|
$85
I'd like to keep it for all the useful litecoin services:
abe.liteco.in
blockchain.liteco.in
address.liteco.in
electrum.liteco.in
forum.liteco.in
|
|
|
|
I actually don't think this will change much. If someone is going to snipe, they will still submit a bid right at the end. And people likely won't have time to respond before the auction is over. I think extending the auction by 5 mins after every bid seems like the right solution. But obviously, you can do it however you like.
"A modern variant of the candle auction is used in some online auction systems to prevent auction sniping. In these auctions, a computer randomly selects the time when the auction will end to discourage snipers from attempting to enter bids at the last second. Indeed, Füllbrunn and Sadrieh show theoretically and experimentally that bidders submit serious bids from the start in candle auctions." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_auction#Candle_auctionYes, a computer randomly selecting when the auction will end will discourage snipers. But the range needs to be much larger than 2 minutes. I'd recommend at least an hour. Have the auction end anytime between July 28 2012 16:00 GMT+0000 and July 28 2012 17:00 GMT+0000. |
|
|
|
Alright, here's the SHA256 hash: f378d6e6174cc89543551675e2fe23cd22b71be660ad56b9ad91168b7a0ee449 The exact message used to get the above hash will be posted when the auction ends. I've been considering adding a random number of seconds (between 1 and 120) to the end of the auction to prevent sniping. I'll post a hashed string containing the number in advance. It should prevent auction sniping, while not allowing the auction to continue indefinitely.
If most current bidders agree, I'll implement this, and allow any other bidders to withdraw from the auction. How does this sound?
Agree with this, though would prefer to see more seconds than '1' obviously.. The number of seconds doesn't matter that much. It's the psychological impact on the bidders I'm looking for. Good luck, everyone! I actually don't think this will change much. If someone is going to snipe, they will still submit a bid right at the end. And people likely won't have time to respond before the auction is over. I think extending the auction by 5 mins after every bid seems like the right solution. But obviously, you can do it however you like. |
|
|
|
|
Interest payments have gone out at a rate of 0.00503020
|
|
|
|
|
It would be great if people would mention what they would do with the domain if they get it.
|
|
|
|
In most places, i see bitcoin logo, instead of litecoin.
When you run setup.exe, it shows the bitcoin logo. That will be fixed. Where else are you seeing the bitcoin logo? |
|
|
|
The new code will have all the recent Bitcoin fixes.
The code doesn't seem to have changed the switch on times for BIP 16 and BIP 30 in main.cpp. This can cause issues depending on whether the new client or the old client has majority computing power and whether it hits this code. You might want to change the dates to a future time such that it turns on when it's likely more people are running the new code. You can convert the date formats at a site like http://www.convert-unix-time.com. Or have you turned off the relevant code somewhere else? If so, disregard :-) Thanks. I will change those times to a future date. |
|
|
|
Announcement!Now that we have a couple more Litecoin developers, I figure we should move away from hosting the source under my username. So I'm announcing a new location for the Litecoin project: https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoinWith the help from pooler and Fanquake, I rebranched from the latest bitcoin code and ported the Litecoin changes over. The new code will have all the recent Bitcoin fixes. Please help us test it out. If you are on Linux, just grab the source and build it yourself. We are currently working on creating a Windows binary. Stay tuned. This means that the wiki has been moved to the new repo also: https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/wikilitecoin.info will point to the new wiki location very soon.
|
|
|
|
As far as I know he switched to just plain old mining it. Using his pool's users' hashing power, of course.
-MarkM-
Probably didn't bother telling his miners though  Yes, he used Eligius miners to merge mine this and killed it by rejecting any transactions. Not sure if he's still doing this. He cannot perform the same attack on Litecoin, because Litecoin uses scrypt and cannot be merge mined with Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Yeah, actually if we can go back to the subject. I don't think that this business will keep. Not at 1.04+ Despite of all the attacks I've had on me, I still believe that people are not that stupid  People are actually undervaluing the insurance. If you purchase bonds for 1.05, you are actually getting an effective interest rate better than investing directly with Pirate. I'm guessing you probably don't agree with the previous statement, but if you want to see the math behind it, read up on my posts around page 25 of this thread. |
|
|
|
Sorry, but I don't think you understand what risk-free means. Whether or not they have made enough money to cover the insurance is besides the point. Is Apple's business now risk-free since they've made a boatload from ipods, iphones, and ipads? And I don't think you understand what risk-free means. I guess its a matter of language. For me this investment is already risk free - I'm not going to admit that I was wrong stating this, because I wasn't. You were actually just throwing FUD around. Sorry if most of us didn't appreciate you trying to enlighten us and save us from these PPT scammers. We are all adults here (well most of us), and we really are not as stupid as you think we are. If the price of PPT is too high for the insurance provided, we won't buy the bonds. There's no scamming going on around here. If the PPT owners need to raise the minimum price to stay profitable, then that's their prerogative. If you feel like the minimum price is too high, then you don't need to buy the bonds.
