FUCK CSW and his shill army

No - I am suggesting they might be doing it - who knows right? It is my fear with any hw wallet - or that they use a preset number of pk’s etc - i would rather trust a collectible maker than a hw maker.

I wonder if they store em like trezor did - without telling anyone. Ledger has been splitting keys to shards and now want to charge a subscription to “recover” your keys.  This is my fear of all hw wallets - that they are secretly storing/saving keys and that is why I dont truly trust any of them. Look at what just happened with Atomic wallet - supposed ti be non-custodial yet was actually custodial so keys were leaked.

its ok - I made the mistake first - all good!

I hear ya but I still would prefer a fully buyer made coin or a fully DIY to something like this. This is my least favorite. I think that comes from looking it at from a makers point of view. They cannot fully complete any item until each order comes in and the customer provides the information. That increases the work time considerably if you are doing 1 or 2 at a time then waiting for another order and then doing a few more.

Or maybe the maker makes the people ordering wait - like Ballet did with the PRO - they did them in batches and it was a few months between batches. They also had to wait for the customer to provide that which would encrypt the private key.

Either way, #76 please

the same logic could be applied to the trezor - will they keep it safe? and in working order? will they keep their passphrase safe?

Instead of trusting the funds to 1 location - the collectible - they have to trust 2 locations the collectible and the passphrase.

call it what you want but this is still just DIY yes it has the maker applying it to the collectible but the maker had no part in making the key or address the buyer did so still DIY.

I would rather personally have the maker do the whole thing (address/key generation) or none of it all - Not a half way job.  I would prefer to never use any hardware wallet at all - so far all have been proven to be compromised or closed source so you cannot verify they are not compromised - that goes for both ledger and trezor.

I still find this process to be considerably more complicated and in my opinion guarantees zero resale of funded item, ensures it can only be sold as redeemed.

rolled is great!

Curious - what collectors want it this specific way? or do you mean having the maker affix it and "load" it?  Curious if its the former, if you meant the latter than yes many do. Though most "loaded" items these days are actually just buyer funded as the maker has the buyer directly fund the coin so the maker actually never had any contact with the "load" amount.

edit: for example, let's use Lealana (love the coins) smoothie does "funded" and "buyer funded" coins - in reality, there is no difference between the two - except for the hologram. Both coins are directly funded by the buyer - neither funded by the maker. Yet the ones without the "buyer funded" holo fetch a higher premium.

Remember to be loaded by the maker also can be a sticky situation - as that requires a money transmitter license.

as for the airgapping a system - I would hope nearly anyone in Bitcoin could do that. Simply run/operate a system that does not and cannot go online.

I think you are making that part seem harder than it actually is.

and I didnt mean you with the hostility part, just soon I expect our favorite "OG" to step in and explain how it all works lol - I think you and I are beyond being hostile towards each other

and yes this way keeps you from getting rugged - as does DIY - because this really is a DIY scenario - just using a hw wallet to complete it vs an airgapped system.

Essentially the trezor is the airgapped system - could buy a laptop for $99, remove the wifi/bluetooth functionality, install Bitcoin core or Electrum or any number of wallets on it and do the same thing.  

By your logic, this is a process for someone who cannot make their own keys - yet will somehow manage to do all of these steps and successfully manage to keep the passphrase so they can later use it in conjunction with the collectible to redeem funds. How is this simplier than just creating a private key and applying it to a DIY item.

My point is this - this process is not new or creative even - it is simply taking what someone could already do and having them provide part of it to a maker so it can be added to a collectible. To me, the object is not loaded in any fashion. It simply has the address to a private key that could be easily redeemed without the collectible.

For that sake, why not just use the trezor to create a private key and only provide the public address to the maker? The effect would be the same.  The person not the maker is responsible for maintaining the security of the key.

Maybe I am missing something but I dont see how this is any more secure than just having your btc address added to the collectible and calling it good at that point.

I dont want any hostility so I will leave it at that. If something is produced, I would still probably buy one as a collector. After all, I buy tons of stuff that I would never trust with 1 sat.

oh for sure, as a collector I would still have the urge to get one. but that still doesnt make it make sense. This is an overly complicated method of someone basically doing a DIY.

lets keep it to 4 decimals as listed in OP

so to clarify the above bids are invalid

For collectibles this still makes zero semse - for personal storage on an item you mever plan to sell maybe but most collectors are simply flippers in which case this makes the items useless to those folks

I dont see how a redeemed item makes it more valuable as you stated - to me redeemed makes it less valuable - thst is why I buy mostly redeemed items - cheaper amd I am not a flipper like most.

got you added. as a note, they may do the golds at a later date. there just was not enough interest at this time.

received an update - the golds have not gotten anywhere close to MOQ - so I will be removing those as they will not be made.


That said, we have jointly reached the MOQ for the Stainless so I will add a payment address to OP and please send payment by June 7th


please send pymt and dm me your txn id or post it here.

well you know me, I will def get one. I just dont see it being successful for collectibles. Unless there is someway to change the passphrase - like the OfflineCash notes were supposed to be capable of doing.

oh they had a disclaimer but you know people dont like to read lol. I personally loved it as it was then super easy to use as a hot wallet - no one could ever see the pass phrase and encrypted key at the same time.

ok but then how could the collectible ever be sold? If I did one and I knew the Passphrase and the pk and seed are on the collectible in plain sight - does that not render the piece useless for selling?

Maybe that was addressed above but I dont think I saw that.

and would that slow down production? waiting for 200 customers to provide the information?

its like doing every collectible the same way the Ballet Pro series was done.

.025 BTC

This process looks quite a bit more difficult than a diy pk with BIP39 seed and passphrase

But maybe that is because I dont know trezor very well - I personally have 2 of them but wont use em - part of me feels that all hardware wallets leak out your information/keys/seed phrase/pass phrases etc thats just me though.

I guess I dont trust hardware - why not just create your own seed phrase and pass phrase without any hardware to rely upon? That could work as well in this scenario right?