin addresses, most of them holding just 50 bitcoins. It’s a bit of a logistical nightmare, but most savvy Bitcoin investors spread out their bitcoins across multiple wallets. That way if they lose the key to one of them or get hacked, all is not lost. |
|
|
|
|
What is the estimated launch time?
How deeply is it going to be connected to Cryptsy? Wouldn't it be best if existing Cryptsy customers could use Mintsy using the same login credentials?
Will the Mintsy contracts be tradable on Cryptsy? Will it be possible to convert MN1 and MN2 into Mintsy contracts?
Anyway, looking forward to it
|
|
|
|
The bet will be resolved as YES as the price dropped below $430, in case if no one bets on the opposite side of the bet (in this case NO), user gets a refund since it is a P2P platform. The bet will be resolved in a next few minutes. Thank you for your message, we will include this in Anybet F.A.Q and Rules section of the website.
Thanks, received the refund + winnings on the Scotland vote bet. Feels good  |
|
|
|
Hi, Today is the end of our signature campaign’s first week for our first 9 participants. PM's have been send to you. Please check and respond in the pm and here in the thread.
Count me in. |
|
|
|
|
I had a bet placed on the following:
"The price of one Bitcoin in USD will be 430 USD or under before October 5th 2014 as per Bitstamp on bitcoincharts.com. Time zone: Website Time."
Looks like the BTC already dropped below 430 ($418.52 at this moment). Why is this bet still active? Do we need to wait till 4th October, to get it resolved?
Also, apparently I lost, but I was the only one betting. Am I correct to assume that in such case you will refund the bet amount? It would be the only fair option, as I couldn't really win (with 1 bet you can only lose or get your stake back) and that would be very off-putting for anyone who wants to place the 1st bet.
Don't really care about refund (as I bet the min) but could you clarify?
|
|
|
|
1) Sent to jail
2) Cannot access wallet
3) Hodl for 12 years
4) Profit
Lol. But then: 5) another 12 years in jail (for selling/using bitcoins) |
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification.
Then it's not Bitstamp's election, but a regulatory compliance report, correct?
Yes, it's a regulatory requirement. The thing is, they did the very minimum they were required by law. It would be very wise of them get proper financial adviser/auditor and also prepare the extended, full accounts (to be more transparent and credible). They also had some issues with filing the papers on time. I hope that any of the newly appointed directors has some solid knowledge and experience in such things. |
|
|
|
What is the source of this document?
Companies House (UK)
Agree, worthless - why publish this at all, Bitstamp?
Doesn't add much to their credibility - in fact, subtracts from it.
Bitstamp didn't publish that. IMHO they should have prepared proper accounts (audited) and publish it, but they didn't. What you see is an extract from the abbreviated accounts, which, by law, they have to file with Companies House every year. Such accounts are publicly available in CH (for a small charge). |
|
|
|
They need an audit. They're not entitled to the "small company exemption" with assets of US$64 million. Here's the "Companies Act" section to which they refer. They may be able to claim that they were a small company in 2012, and get a year after becoming a large company in 2013 to comply. For 2014, they need a full audit. They may be entitled, if they have less than 50 employees (very likely) and turnover less than £6.5 million. The section of CA2006 quoted by you says: The qualifying conditions are met by a company in a year in which it satisfies two or more of the following requirements
Also, an annual statement normally contains both a statement of operations and a balance sheet. They just have a balance sheet, and one with too little information. All their liabilities, including customer deposits, are consolidated into one number.
This is worthless.
As a small company they can choose to present abbreviated accounts (and they did) with very limited info. What I'm wondering is whether company with such activity falls under FCA/PRA regulations... I thought Bitstamp was in the UK? Why is their financial statement in dollars?
UK law allows companies to present statements in their operational currency (for Bitstamp it's USD), they have to convert to GBP for tax purposes though. |
|
|
|
Just thought it may be interesting for some to see the first financial statements of Bitstamp Ltd. Not much in them, since they've chosen to file the abbreviated accounts. They made a profit after tax and salaries of $833,430 * and noted impressive cash balance of $65,667,026 (I reckon it includes customers' deposits). Here's the Balance Sheet:  EDIT:* Since no income statement is presented, I assumed that profit equals "profit and loss account" reserve shown in the Balance sheet, but that wouldn't be correct if they paid out any dividends. |
|
|
|
Anyone has any experience with CryptoThrift? I haven't used it yet, but I'm looking at this listing: https://cryptothrift.com/auctions/dogecoin-crypto-coins/56700-doges-3/56700 doges for 0.015 BTC (currently worth 0.04), escrow accepted, seller has no feedback tho. Is there any reason nobody bought it yet? Is there any risk for the buyer (using escrow) if the seller refuses to sell, escrow fees or anything? Am I missing something? |
|
|
|
Dogecoin?
Why? Folks ... Bitcoin needs to succeed if you want "X" joke coin to have any chance of succeeding.
