Hello, I am looking for a 2 week loan of 0.03 BTC. This is my first loan request but I have a clean Trust history and 1 completed trade; forum member since April 2014. Loan Amount: 0.03 Loan Purpose: Pay for bills Loan Repay Amount: 0.0365 Loan Repay Date: 10/17/18 Type of Collateral: none Escrow profile Link: none Bitcoin Address: 1M4GrspPosuY64coB7VgBNdtKR7wypUY5h Signed Base 64 message: This is nutildah's bitcoin address. 10-3-18. H1/efguPL8I1i94cbF0FaV00XZlNrehmgQldIf4Q/C/4YMs0OCfXIU3ScBhOvZZs8TmRe1lDiiS6hvBVTj8WsdU= Thanks for your consideration. |
|
|
|
when a journalist has nothing to write about, he writes about bitcoin price
As a bitcoin news writer I can confirm this as true. That's the thing about the price: its always either going up, or down, or even when its sideways you can write about that too. It takes effort to find good material to write about sometimes. Our TA guy just pulls magic bunny rabbits out of his ass 3 times a week and gets paid decently for it. |
|
|
|
Hi,
Please stop spreading the rumours and FUD. If you need any clarification, please come on video conference to clear your doubts. Moreover, I am a verified ICO expert on ICOBench, which answers all your points.
Regards
Naviin Kapoor
You have to pay $$$ for expert reviews on ICOBench. My question is: why would they pay you if they didn't think they were going to get a favorable review? If any expert is aksing for paid reviews, you can send the message and email to info@icobench.com, his expert status will be revoked by ICOBench in no time. ICOBench is doing hard to curb these issues, nevertheless, it does not mean all reviews are wrong in ICOBench When somebody shells out 6 BTC for a "full analytical review by ICO Bench analysts," have you ever issued a less-than-positive review?  |
|
|
|
Army's however navigate using proper world map without distortion like this:
You're not seriously suggesting that Greenland is about as big as South America? Every flat map is distorted. Frankly we should just stop commenting here. Its more fun to watch them cannibalize themselves. I think they get their rocks off by coming up with absurd counterarguments, strange as it may sound. |
|
|
|
Hi,
Please stop spreading the rumours and FUD. If you need any clarification, please come on video conference to clear your doubts. Moreover, I am a verified ICO expert on ICOBench, which answers all your points.
Regards
Naviin Kapoor
You have to pay $$$ for expert reviews on ICOBench. My question is: why would they pay you if they didn't think they were going to get a favorable review? |
|
|
|
Now this thread is reduced to two pigeons playing chess with each other.  |
|
|
|
Notice the red lines, the routs connecting major star ports; they're lines not arcs. The only logical conclusion based on the logistical fallacy of taking a longer path than is required is that the globe is a projection and the map is true.
That's not what the description text says. It clearly says its a projection of a globe with poles. "This map is made on the North Polar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection. This means that the world has been projected on a plane tangent to the North Pole, with the parallels of latitude as concentric circles equally spaced from the pole outward." How about the only logical conclusion is the map is what it says it is? You lose. I'm not entertaining you any further. |
|
|
|
LOL Since when is someone being ambivalent suggest that someone "believes" anything? It's like calling someone who is agnostic a religious zealot.  Just because you say you are something it doesn't mean you are. Obviously he cares otherwise he wouldn't have injected himself into the discussion. Not like anybody was asking him about his opinion. Saying I have no proof that somebody isn't some anonymous person is simply rehashing the definition of what "anonymous" is. It's a rather stupid, obvious statement for him to make. |
|
|
|
OK again, so no public proof = no proof.
Absolutely. You have no public proof that CSW is not satoshi. For the record: I am ambivalent on the matter. He may be; he may not. But you are falling upon the argument of the most fallacious nature. Lack of proof is not proof of the converse. And you have no proof that I'm not Satoshi either. Neither have you proof that my grandma is not Satoshi. This is a stupid fucking argument but if you want to continue to believe that a bull-headed narcissist, an egotistical, mean-spirited sociopath is Satoshi, despite an utter lack of evidence, that's your right as a human citizen. Have at it. There's a raging Flat Earth argument in Off Topic that could probably use your help in its defense. |
|
|
|
^^^ My hint was that's it's a Azimuthal Equidistant map.
I know they use this type because during an elementary school class tour of a large ship, I commented on the AE map in a map book on the bridge and was immediately scolded by the Jewish teacher who snapped the book shut and made sure to explain what a stupid comment I made.
The heading "GLOBAL WAR" on a Flat Earth map says it all, think about that in the context of a massive conspiracy. Unless you want to argue war doesn't involve conspiracy?
Wow dude. You just totally bypassed all the times the description of your Flat Earth Map used the word GLOBE and POLE (and even Azimuth itself refers to an object that is globe shaped) to make a ridiculous, racist point. Your evidence that the map is used by sailors has to do with an anecdote from elementary school? |
|
|
|
Guess what kind of map sailors use? Hint:  That's called an Airmap and it is not used by sailors. Never. Here is the text under Explanation of Projection, every word bolded here is something you can't believe in because it runs contrary to your theory: This map is made on the North Polar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection. This means that the world has been projected on a plane tangent to the North Pole, with the parallels of latitude as concentric circles equally spaced from the pole outward. The meridian of longitude are straight lines radiating from the pole. Every post on the map has a trans direction of azimuth, from the pole and also a true distance from the pole.
