|
The currently highest bid is 5.0 BTC via PM.
This meets the owners minimum price, so the coin will be sold here in this thread.
Insured shipping&handling is included.
The deadline for bidding is Monday 11:59pm UTC.
Current winning bid: 5.0 BTC.
Ente
|
|
|
|
|
Bump.
I'd prefer to sell it here, in the community, than on ebay or elsewhere..
Ente
|
|
|
|
Lets have a bEEr and just go with the flow, what else?  I'm all in for that! Ente |
|
|
|
|
I have to agree, and will now say the opposite of what I said before:
Forget that "private key" stuff, and stick to your paper wallet, as you were already doing. This is more than 99% sure.
With my previous suggestion, you add more uncertainity than you are removing.
To all of you: Be very careful with "individual private keys" and brainwallets. This probably is among the top 5 reasons people lose all their bitcoins.
Ente
|
|
|
|
What lenders must realize, is that swap rates are 100% controllable by them. If coordinated just a bit, the rates can be held at no less than a agreed upon minimum. The reasoning, especially for a big hand is that "I'd better get less than usual, than nothing at all", which obviously backfires. Moreover, when one posts a lot lower rates than wanted, he/she typically sets shortest duration possible (2 days) in hopes for rates to improve, so that new offer can be made 2 days later. This, backfires even more, because without major market movements and all existing swaps expiring every 2 days, the rate decrease is amplified even faster.
So, if Bitfinex team does not feel that "capping" the lower end of lending (and perhaps cancelling the FRR for better rates discovery) is a viable option for the system, the only solution I could think of and AM suggesting, is for those concerned to get together and communicate the strategies to each other in some sort of a "club". If anyone knows about the existence of such group, please let me know. If not, feel free to PM me and we can think of something together.
Another, very easy to implement right now suggestion, in attempt to recover the rates, especially to those who already stated (just above) that you do not wish to lend at the current rates, let's see if we can indeed communicate a bit. As the first step, I suggest you to set your offer to 0.09% (even) not less. I personally agree with your reasoning, I am NOT lending at 0.05 and I did set my offer to 0.09% even, please go see and join. I also have other swaps expiring in about a day and set my autolending to 0.09% as well.
That's funny! :-) How about "no, the liquidity takers controll 100% of the rates!1!!" I don't have to state that the rates and FRR are set where those two groups meet, do I? I'll gladly pay higher rates than now, when we leave the bear market. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to go through five months of bear valley with any "reasonable" rates? In no way would I take anything even close to 0.9%. Wake me up when we crossed the ATH, then we talk. In other news, I lend out a smaller position since January too. Ente Sorry, can we make at least a little sense here? I have no idea where are you coming from with your reasoning. Once again, "liquidity takers" can ONLY take what lenders are offering, absolutely not the other way around. Market conditions do obviously have an effect on rates, but purely technically, it is only the lenders who determine the rates, 100%. For instance, if hypothetically lenders do somehow manage to agree on the lowest rates they wish to offer all together, then THIS will be the rate, which "takers" WILL have to use (or pass of course). "...I don't have to state that the rates and FRR are set where those two groups meet, do I?...." <-- I do not see how is this even relevant. The "two groups meet" all over the place, FRR is just an average of that process over time. I personally "met" several traders at 0.1085 a few days ago, we are still doing business right now and this value is NOT where the FRR has been for a while now. I do have a perfect, first hand and quite extensive idea about how expensive the loans can be. No one is forcing you to play the "sideways" market, I don't and that is why I am currently lending. No one will be "waking you up", you'll need to set you own alarm that would float your own boat. P.S. Did you mean to say 0.09% or you did say 0.9%? If 0.9% I agree, a lot of traders, would most likely prompt for lending. Well, I guess we are talking the same here. Yes, lenders set the rates, and takers accept or refuse. And then lenders either lower, or don't. For every time you probably think "hey, let's form a lenders union", I slam my head on the desktop shouting "why did he put up a borrowing offer at 50% higher than the highest one? Why not just 0.001% higher?!?". Don't worry, I don't need a wake up call. I'm still taking liquidity, and using this sideways action to lower my swap average. Instead of closing altogether. Which is, I guess, in the best interest for all three of us. Oh, yes, I did write 0.9%, where you wrote 0.09%. I liked the old "yearly rate display" better :-) Let's have a vote altogether: Who wants bear, who wants sideways, who wants bubble? ;-) Ah, screw that, we'll get there soon enough anyways. Ente |
|
|
|
Maybe this is off-topic but I can't seem to find any answer to my doubts.
