Yeah, damn dat eeeebil gummint for prohibiting hiring people to murder your drug rivals.

Looks like it's back up, but with no tournaments.

Seals seems to be down.

darkmule daily

So a self-selected sample of basement-dwelling neckbeards who have no jobs so are willing to work for pennies an hour on that ridiculous Turk thing.  I stopped reading right there.

Since giving up the password would probably be part of some kind of deal, unless DPR is a complete idiot, nuking the wallet with some trickery would pretty much break the deal and subject him to whatever consequences the feds threatened.

I've seen estimates from around 150K BTC to over 1 million, but much more than that is pretty unlikely, considering the period of time when Satoshi was mining (under that name).  While presumably he (or they) could have been mining subsequent to that time under other names, by that time, there were enough other miners that any one of them monopolizing the supply was pretty much out of the question.

So this is still puzzling me.  Suppose (a lowball estimate) Satoshi has 250K in BTC.  That would be, at current Gox value, about $37,500,000.

He's supposed to torch $37.5 million so you can subjectively feel better?

This plan seems to raise concerns of realistic, rational behavior.

I assume you mean a known PRIVATE key, since you couldn't transfer ANYTHING to an "unknown public key."

Also, why on earth would anyone throw away an enormous amount of money in return for nothing?

If you have stuff sent to your physical address, and then your house is ransacked, all the TOR in the world won't do you any good.  Drugs aren't just magically transported through the wires to people's homes.  They send it through the post.

At least if China is using the term correctly, a ban on virtual currencies would indeed not impact Bitcoin, which is a digital currency, and specifically, within that category, the leading cryptocurrency.  "Virtual currency" is a narrow term referring, generally, to currencies used within virtual worlds or other gaming environments, whose primary purpose is to purchase in-world items.  China outlawed using these for the purchase of out-of-world items, largely as an anti-fraud measure, because as virtual currencies began to acquire real-world value, they were used for illegal purposes but, more importantly, were susceptible to insiders simply "printing" themselves as much virtual currency as they wanted for their own personal profit.  Specifically, an executive at Shanda Interactive Entertainment was sentenced to prison for creating a large amount of virtual currency for his own profit.

While Bitcoin has the same susceptibility to fraud and use in illegal activities as cash, it does not have the much more serious problem of one person unilaterally being able to create value out of thin air (essentially stealing it from other holders by deflating their holdings).  So if Baidu is doing this, I think they're on pretty solid ground.  If the Chinese government does ban Bitcoin, it will probably not be for the same reason as they banned using virtual currencies for real world purchases, as those reasons really only apply to virtual currencies that can be created willy-nilly by one entity.

As pointed out barely 5 posts ago, that is because it is a compromised account.  Whoever originated this thread is probably trying to establish another account for less than honorable purposes.  He'll have to wait like everyone else.

Seems reasonable to me.  Even if it's probably because they don't have a system set up yet for manual payments, there will probably only be a trickle at first and they would be wise to be wary of fraud attempts, so manually processing transactions until they get the hang of it is completely sensible.

Didn't say it was.  But it's related to the OP of this thread.

Actually, they can fail to get a guilty verdict but still win the civil action over the forfeiture.  But yes, they at least shouldn't dispose of the assets before some legal resolution.

darkmule daily

Also, in case anyone is concerned about the low post count of this account, I can confirm that the poster is, in fact, Umuri and that unlike SupaDupa/CrazyRabbi/MrWubbles/whatever, Umuri is scrupulously honest.

This scamming lunatic is already banned repeatedly here under his SupaDupa nick.  He is also banned on #bitcoin-otc and pretty much any forum capable of banning people.  I have no idea why teppy doesn't ban him from Dragon's Tale, too, because he's a filthy, stinking bum who does nothing but constantly borrow money from people and either never pays it back or pays it back months later, but after showering them with torrents of filthy verbal abuse.

Anyway, reported for ban evasion.

True, at least to people who know Bitcoin, but they're doing this in front of a judge and (maybe) a jury.  So the less they have to explain, the better, and explaining how something is evidence when they don't even "have" the "money" any more may be beyond the ken of the average juror (or judge).