Cautionary Tale: I messed up. Big time. Please don’t pile on harder as I’m already sick to my stomach.

NEVER EXPOSE YOUR BTC KEYS/Seed to an forked wallet.

Two days ago, I attempted to split my BTC Diamond and BTC Private. I could not get it.

At some point, I exposed my Ledger Nano with my BTC on it, to each of their Electrum Wallets.

Last night, my wallet was emptied of ALL my BTC, 13+ coins.

Here is the transaction.


Transaction Identifier: d96a7dcd9775456e36938ed2cb84e9d0cac46fad14b8c95008ed77d08f9f8de6

Went to: 3LsvHPBGuEVLZZDUiUuNdNi33T7zmTBC7o

Here’s a signed message so you know I HAD controller of the wallet.
I’m not scamming, just utterly sick to my stomach for losing 13+ BTC.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
@TheShillBilly Twitter

I've lost all my coins. Please help ANYONE. If you stole them
Please return them! Please Please Please!  RT to help...

-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1QFFas4xGSy1p1Kj2ghyD6BJhVDmwWmyKb
H744TwI8rhqMHinDQdTtYiw3JGie9oC/p6XaUcPz25pzUcEoK0cakF0p1mBPZehnJk1PP8JgtEgte2OvDZXAr3g=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

It appears that I have now lost my entire life savings. I’m not begging for a handout but rather attempting to warn anyone new to the space. I’m sick to my stomach with the loss and my only hope is to gain the attention of the culprit.

If you have any space in your heart, please return the BTC. I’d accept a fraction of what was stolen. Please don’t completely bankrupt me.

Seems like a scam. Forum staff or admin should clarify and delete such thread if it's a fake airdrop. Please report such spamy post to moderator.

compiled an overview of my top tier crypto affiliate programs

After a very lucky streak in April, still waiting on 1st block for May.
Damn! no wonder... I just now noticed my wallet staking wasn't active! Duhh!, well that was annoying.
No idea why it decided to conk out, or how long it was out, ftm, but a simple reboot fixed it.
I just chalked up the dry spell to bad luck.(balanced out my good luck for April I suppose)
Gotta remember in future to always check that the diamond is blue.

To be extremely honest, merit system is comparatively new and I believe that it will take much time to inculcate the habit of giving merits to others for their good contribution. Sometimes I forget to give merit points even if I like the post because that's not something that we are used to it so I am not expecting much use of merit feature at least 3 to 6 months from now. However, even if you are not getting any merits do not stop sharing good content and focus on the contribution of your knowledge because even if you are not getting merit points today but in the coming future other members might find it useful and you will get merit points for your old posts.

Which browser do you use?

We know about the error and are currently investigating it. Please excuse the inconvenience.

We have nothing planned here at the moment.

We want to integrate the function of a depot separation in the future. Unfortunately, we cannot tell you about ETA.

Please write us a ticket via the HelpDesk so that we can check your account.

NEM has great future after latest move on getting approval for privacy based coins just opened way for NEM as well. It is best thing happened which will have wider impact and results for anonymous projects.

Thanks, there are still a few out there on the incompatible version (v2.0.0 https://chainz.cryptoid.info/note/#!network) . The actual update was this one: http://dnotescoin.com/download-the-dnotes-v2-0-1-updated-wallet/ released at the end of April.

One of the main reasons we added the News section in the wallet is a means to inform users of updates, which draws directly from our blog. We did everything we could to reach out to users as well; Emailed everyone who participated in the swap and withdrew multiple times, a dozen tweets/facebook/reddit posts, but were still unable to reach a handful of people. Now that I know for sure the fork did occur, I will write a new statement.

I would be very interested to have a discussion on making it even more clear when an update is needed, without being overly intrusive.
Would a pop up on the wallet itself be pushing it too far?

Thanks for the question wiser! I had to delete two words in the article and replace another to clear up some of the meaning.

The first part to say about your question, is that there are a wide range of ICO structures, so i'll just answer for probably the most common (which do sometimes vary depending on the application being built - say exchange or retail businesses etc).

The second part is that most ICO tokens that I've seen are not actually 'profit sharing', but rather 'income sharing' -- I'll explain.