There are a lot of scams going on around these forums, but this is not one of them.
Of course I am not going to buy any more of these bonds - I wasn't waiting for your permission. And are you saying that you are going to buy more of these overpriced bond? Well, then enjoy the free insurance! Thanks |
|
|
|
So you are saying after weeks of operation, the people behind PPT could have made enough coins to now cover the insurance. How is that risk free? They are still using the profit they made to cover the insurance. Also you aren't taking opportunity cost into consideration when calculating their profit. So how many risk-free weeks need to pass and how many more PPT.DIV stocks need to be sold, before you generously give me a right to say that the investment is already "risk-free" for the initial investors? Is there such a number? Sorry, but I don't think you understand what risk-free means. Whether or not they have made enough money to cover the insurance is besides the point. Is Apple's business now risk-free since they've made a boatload from ipods, iphones, and ipads? You go from calling people liars to a hand wavy explanation about how you think it's possible that it's 100% risk free. I guess you will never admit you are wrong since there's always a way that you haven't figured out yet.
I did what was the right thing to do, and what nobody else wanted to do; explained to people what this business is about and that the initial investment has already been paid off, so decreasing the interest rates now because "we give free insurance" has no justification whatsoever. In fact, it's more of a scam - or just a lie, if you prefer calling it like this. You are criticizing me for doing what I believed was right. And what did you do in this time? Nothing. So spare mi your morals, because I don't need to be a genius like you to know that the best way to make no mistakes it just to do nothing. You were actually just throwing FUD around. Sorry if most of us didn't appreciate you trying to enlighten us and save us from these PPT scammers. We are all adults here (well most of us), and we really are not as stupid as you think we are. If the price of PPT is too high for the insurance provided, we won't buy the bonds. There's no scamming going on around here. If the PPT owners need to raise the minimum price to stay profitable, then that's their prerogative. If you feel like the minimum price is too high, then you don't need to buy the bonds. There are a lot of scams going on around these forums, but this is not one of them. |
|
|
|
Your chart shows that you're using insurers initial investment to pay out 1310 on week 4 to pay them back and on week 5 for the investment that was never deposited for PPT.A on week 1. You are right. Sorry - my bad. Thanks for picking that up. But since the insurance exposes the investor to the risk for 4 times longer period, while insuring only 25% of his output capital, I believe there must be an algorithm to eventually make it 100% risk-free for the business owner. And I will figure it out... But now I just need to honestly admit that I haven't actually figured it out yet. And apologize you for doubting in what you were saying. piotr_n, I think you are wrong here. The insurance is not an illusion. You really don't need to create a chart to understand. Just remember that you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the funds are with pirate earning interest or they are sitting there waiting for a default. They can't be doing both at the same time. Each PPT bond is held for 4 weeks. So the funds need to be with Pirate to earn 4 weeks of interest. If that is the case then there is no mysterious pool of fund to pay for the interest when there is a default. If there's a default all funds from PPT bonds will be lost and the interest will need to come from somewhere else. There's no trick. The snake cannot survive by eating its own tail. Please, have a look at this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjniD04O6MJndE9vX2MwSDdHTnZVVWdNLTRQRldyWUEIn the blue cells there is the actual data from the auctions. The content of purple cells is just my wild guess (it could as well have been played differently), but it gives an idea of how the business can eventually become 100% risk free, which happens at the price of receiving lower interest from the initial capital for the first 10 weeks while still exposing it at BS&T default. But please also note that the PPT.DIV shares were given to the PPT holders during week 5 and their market price ever since then hasn't been negligible. So you are saying after weeks of operation, the people behind PPT could have made enough coins to now cover the insurance. How is that risk free? They are still using the profit they made to cover the insurance. Also you aren't taking opportunity cost into consideration when calculating their profit. You go from calling people liars to a hand wavy explanation about how you think it's possible that it's 100% risk free. I guess you will never admit you are wrong since there's always a way that you haven't figured out yet. |
|
|
|
Your chart shows that you're using insurers initial investment to pay out 1310 on week 4 to pay them back and on week 5 for the investment that was never deposited for PPT.A on week 1. You are right. Sorry - my bad. Thanks for picking that up. But since the insurance exposes the investor to the risk for 4 times longer period, while insuring only 25% of his output capital, I believe there must be an algorithm to eventually make it 100% risk-free for the business owner. And I will figure it out... But now I just need to honestly admit that I haven't actually figured it out yet. And apologize you for doubting in what you were saying. piotr_n, I think you are wrong here. The insurance is not an illusion. You really don't need to create a chart to understand. Just remember that you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the funds are with pirate earning interest or they are sitting there waiting for a default. They can't be doing both at the same time. Each PPT bond is held for 4 weeks. So the funds need to be with Pirate to earn 4 weeks of interest. If that is the case then there is no mysterious pool of fund to pay for the interest when there is a default. If there's a default all funds from PPT bonds will be lost and the interest will need to come from somewhere else. There's no trick. The snake cannot survive by eating its own tail. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
