Weird.  Vandroiy can't just make an offline wallet, have nanotube send the funds there and verify it via third party tools.  His coins not mine but seems strange given the nature of Bitcoin that closing the bet would require waiting.

Why would the next 80 years be any different?  I mean it isn't like this has snuck up on anyone.  The purchasing power of one $1 USD has slowly been eroded for decade after decade after decade.  It isn't like the US is throwing a curve ball at the last minute.  Do you honestly think there is any central bank that doesn't know that $1 USD will buy ~30% to 40% less in a decade?  Do you think any central banker didn't know that a decade ago, two decades ago, eight decades ago?  I mean you don't need to be an economist to figure that out you just need to be able to read a graph.

30 year bond rates tend to be above the rate of inflation so bondholders don't really lose (the naive ones just make less than they think).  They get more dollars but the dollars are worth less (but not worthless).  Net-net they break even.  It is a store of value in a weird kinda way.

The debt is less important than the deficit.  Our current year deficits are simply unsustainable but that is a lot easier to solve.  Paying down the debt is tough but we never will.  At one time a billion was a lot of money.  Did we pay down our billion dollar debt (circa 1918).  No we just let inflation solve it over the next century.

Simple.  Inflation. 

The dollar has lost 99% of it's value over the last 80 years.  It will lose that much over the next 80.  $15T is only $150M in real terms if the dollar devalues 99% over the next 80 years.

This is the wrong subforum for a loan offer.

Can people stop attacking dank?

I mean I find the idea of >3% per week profits to be hard to believe but pages and pages and pages of attacking him?  What is the point? Anyone who is invested is obviously not moved by it.  Anyone not invested has 19 pages of warning signs.  Does anyone think 21 pages is going to be a better deterrent.  Just seems kind pointless to keep piling on him.

I don't think there will be a Round 2 that was a KO.

No you know anyone like that.  Pirate didn't con a bunch of bitcoin outsiders.  Hell they (looking objectively from a distance) were more likely to see it as an super obvious ponzi.  It was only the bitcoin enthusiast who thought somehow bitcoin could bend the laws of compounding interest.

My guess is the number of people who were complete outsiders to Bitcoin and bought solely to put coins into an obvious ponzi and will sell as soon as possible are a distinct minority.

Maybe it makes people feel better to think that but this was a "hometown" scam.  The people scammed were the people right here in this forum long before Pirate started offering dumbass "wagers".

You do realize the satoshi client is considered beta right?  The developers have expressed that security, and improved performance are their goals at this point.  Of course if you feel security and improved performance are silly near term goals you are free to fork it and develop a client which is user friendly.

Alternatively wait 10 years and the popular clients will all be polished and user friendly.

So you believe he may not get his coins yet you gave Pirate a 10 on OTC.
Do you routinely give traders who you believe may steal large sums of coins a 10?
Just curious.  Trying to reconcile these facts.


Pirate already stated he will not honor the terms of his contract (suspending interest retroactively back to the closure).  Was he lying?
If not them Pirate wont be paying back BTCST funds in full.  So does your statement above mean he will return "some" of the funds he owes.  Is someone who returns some of the funds they owe worthy of  10 rating.

If so can I borrow 10,000 BTC, repay you 5,000 BTC and get a 10 rating from you.  That would be swell.  Tell you what to reduce the tx fees you can just deduct the 5,000 I will repay and send me the 5,000 I won't.

Deposit address:
1927YqmruSf7PYip6MDYezMbA85GdkAAD1

Thank you. I will be sure to rate you a 10 on this transaction also.

Logical fallacy.

If keeping Pirate debt debt and hedging it is a "best bet" then buying Pirate debt bet and hedging is equally the "best bet".
Conversely if buying Pirate debt and hedging it is a "bad bet" then someone with a with an existing debt shouldn't keep it they should sell it and thus keeping the Pirate debt and hedging it is equally bad.

If someone can buy then someone else can sell.  One can't be bad and the other the "best bet".

Does your brain not comprehend logic.  Is everything just luck and unicorns?

Exactly.  Nobody controls Bitcoin so there is unlikely to be unanimous decision.  Still given significant portions of the protocol and infrastructure have been yet to be developed I think it would be hard for anyone to objectively say Bitcoin isn't still a beta.

Your post seems confusing.  You ask if people hate advertisements and you are looking to get donations to have them removed but then you also indicate you will allow others to advertise?

While there may be some value in allowing more slots the reality is that the amount of traffic really doesn't warrant it.
Click through rates are low ~0.50% and that means each slot is maybe worth ~100 hits  per day.  Now if you create a pool and subdivide that (say avg member has a 1/10th share) you are talking about maybe 10 hits per day.

The admins run the ads manually.  The auction, payments, ad submission, review, and integration are all done by a person.  There is no tecnical reason why the site can't have 80 slots instead of 8 but it would mean 8x the manual work and the revenue doesn't really warrant any automated system (at this point).

My guess is 7% a week from some bitcoin buccaneer.
All the HYIP/ponzi stupidity make it hard for real commerce to cut through the noise.  Hell 99% of the assets on GLBSE offering dividends probably shouldn't.  You got 1 day old mining ventures paying out 100% of earnings in dividends.

For the record I think SD is overpriced but it IMHO more like overpriced by a factor of 50% to 100% not 1000%.

Proof?  Also how exactly would Goat BLOCK other people from contacting Pirate even if Goat wanted to.  Does he have complete control over the internet and all other methods of communication?

Well you can argue anything doesn't mean it is logical.  Try this.  Call your bank up and tell them you want to close your mortgage.  You will pay it off eventually but since it is closed you want the interest reduced to zero. 

The idea that someone can borrow money at x% then not repay it upon demand and then choose to pay a different interest (or none) doesn't even pass the chuckle test.

Pirate has default and will never pay according to the terms of his contract.  Matt simply can not win the bet.  The only thing which is unknown is will he payout or not (I bet not).

No change addresses?

An address isn't a wallet.  The unspent outputs for that address are 0.0007.  You have unspent outputs on other addresses.

Technically to the Bitcoin protocol there is no such thing as a wallet.  Your client is just adding up the current value of all addresses in your wallet.dat file and showing you the balance.

If you exported all the addresses of your wallet and looked all them up manually on blockchain.info and added up the balances it should match what your client displays.

It isn't a "problem" but it is an issue.  Part of the issue is that the infrastructure isn't all in place yet.  Remember bitcoin is in BETA.  

To have a working fee economy you need:
a) miners making optimal decisions on tx inclusion.
b) smart clients able to make recomendations to users on apropriate fees (by looking at the memory pool & prior block fees)
c) robust enough processing nodes to handle the increased volume.
d) a low enough subsidy that it doesn't distort the true cost of tx.

Those don't exist (yet) although some are being worked on.  The last point will really only be "fixed" over time as the subsidy declines.

That being said I think SD is great.  It is a free (for non players) stress testing of the network.  I do think on a long enough timeline it will not be viable.  Space in the blockchain is simply too valuable for the processing model to remain viable.

I got to lolz at the Bane Capital pseudonym. 

Yeah that is what we would call ... false. 
Also linking to another account on another forum is hardly proof that is your account.
You got 9 posts, no rep, and are making false statements on the security of PayPal payments.

Hmmm