In a profit-sharing scenario, the ICO would need to be generating significant revenue, and be running an operational surplus for ICO tokens to ever receive a 'dividend equivalent' payout. The business that ran the ICO would take their total income for the year, subtract all their expenses, then decide how much they want to reinvest back into their business for improvements, and the leftover is the 'profit'. Dividends to equity owners in traditional businesses are paid based on profit, which is determined after the company decides how much it wants to hold onto (retained earnings) for business upkeep / growth. If the company wants to grow, it just holds onto all the earnings for the year. This is a luxury it wouldn't have when it comes to ICO payments that are generally based on gross income, rather than profit (i'll get to this).

So in a hypothetical example, say my ICO business turned over 10m for the year, had 8m of expenses for the year, and I decided to reinvest 1m of the remaining 2m into the company to improve its services. That would leave 1m in profit. If my ICO token promised a 10% return from all profits, there would be 100 thousand dollars paid out to the ICO token holders, and then the equity owners would get the rest in dividends (as they are lower than ICO tokens in the capital structure).

But the way that many ICOs I've seen are set up, is the token is used as a voucher to pay the fees to use the ICO's network, where a certain percentage is paid back to token holders -- which functionally makes them a drain on total income. The funds are automatically forwarded to the token holders, so they are potentially never recorded on the ICO's income statement, but the final resting places of all funds involved in the transaction remain the same. Me giving you $20, and then you giving 10 of it to someone else is exactly the same as me giving you $20, and your software automatically giving that $10 to that other person.

So with Tim's ICO of 10m turnover with a 10% return of network fee to token holders, there would be 1 million dollars paid out to token holders, rather than just 100k in the above 'profit' model. One of the 'payment processing' coins out there has a functional draw from its network equivalent to ~25% of what would be considered its 'net income' from fees. That would be a draw of 2.5m out of the 10m turnover in Tim's ICO, which would suddenly see Tim's ICO making a loss: remember that regardless of the way you play trick accounting, a 10m turnover, less 2.5m ICO dividend, less 8m expenses = 0.5m loss, is exactly the same as a 7.5m turnover, less 8m expenses = 0.5m loss (not accounting for ICO income in turnover, nor as a dividend drain).

There are four main ways that I can see this potentially hurt an ICO business:

Firstly, the drain from income occurs regardless of whether the ICO company is making an operational surplus -- meaning it could make it stay in the red longer, and at worst accelearate losses that force it to go broke if it can't turn profitable by the time the ICO money runs out.

Secondly, The above scenario could scare investors away from putting their money into the ICO business (or save one) that had such an automatic drain on its turnover, because:

Thirdly, sustainable operational surpluses are required to reinvest surplus capital back into the business that allow it to grow (and equity investors care about growth). Investors only tolerate perpetual losses for so long. Once a business runs out of money,  and nobody wants to invest, it dies.

Fourthly, and last, the fee structure places the startup at a competitive disadvantage to other projects that don't have, say, a 25% income drain sent to token holders. A hypothetically otherwise 'identical' competitor (No ICO) could eliminate some of this margin to attract new customers, yet still remain profitable and grow.

i.e. Baseline (using everything recorded accounting, and assuming expenses are fixed):

Tim's ICO  = 12.5m turnover, less 3.75m ICo dividend (25% of network fee), less 8m expenses = 0.75m operating profit to reinvest.
Competitor = 12.5m turnover, less 8m expenses = 4.5m operating profit to reinvest and grow.

And if engaged in a price battle:

Tim's ICO = 10m turnover, less 2.5m ICO dividend (25% of network fee), less 8m expenses = 0.5m loss, disgruntled equity investors.
Competitor = 10m turnover, less 8m expenses = 2m operating profit to reinvest for growth.


As you can see, an equally competent competitor without income-based ICO will easily win a price war. While the ICO model will see greatly reduced growth in the business even as turnover rises. The ICO token in this model anyway, becomes a parasite on the economy that constrains its growth. And the only way to draw more investment in to remedy the situation is to attract more investors -- but again, why would they want to bail out a business where they get reduced growth, and where ICO token holders still get paid even when the busienss is making a loss? That investment could be the difference between many ICO businesses surviving or failing. And as each ICO business dies, so too does its token.

Note: there are lots of different ways ICO's can look, and not all ICOs are prone to all the downsides in ever case. Models are illustrative only.