Doesn't anybody else see the very Big problem with this "Recovering Tainted Coins" or even labeling them 'tainted'?

Businesses will stay away in droves because there are to many 'what ifs' to the equation.

What If: Bicoinica stole its own coins reported them stolen and then gets to recover them after selling them at market? (Not accusing just a what if for example).

What If: A business or site isn't aware of the stolen coins and uses them and passes them on. (i.e. the Faucet) Technically the faucet received stolen coins and passed them on. Should they be responsible for the coins they passed on? Or should just the end receiver?

Who is even deciding they are stolen?  Have they been reported stolen to the appropriate police agency in the appropriate jurisdiction? What is the Police Report Number? So people can report reception of stolen coins? Who is the assigned case officer? So the people reporting can talk to the right person.

If no report has been filed, then this is 'self help' in order to retrieve stolen coins. Which could make the people recovering the coins thieves themselves if they haven't dotted the 'i's' and crossed the 't's'.

There will be many DB's of 'Tainted' coins. Some will be updated, some will not be, some will be forgot, so when the coins are returned to a rightful owner there will be a probability that those DB's won't be updated and the coins will be confiscated again from the rightful owner.  

Then there will be the issue of why some coins form some businesses get returned but other coins form other businesses don't get returned. It will not be 'equally' enforced which is a problem in of itself.

And plus: Most of the people pulling off these thefts will know how to get around the set up systems to avoid the problems of them being 'tainted' so some unsuspecting third party will get shafted.

So all these systems of labeling coins 'tainted' will only hurt the greater bitcoin community.

The Intent here is good, but remember the cliché: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Considering what they are about to go through, the Greek Government might even make BTC the official currency.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the banks that have been 'cut off' from the ECB wouldn't mind processing tx to mtgox for a percentage.

Wouldn't that be obvious?  He would quickly become #1. The #1 man. The goto guy.  

But lets assume Goat can make 8% on his funds, he offers 7.5% to steal the market share and become 'influential'.

There are tons of reasons.  Cereal companies compete with themselves.

But what I was doing: Was 'Testing' whether 'one' guy could swing the rates.

Well I guess it's a free market, but of 1?  

I guess 0.5% is OK, but then why not 0.1%, OR do you really want to sell some shares in GLBSE? How about 7.1%/wk?


I understand Theymos is respected and a good Admin for the Forum, but if his 'likability' translates into his wishes being turned into reality then it isn't a 'FreeMarket'.

However, it is a good thing. I just wished the market would have forced it to happen.


Testing... Testing...     Goat how about 7.5%/wk?  

Almost all of my proposals will include me getting the interest off of the 100 BTC for the year from the 'accepted' escrow. The others would introduce a shared risk between us that brings it closer to a 50/50 bet. As in, I would structure the 100 BTC to be escrowed so it couldn't earn any interest from the escrow agent. I would pay you the 10 BTC upfront, BUT an early withdrawal would require you to pay a 12 BTC penalty OR I'll pay you 10 BTC at the end and an early withdrawal will cost you 2 BTC. This structure puts a lot of work on the Escrow agent for a 'Year'. If he can't use the BTC to earn something he would want to have a fee, I would assume, the fee would be for you to pay.

This is a lot of work for an all involved. It would be easier if you built up enough trust and reputation to just do the deal without escrow.

I'm leery of Multi-Sig transactions. I understand why they were introduced but the unintended consequences will, imo, out weigh the benefits. BTC will be held ransom, it will increase the attrition rate of BTC, and it introduces a level of complexity that many won't want to deal with. It is hard enough to get people to understand bitcoins without adding a "but, if, and when" to a transaction.

A little calculations of a conservative nature:

      Escrowed:         100 BTC
%/year at 2%:         104 BTC
# Wks til B/E:          5 Weeks to get back my 10 BTC

So after 5 Weeks of me earning interest, I wouldn't really care what happens everything else is icing.

Escrowed:  100 BTC (Structured so No Interest can be earned)
       PV $: 5 USD (example)
       FV $: 6 USD (20 % increase in the value of 100 BTC being held in escrow)
  Penalty:  2 BTC (It would behoove you to agree to break the deal and cash out the 100 BTC)
       FV$: 4 USD ( Hurting you as to the contract, but time is on my side )

Really as structured, the only way that is a possible benefit for you is BTC to decrease but with in the PV$ of the 10 BTC or less. Of course, you could not want to cancel the deal on an increase and that would hurt both of us (but you more).

BUT as far as me giving you 10 BTC and crossing my fingers for a "YEAR", no thanks...

CDF's do have a place in BTC though, so the attempted use of them is interesting. The pricing of them will have to be closely calculated.

Yea, kind of sensitive information. But, 5000 Accounts doesn't mean 5000 clients.

Well it sort of does but on an individual basis and not from an regulating agency which is good.

i.e. If someone wants me to rent a truck and buy some fertilizer in exchange for BTC, I would have to decline that transaction.

Or I've had people tell me, hey I need BTC to buy <insert illegal substance here> (illegal as in my locality), I will decline the transaction.

LOL,

 It figures, considering the story, they convicted the 'fall guy' er girl, and the culprit is sitting pretty in China.

Plus Overdraft is a form of credit, people are allowed to default on their credit cards and file bankruptcy if no malice was intended with the transactions.


I fault the system for giving him the 10 Million Dollar overdraft without some due diligence being done on part of the bank.

And you have to really feel sorry for the Girl Friend. She has now been dumped in a spectacular way. I'm surprised the jury convicted her if she never had the money. Seems like she is a victim that has now been victimized twice.