Why? Because no bitcoiner bother to do the same but with bitcoins instead. Are you blaming the author of the idea, that he chose the wrong coin? It's a great news for cryptos, including bitcoin. I'm sure that a lot of people got introduced to bitcoin through dogecoin. |
|
|
|
Pretty fucked-up news: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/11097208/Why-Bangladesh-will-jail-Bitcoin-traders.htmlBangladesh's central bank has warned against dealing in Bitcoin, saying anybody caught using the virtual currency could be jailed under the country's strict anti-money laundering laws.
The Bangladesh Bank, which regulates the impoverished country's banking industry, said it issued the order after reports in local media of Bitcoin transactions through various online exchange platforms.
"Bitcoin is not a legal tender of any country. Any transaction through Bitcoin or any other crypto currency is a punishable offence," the bank said in a statement on Monday.
Bank officials told AFP separately that anyone found guilty in Bangladesh of using Bitcoin could be sentenced to up to 12 years in jail. And not very long time ago: Bangladesh get its own Bitcoin Foundationhttp://cointelegraph.com/news/112354/bangladesh-get-its-own-bitcoin-foundationEDIT: Found the link on reddit, one of the comments: [–]rizzledizzle 30 points 4 hours ago
As a Bangladeshi, this is stupid but expected from the government. It's also not going to be enforced.
The country is so poor and corrupt, anything goes. I believe VOIP is still considered illegal to try and help the national telephone subsidy, but everyone still uses Skype/Facetime/etc. If the above is true, it's possible that it's just a standard Bangladeshi gov's response to every new technology... But can you imagine going to jail for 12 years for sending bitcoins? Madness. |
|
|
|
UNESCO gave green light to cryptos? That is big news!Nah. It's too much to say they gave a green light. The ideas were opened for public voting, there was a bit of hype on /r/dogecoin and that's what happened. Anyways, well done. |
|
|
|
Ever since JD shut down there has not been a reputable bitcoin related casino that accepts investor funds.
There's prcdice.eu started in 2013, they accept investments (BTC + DOGE). Were you not aware of them, or do you think they're not reputable? On the side note, I wish FortuneJack.com had the option to invest, very ambitious, young site. They've got 'Anybet' option where you can propose your own bets. |
|
|
|
See their profile and their trust, no one can claim they don't know they are a ponzi. People that put their money there know where they are entering.
When people click the link in the sig, they don't get to see the trust feedback, do they? |
|
|
|
The Federal Reserve is getting close to raising interest rates for the first time in eight years. This is the furthest the dollar has gone in six years in relevance to the Japanese Yen. According to the head of foreign-exchange strategy at the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce in London, Jeremy Stretch, there has been “a significant lift in volatility [in the market], and levels have moved up substantially,” More @ http://cryptoconspiracy.com/american-dollar-climbs-most-in-10-months-while-bitcoin-stagnates/If the bitcoin stagnates, meaning BTC/USD rate sitting on the same level, and USD 'climbs'*, wouldn't that mean that BTC also 'climbs'? *'Climb' in these terms means that Japanese Yen is losing value quicker than USD, not that USD is gaining in value (purchase power). |
|
|
|
Just for clarifying, I get I think 51 cents per day with cryptcominer sig campaign, withdraws daily and fast, no fee.
Yes , we have understand ,.. but that sig. campaign is only a Ponzi scheme . Its daily payouts, so on the day that it crashes, you at most will lose that days payment for 51 cents + you lose credibility as you advertised a ponzi + you lose credibility by advertising gambling sites, while many people have their life destroyed by gambling? Everyone that is not a baby is aware of the risks, not sure what is the problem So where do you draw the line? Would you advertise anything if they pay you the most? As long as it's not immoral - yes. I've seen gambling addiction from a close perspective, lives ruined, the financial security of people close to the addicted person being risked, yet I don't condemn anyone that advertises for a gambling site. It's up to each and everyone to make their own conscious decision whether they want to use the service that the advertised site is offering. Gambling addiction has nothing to do with the subject. The gambling site is advertised as gambling site, people who use it know that they are gambling. It can have destructive effect on some individuals, but so can pretty much any activity. Huge number of lives/families are affected by car crashes - following your logic, is advertising an obvious scam more innocent than car adverts? But if you're desperate to compare to gambling campaigns, it would be the same as advertising a "1% house edge Dice" knowing that the house edge is in-fact 100%. The only reasonable justification for putting this shit in the sig, in my opinion are: 1 - You don't have a spine/morals at all, you would do anything for a quick profit (including selling your own mother) - in such case no comment. 2- You trust that cryptcominer is somehow, in a magical way, legit - no comment. 3- You think that anyone who would fall for such obvious scam is a moron and deserve to lose to learn a lesson. In such case, why don't pull a scam yourself and earn more than a lousy campaign earnings? 4- You think that the scam is so obvious, that no-one will fall for that and the scammers will lose all the 'investment' (campaign expenses). This one imho is the only sensible 'line of defense'. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