I'm using Armory 0.90 Beta with Bitcoin-qt 0.8.6
1- I want to update to Bitcoin core 0.9.1 but I don't know how to do it, and I'm bloody terrified of losing my coins.
2 -I have a paper wallet, does this means, that in case Armory breaks down, dissapears, whatever bad may happen to Armory, will I be able to recover my coins? 2a- If not, how can I backup my coins?
As I said, I'm sorry if this is an off-topic.
Your Armory wallet is completely independent from bitcoin-core. Even if you break bitcoin-core, your coins will still be there, Armory will just be offline. As long as you have a paper-backup, you normally can even break Armory without losing coins. So, normally you should be able to install the newer bitcoin-core version right over the old. Close both bitcoin-core and Armory before doing that, though ;-) What's that "Armory" that could disappear? If Alan and the other devs (aka Armory corp) disappear, you still can download and use the Armory client. In case the Armory software disappears from the net, isn't developed any further or is outlawed, you still have your local copy. If all fails, and you wake up after a 10 year coma, with *everything* gone, you will surely find someone who recreates your Bitcoin private keys from the seed on your paperbackup. In any case, you would be able to access your funds, and transfer them to whatever place, service, person, client you like. Since you are not in a coma, you can do yourself and your family a favor, and print out the private key of your long-term savings as well. You then have to be *very* careful to always reuse it, when transferring some coins from there (normally, the change goes to another address). You do ask the right questions! Good! :-) Ente |
|
|
|
Maybe you borrowed some BTC while clicking around?
Nope pretty much 100% sure thats not the case all I did yesterday was lend out the BTC. Strange, then.. Post a log? Ente |
|
|
|
What lenders must realize, is that swap rates are 100% controllable by them. If coordinated just a bit, the rates can be held at no less than a agreed upon minimum. The reasoning, especially for a big hand is that "I'd better get less than usual, than nothing at all", which obviously backfires. Moreover, when one posts a lot lower rates than wanted, he/she typically sets shortest duration possible (2 days) in hopes for rates to improve, so that new offer can be made 2 days later. This, backfires even more, because without major market movements and all existing swaps expiring every 2 days, the rate decrease is amplified even faster.
So, if Bitfinex team does not feel that "capping" the lower end of lending (and perhaps cancelling the FRR for better rates discovery) is a viable option for the system, the only solution I could think of and AM suggesting, is for those concerned to get together and communicate the strategies to each other in some sort of a "club". If anyone knows about the existence of such group, please let me know. If not, feel free to PM me and we can think of something together.
Another, very easy to implement right now suggestion, in attempt to recover the rates, especially to those who already stated (just above) that you do not wish to lend at the current rates, let's see if we can indeed communicate a bit. As the first step, I suggest you to set your offer to 0.09% (even) not less. I personally agree with your reasoning, I am NOT lending at 0.05 and I did set my offer to 0.09% even, please go see and join. I also have other swaps expiring in about a day and set my autolending to 0.09% as well.
That's funny! :-) How about "no, the liquidity takers controll 100% of the rates!1!!" I don't have to state that the rates and FRR are set where those two groups meet, do I? I'll gladly pay higher rates than now, when we leave the bear market. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to go through five months of bear valley with any "reasonable" rates? In no way would I take anything even close to 0.9%. Wake me up when we crossed the ATH, then we talk. In other news, I lend out a smaller position since January too. Ente |
|
|
|
Edit 2:
Current bid: 3.5 BTC.
Deadline: 23:59 2014-05-20 CETI have a special 1 BTC 2011 S1 Casascius coin for sale. Of all my coins, it is the one in the best condition. I bought it in 2011, only ten days after it was minted: http://casascius.uberbills.com/?address=15YZZSp4JE1wZ8w52NFf4TSe635cP74HeiIt was a birthday present for my brother-in-law, a mathematician and numismatic. Now he wants to exchange it for 'real bitcoins' (which bears some irony..). The coin was in its protective case all the time, today was the only time since 2011 the case was opened for the photos.  The coin is in mint state. You can see mirror-like reflections here.  A good view of the surface. It was never cleaned, wiped, dusted or anything.  It is completely scratch free.  Hologram and printing in perfect condition. I must admit there's a spelling error, though.  I planned to have it ANACS graded, as it would score one of the top grades. They never replied to my inquiry, and I won't risk several coins without confirmation of full-value insured shipping internationally. I sell it for my brother-in-law, all is handled and decided by me bare the decision if the offered price is acceptable. Depending on who the buyer is, I will ship first or insist on payment first or an escrow. I can provide the exact date and name of who received the shipping from Mike, I got this coin the same day it arrived here. This might turn out as an incredible investment. The until-now highest graded coin, a first-day with MS-67 grade, sold for 50 bitcoins. Buy this one here, send it to ANACS, and it's market value might go up anywhere from two to ten times. Starting bid is 4.6 lowered to 3.9 bitcoins. edit 1: The winning bid turned out to probably be a scamming attempt: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=600223.0This coin is again up for sale. Ente
|
|
|
|
there gotta be a vmless solution here
We're going OT here, but obviously security is the main reason we are here to begin with :-) Some time ago I found "Qubes OS": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubes_OSIt's a Linux distribution where you have different security domains. In the inner works, that's several independent virtual machines, but without all the hassle for us users.   I like their concept! Ente |
|
|
|
XMPP with PGP Encryption over TOR or I2P (other anon net access like VPN, ...)