Well the 'Leverage' is actually against you. Under the terms, of a locked in 100 BTC to an address that doesn't move and to an 'accepted' escrow, lets look at the last few days. BTC went up 10%, since I won't pay the 10 in this scenario until the end of contract. It would be wise for you to come to an agreement to take back the 100 BTC to take the 10% profit, pay me the 2 BTC penalty, and still profit 8%.
Another method of using the 'CD' is I have a savings put a side in cold storage. I could keep that at the same level, take out 100 BTC, invest 100 BTC, etc... BUT the key to this method is that the BTC stays in an address in the blockchain and doesn't move so it can be referenced. If it moves, you pay a penalty (2 BTC) for early withdrawal. And I pay the 10 BTC at the end not up front.
Rather than make this foolish gamble.

The escrow really has the power here. Without assurances, he would just deposit with another and collect interest. Bredio is himself a lender, he would make interest. If he agrees that the interest he earns from 'holding' the BTC will go to me, then I will do the same as with Hash King.

Or you could just trust me, give me 90 BTC, and I'll pay you back 110 BTC in a year minus any negative difference.

But what I really want to show for anyone that takes you up on this, it that the money being held in escrow 'for a year' will probably be used to make money by whomever holds it and that needs to be added into your calculations.

Not to mention, Escrows usually deal in fairly short term deals, having them pay attention for a year is asking a little from them. They should charge a fee.

Multi-sigs have not been fully worked out and into the 'official' client, there would be a risk, possibly more to the escrow.

Or another way of stating your proposal: Just give me 90 BTC ( take the 10 BTC upfront ) and at the end of a 'YEAR', I'll give you 110 BTC minus any negative difference. I'll make any interest off of the amount, plus if at the end I'll get any negative difference to boost my interest earnings to date.


You seem to be trying to trick(maybe not intentionally) people with a Contract for Difference. There is nothing wrong with a Contract for Difference and you trying to use one, just let everybody know 'all' that will probably be done with the BTC.

May I suggest you just skip the 100 BTC escrow and just ask for an agreement and collect the 10 BTC upfront. Why make a CFD harder than it needs to be. The key would be to build up enough trust and reputation so that people will believe you will follow through on a contract and if you don't you have something to loose (i.e. Trust and Reputation )

Oh, because the idea here is to collect the difference in the value of BTC under a CFD, you could just deal in the traditional fiat and avoid the intermediary security. It would save some effort and expense. e.g. ( $50 upfront, $500 to pay the negative difference at the end of a year )
This method has merit to avoid any mention of BTC in transfers and their underlying reasons for the transfer. i.e. No need to mention Bitcoin in PP transfers, dwolla, etc....


BTW: Why not ask for 2000 Escrowed for the year? That way the Escrow can open a Pirate account and get 7%/week. After he gets his initial payment to you plus a little extra he can re-secure the funds and smile for the 'YEAR'.


Something tells me you know this already though.

FRB is alive an well in Bitcoins although this time it is unregulated and free market driven.

At 2% per week from HK, I wouldn't care by then. If I get paid anything from the difference at the end of the year, it would just be icing on the cake.

My other method of locking the BTC into an address and a penalty to be paid if moved, is like a CD except I could only use the CD value to leverage and not spend (however in that case, I would pay the 10 btc at the end, not up front).

In either case, I need to have some value to the 100 BTC.

Hey, You chose him as an option: How about hashking, senbonzakura, Meni Rosenfeld ?

But Ok, never mind.

Ok, I will pay you 10 BTC upon the signed contract. The 100 BTC will be deposited with HashKing, you can use that 100 BTC to pay the difference. BUT, I shall earn any interest off of Hash Kings holding of the 100 BTC if any.

Just a sec... And the funds are considered Mine for the year. Just a sec...


Hash King isn't online right now, however, I will accept you depositing 100 BTC with Hash King that I can't access but are considered mine. I will at the end of the year pay you your 10 BTC and Hash King can return the 100 BTC to your control and you can pay any negative difference to me.

You missed some things... The 'accepted' escrow can't move the funds. The funds must stay in that address for the entire year.
Edit: and if they are moved: there is a 2 BTC penalty payed to me.

Just a sec... let me see if I can find an escrow that would be willing to hold the BTC for a year.

Ok, well as you suggested in your post Gavin will be the escrow. An arbiter could be nanotube, if problems arise. OK.

Well technically borrow, but I will not have access to spend the funds. The 'accepted' escrow will just hold them for a year. If the funds do not move for the year, I will pay you 10 BTC. If they do, you will pay me 2 BTC.

Isn't that fair?

Edit: However, the funds are considered mine. I just can't spend them.

Andrew,

If I get to add the address that the accepted escrow uses to my assets and the escrow doesn't not move the coins from that address (if he/she does a penalty will be applied.), I will accept the 100 BTC escrowed account from an accepted escrow (Gavin is acceptable).  And in one years time from the deposit of the 100 BTC, I will pay you 10 BTC.

Those coins shall not be moved from that address for the entirety of the year though. If at anytime those coins move from that address, a penalty shall be paid to me in the sum of 2 BTC.


Let's have some people scratching their heads.

Andrew,

That's not really fair to yourself here. Almost anybody would take that deal here.

Funny, I just thought, it isn't fair when people will only pay 10% per year. What has BTC done? )

Oh now you did it. They'll be coming out in droves for that one.

Sure, Gavin loans you the 1000 BTC, I'll escrow it, and deliver to you if needed.

I charge 1% as an escrow fee.