Some people need to read between the lines. Peter absolutely should be saying things like he's saying. Think about it long and hard and you'll figure it out. Don't be so dense. If the public perception of bitcoin is that it's a bunch of rogues, it'll come under attack sooner than otherwise. If the public perception is that there are some rogues, but in general it's full of compliance-seekers, especially in the all-important Bitcoin Foundation, then the attack will be delayed or prevented. The phrase walk softly and carry a big stick is important to keep in mind. The public face of Bitcoin should be gentle, accomodating, and non-extreme. It should be business-focused, and not political. The effect of Bitcoin, however, should be known by Bitcoiners anyway and doesn't need to be discussed in polite company  Wrong, and I've heard this before. And it was wrong then just as it is now. "it'll come under attack sooner than otherwise" - Erik - it already IS under attack. Don't be so dense. I have a better option for Peter - don't create his own little organization and claim to be the ruler, and then he doesn't have to say anything.Most of what you say makes you sound like one of the good guys, Erik, but the company you keep has always indicated otherwise. Statements like this only confirm my suspicions. You underestimate Bitcoin's censorship-resistant abilities. |
|
|
|
Some people need to read between the lines. Peter absolutely should be saying things like he's saying. Think about it long and hard and you'll figure it out. Don't be so dense. If the public perception of bitcoin is that it's a bunch of rogues, it'll come under attack sooner than otherwise. If the public perception is that there are some rogues, but in general it's full of compliance-seekers, especially in the all-important Bitcoin Foundation, then the attack will be delayed or prevented. The phrase walk softly and carry a big stick is important to keep in mind. The public face of Bitcoin should be gentle, accomodating, and non-extreme. It should be business-focused, and not political. The effect of Bitcoin, however, should be known by Bitcoiners anyway and doesn't need to be discussed in polite company |
|
|
|
I think that a lot of Erik's points are good ones, and I certainly think that the tone, if not the substance, of a lot of the questions/criticisms on this board are out of line. People can demand that SD take a more "mainstream" or "professional" approach to shareholder relations if they are unwilling to act in a courteous and "professional" manner as investors (who do not traditionally get to flame corporate CEOs directly in message boards).
That said, while obviously the exchange rate change made a huge difference, it is disingenuous to keep highlighting the 10x number with regards to valuation and dividends. If this were the primary factor at play, then when the price dropped back down to 5x of what it was in February, then theoretically share price should have doubled from what it was at the peak of the exchange rate, which isn't what happened.
While I totally agree that both gamblers and investors still considering their decisions based on USD values rather than the BTC denominations of the bets/shares played a part in driving the price down, it's definitely only half of the story, as evidenced by the fact that there is not an inverse relationship between share value in BTC and BTC value in USD. While share values dropped as BTC value rose, when BTC value fell, so did share price. They are closer to non-correlated than negatively correlated.
Still holding my shares, and still interested to see what the future holds for SD, but let's make sure we are all thinking rationally about this. Frankly, I think that Erik (thanks, Erik) has done a pretty good job of resisting the urge to get down in the muck with the trolls, for a guy whose job is not really PR. Everyone, disgruntled investors especially, needs to realize that this isn't the NYSE. We weren't buying into an established company, we were investing in what was essentially a start-up, and that can often mean taking losses for months or even a year or two before seeing profits. If you are that risk-averse, or only interested in short-term gains, you shouldn't be in any Bitcoin company stocks most likely.
Well-reasoned, well-written commentary. Thank you for your comments Zebulon. |
|
|
|
It should stay right here. The lack of distributed exchanges is one of Bitcoin's biggest problems right now. Ripple provides Bitcoin with an excellent solution for that (and so does Open Transactions) and that deserves a lot of attention. Those who are worried about XRP should not be allowed to censor the discussion.