(OTR encryption is also very common for XMPP)
there are some semi-dead encrypt. p2p messenger projects like:
- TorChat
- Crypto.cat
- RetroShare
which had/have some community/users in the past
Tor Project is developing a new Instant Messenger to be bundled with their Browser/TOR Client downloads (will be an hardened fork of Instantbird with OTR encryption, that only uses TOR obvious)
I guess this will be the "market leader" / anon messenger with the most users medium term.
Thanks for the extensive list. Honestly, all of this sounds awful. i2p/TOR won't gain enough momentum for a messenger any time soon. OTR is no good solution for a messenger neither. Well, cool, I'll focus my mental energy on bitmessage then! :-) edit: Maybe it all doesn't matter, as 90% of all IM happens on mobiles anyway? So the top priorities would be to support Android and iOS (and desktop OS), and to have low hardware/storage/traffic needs. Which would mean BitMessage would be a total niche product.. Ente |
|
|
|
- where is my (linux) userstuff? I'd expect something like ~/.bitmessage, but can't find anything. The program folder is 6mb, which can't contain the "blockchain". It's in ~/.config, where it's supposed to be. - I believe it would help adoption *a lot* to have plugins for the common chatclients. Like kopete, for example. No matter if it's the whole bitmessage implementation, with huge size, as long as it visually fully integrates into the common clients. What do you people think?
Bitmessage provides a daemon mode, so it would just take someone with the time and motivation to write the plugins. Bitmessage isn't exactly instant though, I'm not sure how well it would work with clients focused around a primarily XMPP based ecosystem. Whoops, thank you for pointing out. No idea how I could miss this. Most programs have their config in ~/.program, was my impression.. It doesn't help that bitcoin-core now has a config in ~/.bitcoin and ~/.config/Bitcoin. At least doesn't help my overview! :-) Daemon mode sounds good! Sure, it wouldn't be exactly the way we are used to from instant messengers. But it would make it so much more convenient for BitMessage users, and it would make it less of a hassle for new users to start with BitMessage too. I want to start a bounty: "Program a Kopete plugin which integrates BitMessage into its GUI".Where should I do this, for maximum exposure? Any other messengers with high user counts and easy plugin-usability? Is there any other encrypted p2p messenger, fully anonymous (without knowing which IP sent a message)? Ente |
|
|
|
Wegen zahlreicher Nachfragen:
Die BaFin hat die Angelegenheit ruhen gelassen, es ist nichts neues mehr gekommen.
Interessant. Kam ein Schreiben von der BaFin, in dem steht "Wir lassen die Geschichte ruhen", oder haben die sich seitdem nur nicht mehr bei dir gemeldet? Ente |
|
|
|
Where to find my own Bitfinex referral code ?
..I'll give you mine if you can't find yours  Yes, e-mail support, and you'll quickly get one. Ente |
|
|
|
A web-based Bitmessage client should never exist. Just like that article talks about, there is no way to securely deliver the code. If HTTPS is secure and trustworthy then Bitmessage need-not exist. I argue that it isn't. ..I had to quote this, for all that happened lately with heartbleed.. :-) Finally I read through this whole thread. - where is my (linux) userstuff? I'd expect something like ~/.bitmessage, but can't find anything. The program folder is 6mb, which can't contain the "blockchain". - I believe it would help adoption *a lot* to have plugins for the common chatclients. Like kopete, for example. No matter if it's the whole bitmessage implementation, with huge size, as long as it visually fully integrates into the common clients. What do you people think? Also, I am BM-2cWuHRsRAwfbCdzKKEKRf1nc2BwzPgRLN2 Ente |
|
|
|
Any news on allowing liquidity providers ("lenders") to extend deadlines of their outstanding loans?
