I think charities should be vetted.  There are a lot of charities that really give back a small percentage of what they receive for the actual cause and use the most of the money for 'operating costs'.

I also wouldn't donate to Greenpeace even if there was a 3x ROI.  Those guys are assholes (reference Nazca Lines stunt).

Not sure that I have the patience for another ICO coin.  I'll probably pay attention to the progress though.

I wouldn't use a site like that but I also don't buy accessories.

Might buy a T-Shirt though.

There is a setting in the Android app that allows you to remove the app signature (Posted from bitcointalk.org Android App).   You should probably do that if you are going to continue posting from the app as Mods will delete posts that contain the auto generated sig.  Happened to me.

Just an FYI.

Ditto.  This entire 'trend' is mildly amusing.

-acolyte

How is this still a thing?

Rand Paul would never get on the crypto bandwagon unless the Obama Administration decided to make it illegal.

And that is not going to happen.

I just deleted a ton of people from facebook and the rest would probably not know what to with it.  It's a great app but there is going to need to be a larger impetus for regular people to accept such them.  At least in my circle.

I would make an offer but I can't even download the wallet.  I'm stuck on 32 and it won't recognize anything (The browser crashes every 2-12 hours depending on usage even).  So no where to accept the coins.

I bet this might be the first time such a complaint was openly admitted to on these forums...fuck it; I'll check back in a week.

Didn't Wikileaks already suggest that Google was beholden to the government months ago?

Is this a formality demand?

Computer died beyond return.  I'm currently on a laptop from 2007.  Temporary problem but relevant for the question and time frame.

Thanks for the reply.  I might entertain some of the offers above.

You pretty much have to be a miner to interact with this coin right now, right?

It will take a while for there to be any noticeable difference.  We need success stories rather than Gox stories...

Looking forward to seeing what comes from the presentation at the London Bitcoin Expo!

Is there a way to get a summary of what all of that means?

Generally I would agree.

However, this is a thread off context.  Meaning it is created and controlled by the author.  I intend to dilute that control by calling out fallacies.

In the end, it will be meaningless.  But I am tired of trolls controlling the narrative so I will engage.

He either screws up his narrative because he can't keep up with his own statements/examples or he ignores it. (To be clear - he's already done both)

If he likes typing essays to match mine than so be it. Mine will get longer and more succinct. Every second he thinks about my counter is a second that he doesn't have elsewhere. 

And I have plenty of time. 

It should also be noted that you did not address my third question.

The repeated question was intentional.  For emphasis.  I'm not sure I am going to hold much relevance to the plugging of "THE WALL OF SHAME" though.  I don't agree with several of the targets in that thread but that is a debate for a different time.


I do recall stipulating that anecdotal experience was unacceptable as a response.  That is what you have provided.  Experience based on different people and different projects.  I have no experience with SEED and only basic familiarity with PINK.  Suffice to say, that is probably enough experience for me to conclude with reasonable confidence that they have nothing to do with David or Bay.

I won't completely disagree with your point on the low liquidity in alts due to major ICO's though.  There has been plenty of money dropped into them and a lot of that money is tied up.  However, I will disagree that such a distinction equates unequivocally to "So, fact is, there's no money available".  That just isn't true.  I know people with plenty of money/BTC who shined Ethereum and SuperNET.  Even Blocknet.  I even know some who shined on Bay.  The fact of the matter is that while altcoin markets aren't liquidated with a ton of money (like we all had thought perhaps in March earlier this year) this is still the biggest open sourced R&D project in the world and there are eyes on it.  Does that mean that scams will come along and take advantage?  Sure.  Does it mean that every project is here to take advantage?  No.

Finally, I am not sure why you would bring up BYTECENT.  Started by IE, there is a huge lack of confidence in the guy and the lack of ICO contribution likely worked to his advantage.  The result was the establishment of 165,000 coins or so (right?) and if anyone can point a finger at a dev who would buy his own coin up and profit on a pump (which occurred almost immediately), that finger would almost likely be IE at least 60% of the time.  There is no way that I will be convinced that IE is a more stout dev/community manager than David and Bitbay.  


This is where I take issue with your reasoning.  You provide three unrelated case samples and then blanket Bay with them.  ICO's that didn't get enough money somehow prove that an ICO that did receive the funding is a scam.  ICO's that did get enough funding prove that there is no money left so Bay must be a scam.  You hedged your logic here and it doesn't work.  You're also stating that they are definitively selling coins that they bought during the ICO for pure profit.  But you provide no proof.  It's an accusation, nothing more.  It is completely reasonable to as well state that the drop in ICO price is due to natural market behavior - sellers panic when they encounter doubt of whatever form, sellers who intentionally drop the price in hopes to pick up more.  The percentages expected from a seasoned trader on the latter example is in the low percentages so it is going to happen over a period of days to maximize gain.

The point is that there are other explanations that can be proffered to explain the market behavior of Bay once trading started.  There were similar issues with Maid when their ICO ended - people were crying manipulation because of the MSC discount.  That coin dropped under ICO price for months.  Did that prevent Maid from continuing their development?  

Funny story.  Maid staff also purchased tokens during the ICO (David Irvine estimates an average of 6 BTC per staff member of which there were about 16 at the time).  Does purchasing shares in your own company make for an obvious scam or manipulation?  No.  So I expect that some were bought by the Bay team.  It is just as likely that they were betting on themselves as opposed to buying for market manipulation.  In fact, I would consider the former more likely.


