Assuming pirate send me the coin. If pirate does not send the coin I will not buy them back. Please read the contract if you disagree. This bond was not at all insured.
Of course, I thought that was pretty clear. All I'm saying is, do not close trading or pronounce it "dead" until it is 100% sure that pirate has sailed away. As of now, he has said that he'll try and pay back by Friday. |
|
|
|
Assuming he does pay it will stay at 1.068 BTC I'm not even sure what rate he is paying as it is after the 20th.
The bond is dead and IMO it really should be locked down on GLBSE but that is up to Nefario.
On IRC he had said that he would pay the old rates until the time the exact hour the account was closed and coins returned. Also, please keep the bond alive for now: it allows people to trade the debt around and serves as a good indicator for the market value of pirate debt. |
|
|
|
Do not worry, if pirate sends me coins you will get them bought back at 1.068 like I said above assuming he pays in full with interest.
Well, technically it should be 1.068 + this week's partial interest as well. If you're paid back as promised, of course. |
|
|
|
Currently supported shortcuts:
-from: your wallet
--to: MtGox deposit address
--to: MtGox voucher code
I tested both these methods - had my MtGox account credited, and a MtGox code in under 10 minutes. Super slick! I'm sure this will be extremely useful and popular. Can you comment on your risk involved in accepting 1-confirm transactions? |
|
|
|
Here's another way to look at this: 320,000 BTC is a little more than 1.5% of all bitcoins that will ever exist. And for now, and possibly for a little while longer, SatoshiDice is a lot more than 1.5% of all that's worth owning in bitcoins. There are some good companies out there. Maybe ten, maybe twenty, certainly not one hundred. This is one of them. Surely if one is bullish on BTC and believes that there will eventually be more good companies, 1.5% of all BTC seems unlikely in the long term, let alone growing beyond that. It might make sense if valued in USD though ($3.2 mil) - that number could have growth potential. |
|
|
|
|
Here's another way to look at this: 320,000 BTC is a little more than 1.5% of all bitcoins that will ever exist.
|
|
|
|
Hey guys I've been away from bitcoin for approx 1 year (was a GPU miner before that). Is there a thread explaining all this pirate stuff? I have no idea what's going on.
Wow, good luck. These days I find it hard to catch up after even a day of being away. |
|
|
|
I agree, perhaps he can approach one of the other lenders and use his pass through system, albeit at lower rates, to funnel our funds into other investments.
I like that idea. payb.tc, you already have the infrastructure and the trust required to set up a pass-through website for many different deposit-takers. Something similar to what was suggested on this thread. I'm sure existing bitcoinmax account holders would love to use something like that, and the effort you've spent on this so far won't go to waste. |
|
|
|
When he does pay everyone back (with interest) will we get a heartfelt appology from Micon and everyone else on team Ponzi?
I will make a youtube video with a straw hat on, a sign that says "I, Bryan Micon, was 100% wrong about the matter of Pirateat40 & Bitcoin Savings & Trust" I will then also compose 16 bars into a rap about FUD, and how BurtW was right. The rap will also touch on inducting Pirateat40 to the BTC hall of fame and will portray Satoshi as a closet cross-dresser from Idaho that makes it big time at Goldman Sachs and recruits some of his friends to start Bitcoin in 2008 Witnessed. |
|
|
|
'make -f makefile.unix' returned many an errors: ..........
net.h:284: error: Б─≤cs_vSendБ─≥ was not declared in this scope
net.h: In member function Б─≤void CNode::AbortMessage()Б─≥:
net.h:303: error: Б─≤cs_vSendБ─≥ was not declared in this scope
net.h: In member function Б─≤void CNode::EndMessage()Б─≥:
................
genjix just merged my 0.6.3 patch into the new github repo for the electrum server: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum-server - please try that one. Also let's move this discussion about the server into the thread meant for that. |
|
|
|
Hello! How I can install electrum server in my CentOS 6.0 x32? Please step by step instructions.
I think one of the dependencies needs a 64bit server (I thought it was Abe but I'm not sure). The instruction can be found here.You can run the server on a 32-bit machine by following these additional instructions. Note that bitcoind must start downloading blocks from scratch after applying the patch in question. |
|
|
|
If two people enter a bid/ask at the same price but at different times, the newer entry is listed above the older entry, implying that it will be executed first.
If the trades are executed in the order shown in the table, then I assume that is a bug because the older entry should be executed first. If the execution order is correct, despite the order shown in the table, then that means the table is showing the entries in the wrong order. I have not been able to determine whether the entries are executed in the wrong order or not.
I've noticed this before, and have also seen that the execution order is correct, just the display is wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the excellent work!
Will the server still be maintained on gitorious, or will this also be moved to github?
|
|
|
|
All attempts will be made to resolve this issue as soon as possible but is dependent on the issuer bitdaytrade
I'm confused, what was the issue with this asset? |
|
|
|
That will pretty much be my policy going forward. We are still around 300 BTC off the new 7% limits. Meaning, if my account does not get another 300 BTC (from FOO.PPPPT, BIB.PIRATE, or my private deposit program) this week (by August 13), interest rates will drop 1 %. I would want to have at least a 1000 BTC buffer over the limit before I open buy backs again on FOO. If wholesale redemption of bonds is important to you, then BIB.PIRATE is probably more suitable for you. Bond redemption is written into its contract.
Does this mean that a bulk bond redemption on BIB.PIRATE could suddenly cause interest rate reductions on FOO.PPPPT and your private deposit program as well? |
|
|
|
Actually that bolded part was the very reason why I asked, since I wasn't sure how you as a new owner interpret it. There's always possibility for confusion if in one place is written "no on-demand buyback" yet elsewhere is separately described the weekly buyback procedure (ie. is the latter considered as "on-demand"). But got the info I needed, will look into BIB.PIRATE more closely too. Hopefully you'll find those missing 300 Satoshis somewhere.  The original contract didn't require me (now brendio) to provide for buybacks. I merely provided the option as a courtesy since we were comfortably in the highest interest tier back then. It's a good clause for times like this when brendio needs more funds to get the max interest rate possible. BTW, I believe he needs more like 30,000,000,000 Satoshis at the moment! |
|
|
|
We regret to inform our many loyal and friendly customers in the US that due to regulatory obstacles that keep cropping up in the US which take far more of our time than the profits justify, we have made the sad decision to pull out of the US market entirely.
That saddens me. Thanks for the great service so far, we'll miss you! |
|
|
|
|
Thanks to pirate, Nefario and brendio for the smooth transition, and to investors for your trust. I will link to brendio's new thread in the OP and lock this thread soon. I hope to be back with other FOO.* assets sooner or later. Until then, cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