Again this is more misinformation. Ripple does not provide any decentralized exchange. The fiat half of any exchange must sit in a physical bank account somewhere. Whether this is gateways in ripple or exchanges in Bitcoin, in both cases the same vulnerabilities exist. Ripple claims that the exchange process is decentralized because they're talking about the exchange of fiat IOU's for BTC, not fiat for BTC. You can set up a fiat IOU destributed exchange with Bitcoin as well. But Ripple has better marketing and branding so people seem to think it's some magic new phenomenon. For those who want a decentralized IOU exchange, Ripple is great. A decentralized asset exchange, it is not. |
|
|
|
this night some people sold 40k BTC in mtgox and the price fell to 120. Like 8% in hours. This is not a steadiness standard. BTC is very volatile when people do this, suggesting its not very well distributed.
Sigh. Bitcoin's volatility has decreased on average over time, yet people keep focusing on the fact that "it is not yet extremely stable." Well, stability comes with time. A $5m dump on the market a year ago would've dropped it like 70%. Today it drops it 10%. Next year it'll drop it 2%. And Bitcoin has also become "more distributed" over time as well. Far more people have Bitcoin today than a year ago. And the portion of BTC holders who have greater than X BTC will always be declining. Similarly, exchange volume is growing increasingly decentralized over time. Two years ago, Gox held 80% of the market. A year ago, more like 70%. Today, it's maybe 50-60%. If various arguments about the centralization of Bitcoin bother you, then you're in luck, because it's a self-correcting process which has been improving since the genesis block. |
|
|
|
I remember the point when SD started going downhill. It was in early February right when voorhees issued all those shares which halved the value of everyone's stock. Remember when he said the price would recover to the true value (which was about .0076/share at the time) within 2 days? Yeah, still waiting for that lol... I am so glad I sold this trash before it tanked. The asset, the site, and the management. What a joke.
Ahhhh early February... you mean right before BTC went up 10x? This is a question to shareholders who are very critical of me. Do you realize that when the BTC exchange rate goes up 10x, it means site earnings measured in USD must go up 10x as well in order to maintain the same share price? All else equal, the fact that the exchange rate went up 10x and the site earnings in BTC did not drop to 1/10th means the site is growing in real terms. The fact that such extreme BTC appreciation makes it nearly impossible for nominal share price to increase is unfortunate, but is this the fault of SD? You do realize that if measured in a more stable store of value like USD or gold, SD's earnings have consistently increased over time, despite hordes of competitors, despite PR smear campaigns, and despite now a US blockage. I understand people are upset because they haven't seen any visible movement (no new site, new features, etc.), and this is reasonable criticism that will only be put to rest once you see the new site. However, increasing site earnings by 10x over the course of 2-3 months in tandem with the exchange rate is an impossible task. The USD-measured valuation of the shares at IPO was reasonable, and the USD-measured valuation of the shares today is reasonable. Indeed, the USD-measured valuation of the shares since IPO has increased, not decreased. Yet... the BTC exchange rate went up 10x and so the nominal share price is down, and this is what people see, unfortunately. What I'm saying is, I think the criticism here is out of hand. The site is growing, it has avoided hacks of all shapes and sizes, it has navigated legal waters that threaten its very existence, it has maintained its position despite throngs of competitors, and it has done all of this with extremely low overhead. I do not take a salary from SD. I am paid dividends per share like every other shareholder here, and yet I front all money for development, I have thousands of personal BTC on zero-interest loan to SD, at risk every day, to provide depth for SD's betting pool which shareholders receive the benefit of for free. I've paid significant legal expense out of pocket, for which SD shareholders receives direct benefit for free. Still, some shareholders seem to think I've "shitted on them" because the share price hasn't increased nominally along with a 10x exchange rate increase. Tough crowd. I'm not asking for people to be happy with the fact that the nominal share price has fallen. I'm simply asking for people to consider the context in which this has occurred - crucially, a 10x increase in the exchange rate. |
|
|
|
So are you willing to confirm that you have in fact been, arbitrarily calculating payments?
