replies are posts.  this was a post.

you could do five posts in about five seconds.

That is the most ridiculous requirement.

So if I asked you to make a logo and then didn't pay you I shouldn't get a scammer tag?  No funds changed hands (even though that is the entire problem).
What if you and I agreed to a CFD so I could hedge my businesses exposure and the price of BTC skyrocketed so you decide to not honor it.  Once again no funds changed hands.

How about keep it simple:
"If you make an agreement and break it you are a scammer".

7 days

The second line doesn't exactly inspire any confidence in bitcoincharts operation.

No.  The SDK is produced by the hardware manufacturer.  Nobody has the technical expertise to make a "custom" one.  If you have Intel hardware you use Intel OpenCL SDK.  If you have AMD hardware you use AMD OpenCL SK.  If you have NVidia hardware you use NVidia OpenCL SDK.

Intel implementation of OpenCL is flawed or incomplete when it comes to GPU (works perfectly fine on the x64 CPU portion).  Standard OpenCL kernels for mining simply do not work.  Period.  In theory it may be possible to make some non-conmpliant OpenCL garbage kernel which gets around Intel's flaws and works on their GPUs.  Nobody is going to do that because the hardware is so weak.  Why would someone with the skills to build that (if it is even possible) spend the hundreds of hours just to produce a kernel which only works on Intel GPU and is the slowest of all hardware available to users?  The mining kernels in use now are the product of hundreds of hours of development.  Nobody is going to do that for some joke of a GPU made by Intel.   Even IF you did get it working a $10 AMD gpu you bought used a fleamarket would be magnitudes faster.

TL/DR:
As I said in the first post.   No.

People did read the terms of your bet.  You failed to honor them.  

If you are sure your flawed interpretation is accurate why not agree to arbitration:
https://judge.me

I will happily pay the arbitration fee for both sides. 

Merely excluding him from further involvement is insufficient IMHO. If Matt has any equity stake he should be bought out.  However that may simply not be possible depending on the legal structure of the entity.

The issue is PayPal rules are arbitrary and a scammer is going to know how to use them to his advantage is both directions.

For example if a noob pays by gift using a PayPal account with a balance he likely is screwed.  
So never pay by gift.  I would also point out that too sending or receiving too many gift payments can get your account frozen or cause you to lose the ability to make gift payments.
This has nothing to do with "scams" and everything to do with the fact that PayPal doesn't get paid on gift payments.

Oh so if sending by gifts can be reversed, than receiving by gifts must be safe right?
No absolutely not.  A scammer is going to be more than willing to pay by gift using:
a) a hacked/stolen PayPal Account -> auto reverse you lose
b) Claiming his account was hacked/stolen -> auto reverse you lose
c) a $0 balance PayPal account (where tx is funded in realtime by CC) -> charge back on CC -> reverse on PayPal you lose.

PayPal requires complete and absolute trust because it can be used to scam both ways.  A scammer is going to know all the ins and outs and the sucker isn't.  So even if it looks "safe" you probably can get burned.
For example FastCash4Bitcoins uses PayPal payouts but you shouldn't use our service unless you already trust us.  If you can trust us with your coins you can trust our PayPal payouts are legit too.

Sadly no matter how many times this explained people seem to get scammed.

TL/DR:
Paying by gift to an untrusted persons = dangerous.
Accepting payment by gift from an untrsuted person = dangerous.

There is no scammer avatar that is just something made up by one scammer as a some kind of insane badge of honor.

I don't thinks so but you have to realize most consumers have been sheltered by the state protecting them from any possible bad decision on their part for a very long time.   Even CC rules means you can be incredibly stupid and still never lose a single penny.

It will take time and reputation does matter.  Do you think say NewEgg or Amazon would be any more risky paying with Bitcoin instead of CC?  I don't.  Those companies have developed awesome reputation among customers and that is a powerful corporate "asset".  I pick NewEgg over say Tiger Direct even if they are a couple bucks more simply because I have never had a problem with them.  They always meet or exceed my expectations. 

Remember Bitcoin is young it is completely different.  It isn't just p2p paypal.  It will take time for the infrastructure to build up around it.

Understood and prudent.  