Since it is impossible to spread the surface of a globe on a flat surface without distortion, all maps are distorted in some respects. In this map the distortion occurs in the east and west distances. This distortion increases gradually from the North Pole to the Equator, and then quite rapidly to the outer limits. The distortion of the Antarctic land areas would be so great that they are not shown.... The length of the meridians is the same as it would be on a globe...
On this projection, the large land masses surrounding the North Pole are reasonably true in shape and relationship. So the map is excellent for studying the possibilities of global war strategy based on trans-Arctic air transport.The text straight up says the map represents a distorted image of a globe. How are you going to deny this? Ought to be pretty entertaining. |
|
|
|
I was also able to read his advertisement few months ago, but i have no interest in it, it might be because i have no such funds that time, or i was busy with some other opportunities, but looking into your statement, it made me realized that i was really blessed not to take an action at that moment, thanks for this.
You should try taking action in it now and see what happens. ICO still onging. |
|
|
|
He deliberately made the public proof in his blog unbelievable, and his private proof to Andresen believable, all Gavin says now is he regrets getting dragged into the find satoshi game where CSW is for some reason happy to antagonise guys like you. I agree with Gavin though, in retrospect he should not have posted his supportive blog until after craig made a compelling public proof. CSW wants to be the bad guy in bitcoin, who knows why, but he does.
OK again, so no public proof = no proof. He doesn't antagonize me, its people like you who won't let reality damage their extraordinarily unfounded outlook that antagonizes me. You're free to believe what you want, but I prefer to believe in things backed by evidence. I'm sure you also believe BCH is the real bitcoin too so what's the point in continuing this silly discussion. You're only feeding the ego of one of crypto's biggest con artists. |
|
|
|
None of us knows the proof gavin saw, all we know is it satisfiec him, and then craig chose to make his public proofs dodgy, but I suspect all will be revealed eventually.
Actually its all very, very public and very easy to understand how Craig was pulling over a fast one on poor Gavin. The debate of whether Craig is a charlatan or not has long been over with. Everybody knows he was lying. Its facetious to pretend its still up in the air. https://www.ccn.com/gavin-andersen-craig-wright-blog-mistake/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLI3VIHuKUBesides, never in any of his public communications was Satoshi 1/10th as big an asshole as CSW is on any given day. And unless CSW has an opposite sleep pattern from 99% of all human beings on earth their sleep cycles do not match up. The reasons why CSW is NOT Satoshi are many and varied and its fallacious of you to continue pretending any doubt remains in the matter. |
|
|
|
So, you think Gavin meets Craig in person and he offers the same evidence as everybody else? You don't think Gavin would have used personal communications he had with satoshi to check if Craig was legit, like ask for dates and contents of emails and forum messages? Gavin wasn't fooled, and afaik witnessed in person Craig using satoshi's priv keys.
You're being bullheaded about the fact that Craig obtained the keys from the bitcoin blockchain. He used recycled keys that were out in the public and obtainable by anybody. Its impossible for Gavin to have communicated with Satoshi about the matter because he hadn't communicated with him in over 4 (maybe even 5) years by that point. Craig wants the situation we have, many doubters, he likes the uncertainty.
Nobody gives a flying fuck what Craig wants. He's clearly a sociopathic narcissist and he hasn't contributed anything of note to the crypto community in his pursuit of even more money. He's an extremely crass, divisive figure hellbent on fooling the weak-minded into believing he is Satoshi for purpose of quenching his insatiable ego. |
|
|
|
Not to mention the emails sent from CSW to Kleiman before the white paper was even released. This is a quote from the main document of the court case, which can be found here https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/1/kleiman-v-wright/"In March 2008, just a few months before Satoshi’s paper on the Bitcoin protocol was published, Craig wrote Dave an email stating: “I need your help editing a paper I am going to release later this year. I have been working on a new form of electronic money. Bit cash, Bitcoin . . . [y]ou are always there for me Dave. I want you to be part of it all.” Ever heard of something called "backdating"? In the same document you just linked: "It is unclear whether Craig, Dave, and/or both created Bitcoin." If Craig was Satoshi, why would he need to pull an elaborate hoax on Gavin Andresen where he presented keys that were already publicly available, embedded in the blockchain? Seems like he could have used any one of perhaps hundreds of other keys Satoshi should be in possession of. Besides, Satoshi Nakamoto was never the ill-mannered, egocentric, conniving drama queen bedwetter that CSW is every day. |
|
|
|
Why you treat others like scammers?
I was scammer and fraudster  I was carder also if you even know who is carder I dont regret it was nice times. (Good memories) |
|
|
|
I was going to report this as a spam megathread, which I’ve been doing quite often lately. But I see some big accounts posting here. Don’t you think all possible replies about it have been given? If someone is stubborn and believes the Earth is flat, you are not going to persuade him.
I think if somebody consistently denies the incoming reception of contrary information in order to continue espousing an outmoded belief they fit one definition or the other perfectly: 1. Insane. 2. Troll. Or, as could very well be the case with both notbatman and joe, both. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