This! So much this! I suggested this as well, here and via mail, it was to be considered.. This would help all: the providers get more continuous rates, the lenders have more security, the platform gets more fees from more liquidity! It shouldn't even be that much work under-the-hood to implement this? Similar idea, with all the benefits: When a margin trader closes (part of) a position, let him keep the -now free- liquidity, and put it back into his "unused funds". To use it again, or to release it manually. Ente |
|
|
|
couldn't you just use a go between (middleman) pc? so for example you create transaction on online pc, unplug that usb stick (usb #1), plug it into pc/device #2 (middleman pc), cut and paste the transaction onto a second usb key(usb#2 that never is used except between offline pc and middleman pc), unplug usb #2, plug into offline pc, sign transaction, plug back into middleman pc, cut and paste signed transaction to Middleman pc/device, unplug usb #2, plug in usb #1 (this usb only ever touches online pc and middleman pc), cut and paste signed transaction onto usb, plug into online pc and transmit.
hope that wasn't too confusing. i'm no security expert and have no idea if this is even feasible or would add any extra layer of security. it does add another third device and makes the whole process longer but if its only something thats done infrequently (to access a cold storage wallet), and it would work, might be an option.
That's absolutely possible! It will add another layer of security. However, when assuming that an attacker can infect the offline computer via USB, we have to assume he can do the same with the middleman-computer. So this is no 100% bulletproof setup. But you can make it pretty secure: For example, use some exotic, hardened OS for it. Some BSD or other Unix derivate may be a good choice. Or a non-default USB implementation. At least a different OS or USB implementation than on the offline computer. We should have many choices, as all the middleman has to be able to do is check (and copy) stuff on USB sticks. When doing all this, to have a very secure middleman, why not simply applying all this to the offline computer and skip the middleman? The only reasonable way to have high and verificable security revolves, in my opinion, around the files you transfer via USB. The "unsigned" and "signed" transaction, going from online to offline, and from offline to online. If we could read the files directly, as human-readable text, we may have a chance to notice attacks early enough (via middleman?). Having small files with a hard size limit would help too. I believe this isn't possible, as the unsigned transaction must contain all relevant data of all input transactions, and this can, in some cases, be a *lot* of data. In the 100kb size league easily, which is impossible to read through as a user, and no problem for an attacker to hide a one kb malware in. Guys, I need some theoretical IT specialist to help out on this! This, surely, is an old and well-known question, hopefully with some answers out there as well? Ente |
|
|
|
Sorry if you already sent one and I missed it, kinda slammed lately.
You guys are doing a great job, with hammering new features all the time, and still having among the best customer support out there. For freeware users, mind you! Hats off to you, Goatpig, Alan, and all of you Armory team! Ente |
|
|
|
The important truths
I know who did it. You may read this and think - this guy is a liar. But I swear to whatever God you believe in - I know who did it. Did..What? After all that time, I forgot who we are chasing after.. Who stole the funds with the linode hack? Who wrecked Bitcoinica? Who? Ente |
|
|
|
Specialized hardware is great, but it is hard to do correctly and usually doesn't gain critical mass to be profitable. IMO, I would rather see Armory try to monetize using low/no trust online services. I will briefly describe 2 that I would find valuable, but I trust the Armory team to do what makes the most sense.
1. Rule base 2FA online oracle.
Basically you would setup an M of N wallet with an Armory web service being one of the M. You could then go to a website provided by Armory and setup various rules (BTC per transaction, BTC per day, approved address, etc.). Using your desktop client you would make/sign a transaction. This would automatically get submitted to the web service. The service would check the transaction against the rules you have setup. If it matches any of the rules, it would be signed and transmitted to the bitcoin network. If not, the web service would make a request for a second form of authentication (SMS, email, HTOP, etc.)
2. Hosted watching only wallets.
Basically Armory would setup a website that looks exactly like the desktop client except it could only work with watching only wallets. You would create a wallet on your offline computer, export the watching only wallet, then upload it to this website. The website would be responsible for maintaining the blockchain and connections to the bitcoin network. When you want to perform a transaction, the website would give you a file to download. You would take this to your offline computer, sign it, then bring it back to the online computer and upload it. This will be useful to people that want to use bitcoin on computers with limited resources because they do not need to maintain their own set of data (currently ~40GB).
Both of these ideas could be developed independently, but in the end I would like to see them combined to create the ultimate low/no trust web wallet. It could probably even silence the people that say you can't trust any web wallet because it could just serve you different javascript. Nothing in either of the services that I described requires javascript to operate.
I like those ideas very much! Especially the "Rule based 2FA" is great! This solves problems which weren't solvable until now! Thumbs up, I like your thinking! Ente |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