Intel OpenCL platform is "non-standard".    The openCL acceleration for CPU is fairly good (CPU will execute OpenCL kernels) but that is kinda useless for mining.  Intel OpenCL drivers for GPU are a "mess".  To my knowledge nobody has gotten them working and it likely would require writing a custom kernel.  That kinda defeats the point of OpenCL (writing generic code to execute against OpenCL compatible hardware) but I guess it could be done (maybe).  Given the worthless performance of Intel GPU, there would be no point.  I don't see anyone releasing Intel compatible OpenCL kernel anytime soon.

You sold the bet as a method of hedging losses for Pirate investors.  A large portion of the bets were from Pirate's victims.  Some victims didn't sell PPT for 30 cents on dollar because they could hedge with you for 50 cent on the dollar.  They could have sold and recovered 30 cents but THEY TRUSTED YOU.

BTW I never trusted you.  I knew you would lose the bet and not pay.  The reality is some people trusted you and lost because their trust was misplaced.  The only lesson you taught people is that you can't be trusted.

Who said anything about the law.

If you are so sure your interpretation is valid why not submit it to arbitration.

http://www.judge.me/

Well I didn't have a bet but I did learn that Matt is immature, irresponsible, and reckless.  I won't be trusting him or any person or company that associates with him.

Not sure if that was the lesson he was trying to teach.

What non-bitcoin cash like systems are there?

Liberty Reserve?  Plenty of the same scams and HYP nonsense around Liberty Reserve.

As long as people will hand scammers giant piles of irreversible cash there will be scammers.  That simple. 

You did not pay the bet.  Period.  In an agreement one party can't simply interpret the agreement how they wan't and expect to be resolved any liability.

If you are so sure you paid the bet how about submit it to arbitration:
http://www.judge.me/

Hell I will even pay the judge.me fees you just need to escrow the full balance prior to arbitration to ensure it is paid out if you lose.
BTW I didn't bet so this isn't some attempt for me to collect winnings.  I just know that even you know your interpretation is bogus and wouldn't stand up to any third party.


I didn't say everyone will subscribe that is just more of your personallity showing through.

Your actions will affect the magazine.  Will everyone stop subscribing? No.  If you quit or are fired will everyone pissed at you subscribe? No.

Your actions still do have an effect.


Hopefully they remain hidden as the same would apply to any other company you work for.  Your are a liability for those you work for.  A net negative and if you can't see that well it just shows how much of a risk you are, to those who partner with you.

Do you have an equity stake in the magazine?
Do you have stock options or other deffered compensation based on the future profits of the magazine?
Do you receive a salary or other direct compensation from the magazine?

Saying it isn't "your magazine" is more of your weasel word bullshit.   Yeah Tangible Cryptography is no longer "my" company (as it now has 5 entities with an equity stake) however I profit or lose because of my equity stake in the company even though it is no longer "mine".

First honest thing you have said in a long time.  You are missing it.  The reality is as an owner and senior editor of the magazine your personal actions DO reflect on the magazine.  People can't trust you (that is obvious) so why should they trust a company who trusts you.  Either the company is equally illreputable or has horrible judgement.  That has to factor in to the decision to do business (subscriptions, advertising, partnerships).  

Our company was considering advertising but we won't not until you are off the payroll.  Simply too much of a risk.  Your personality and low moral standards are a business risk.  You are the senior editor.  Can we trust your judgement not to defame our company in the event your personal feeling get hurt?  Can we trust the magazine won't take a deposit for advertising over the next 6 months and then just walk away?  

The magazine is more than just you but while you remain a part of it you are dead weight and a liability.

Nobody said that except you.  Nobody.

Matt is not merely an employee (like the part time janitor) of the Bitcoin Magazine.   Given the magazine is a startup and Matt was there from the begining it is highly unlikely he doesn't have an equity stake.  Thus if the magazine profits, he profits.  If the magazine goes bankrupt his equity (and thus time and effort promoting it) is worthless.


Yeah and when they find out that the senior editor makes 80,000 BTC bets he doesn't intend to honor it doesn't look very good.  When they learn more about Pirate ponzi and the amount victims lost, and the fact that Matt sold this bet as a way for Pirate investors to hedge their losses (and thus maybe not sell their PPT bonds at a worse rate) it looks even more scummy.