I don't know what you mean by "arbitrarily calculating payments." I explained how I calculate them. On the day that the bill is paid, I use the current BTC exchange rate. For each expense listed, I mentioned the date and if USD then I mentioned the exchange rate used on that day. What's complicated about that? |
|
|
|
Earnings Report for MayData can be found here along with comments/details on all expenses for the month: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aiec3-Eo_yO5dHB2dVdiaEltUHAtTWlBcFhXQVBYeGc#gid=14Bets: 506,686 Volume Bet: 175,136.61 Paid Out: 174,750.31 Network Fees Paid: 531.28 Revenue: -144.98 Op. Expenses: 290.0325 Expected Earnings (discounting variance and incl. Op Expenses): 2,892 BTC Actual Earnings (incl. Op Expenses): -435.01035497
Notes:- Many people asked for details on expenses. These are now provided fully in the spreadsheet w/ comments. - As heads-up, June will incur a payment of roughly $10k for remaining new website work - May expenses were high due to $20k convention sponsorship - Bet Volume was up over 2x from April, despite US blockage. - No hacks, no thefts. Lifetime earnings are nearly identical to expected earnings. - Some people noticed I donated 150 btc to the blockchain pruning/lite nodes development here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=204283.msg2137338#msg2137338 I've received a couple angry PMs from people who thought SD was paying for this and it would come out of dividends. So I'll say it again - this was paid by me personally, not SD.
|
|
|
|
2 bets with no result for at least 30 minutes. Something is not working???
Site was stuck for about 30 min but then resolved. Please PM me if anything didn't return. |
|
|
|
dooglus it's fair to say and anyone here will agree that you are an extremely annoying individual...
SkullCard... I'm going to offer you some friendly professional advice. Dooglus is one of the most well-respected community members here, especially when it comes to gambling. He's been a tireless and extremely helpful contributor. You might want to be more humble, polite, and respectful to him. Coming in here with big claims and grand plans may get you noticed by some noobs, but you won't make friends with the people who matter. you're not the brightest spark I've come across in my time and I suggest you don't gamble at all because discerning patterns and mathematics clearly aren't your strong points! Actually, those are exactly his strong points. |
|
|
|
In an announcement it's good to say what your site actually does |
|
|
|
|
Hey all,
Site processing was down temporarily. All is well, site is back up now, and bets are clearing through. It's great to see so many people using the new live chat and support feature!
|
|
|
|
Thank you guys for all the kind words, they mean everything  |
|
|
|
|
Warning: This site is a scam.
It is using fake SatoshiDice addresses to trick people into thinking it is SatoshiDice.
At best, they're lying and stealing the branding to make money. At worst, they'll steal the bets or donations made on that site.
|
|
|
|
|
This site is a scam.
It is using fake SatoshiDice addresses to trick people into thinking it is SatoshiDice.
At best, they're lying and stealing the branding to make money. At worst, they'll steal the bets or donations made on that site.
|
|
|
|
THIS IS A SCAM SITE
Uses fake SatoshiDice betting addresses.
Mods please remove.
This is not Affiliated to SatoshiDice.com This works totally independent of that website. Your tab says "Satoshi Dice" and it lists bet addresses meant to look exactly like SD addresses. You are scamming people into thinking those are SatoshiDice. At best, you're lying. At worst, you're going to steal money. Have some class and go build something valuable instead of some ripoff faucet site meant to steal peoples' donations. |
|
|
|
|
THIS IS A SCAM SITE
Uses fake SatoshiDice betting addresses.
Mods please remove.
|
|
|
|
|
Very interesting indeed, if true!
Something to think about... if China comes out openly opposed to Bitcoin, and blocks it, then Americans will look upon this as an act of censorship by an oppressive regime. This means they would be less likely to accept similar moves from the American government. On the other hand, if the American govenrment comes down hard (and not China), Americans would be more likely to buy the story and be opposed to Bitcoin.
Thus China blocking it could be good for Bitcoin in America. And America blocking it could be good for Bitcoin in China.
China is STILL the top downloader of Bitcoin client software, a trend which has persisted for the past six weeks (prior to this, the US had always been #1)
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