I did butt in.  This is a public forum and as such I felt that I wasn't being uninvited.

Here's the thing.  I am interested in answers.  I just don't expect them immediately and I don't demand them while hurling insults and accusations everywhere.  Answers come with time and there are plenty of projects ongoing that have suffered a decrease in price despite the well intentions of the developers.  That doesn't mean that it is a scam.  That also doesn't mean that every new project is a scam.  I would like to offer a different perspective.  Perhaps all of your denouncements and warnings during BC/40's were an impetus for selloffs and those people should be cursing you rather than thanking you.  Negative rhetoric, especially prolific negative rhetoric has a very real short term impact on the psyche than a dev stating that development is ongoing.  Huge spikes are rare and if everyone is chasing them then it is easy to scare them when they don't happen.  That is especially true in the crypto world precisely because many of the investors are new and not seasoned by wall street.  Those who are seasoned know the right buttons to push.


There are very significant differences.  And that is precisely why I am not inclined to trust your perspective.  You follow?

David, don't entertain this fool.


You're missing the point.  David was commissioned to write code based on previous work (I'm a fan of Pirates, by the way, and was an extra on Fast & Furious Tokyo((flame me for that; I also extra'ed on an unreleased film starring the crazy guy from Back To The Future)).

I can half ass associate shite all day long.  I can also condescend. To wit,

Oh dear barabbas.  Oh, dear barabbas.  Does one have such a stake in another project that one needs to make an attempt to destroy the credibility of someone who does more work than you?  How was it that you were able to invest in what was considered a small project when 99.999% of the world failed to?  Does that make you special?  Was it god? Regardless, why is it that you have such a high pedestal?

Where is that indigence coming from? 

The fact is, smart contracts don't rely on DD escrow.  They are smart contracts for a reason in that they can be negotiated between parties.  Meaning there can be DD escrow or there can be .0001D escrow.  Or vice versa.

But you knew that, right?  You have experience with this sort of thing and aren't talking abstract out of your probably pristine arse, I would presume.

Let's assume for a second that you are right.  For games.

Because games are fun.

What if BitBay is a scam?

My first question is, "How do you know?"

If you knew, you wouldn't be wasting your time with holier than thou bullshit that fails to include all information.

My second question is, "How do you know?"

Where is your evidence, save from anecdotal and unassociated experience, that there is a scam going on?

My third question is, regarding this quote from you,
"So I'll keep waiting, giving you the benefit of the doubt, and holding a significant dose of skepticism",

Who the flark are you to bust balls and then say, "Maybe you're cool,"?

I got a million questions for you.  I also don't care. I think you are full of obfuscating shite.

You've already established per the above quotes that you are on the fence regarding your own accusations.  Bitch and moan all you want.  Give the man and the team the opportunity to do what they said.  Reconvene in February. Or not.

It should be noted that there are many Americans who are not ignorant to what is going on here.  It should also be noted that there is a ton of money being spent to not only distract our societies with social issues (opportunity cost of attention) but also a ton of money being spent to manipulate the voting process.  Gerrymandering currently favors the GOP (who are hell bent on privatizing the government) and disproportionally allows for Republican election victories.

It's easy to say that, "Americans have no idea what their leaders are doing because their leaders are doing some effed up shite," but it isn't accurate.  Regardless of politics, every one of us has our own life to consider.  We have jobs that we go to, we have families that we want to attend to and we have social lives that we want to maintain.  Somewhere, in the past century, our social lives became extricated from social awareness.  And within that paradigm, it was easy and still is easy to use false information to manipulate people into supporting an irrelevant cause.

Case in point.  I don't know if anyone here has noticed it but during the BP crisis, the news headlines were full of the ongoing issue.  What many people didn't see was that BP bought a crap ton of advertising space on youtube.  Now consider what that means.  When I say consider what that means, I mean try and figure out why they would do that.  It's a simple associative trick to get people to think positively about a topic because they are more interested in the content that they were intending to watch.  The ads were full of positive content like families are great and the environment is a priority.  But I guarantee that 99% of people who were exposed to those ads didn't care - they just wanted to view their content and as a result, they implicitly decided that the issue was not worthy of concern.  The Koch Brothers did the same thing on youtube these past few months with the Keystone Pipeline - highlighting families and American jobs.  Generalized BS that every normal person will nod their head and say, "yeah, that is agreeable."

It certainly isn't as simple as that.  It's much more.  Religion is a major focal point.  If God wants to destroy the environment and deny same sex marriage then he probably wants to perpetuate destructive energy practices (really, how effing difficult is it for a multi billion industry to just give in and start developing clean energy themselves; they'd be heroes instead of a stain on our future aspirations).  Religion is still a major tool for psychological manipulation whether you want to admit it or not.

I'm not saying that there aren't ignorant Americans.  There are.  But not all of us are.  But I can't do shit when the people with a ton of money pay the people who place the Congressional votes into supporting corporate ventures that oppress the common folk.  I also can't do shit when people unknown decide to stand behind and support an 'officer of the law' who very likely killed a man in cold blood because of race.  I also can't do shit about millions of dollars being spent in the financial community interchanged to the lobbying community.

All I can do is read and watch the train wreck.  I post about it.  I vote. 

For the record, I can support everything I posted above with actual data and sources.  I'm just on a drunk rant right now.

TLDR; It's not funny.  Soime of us are ignorant but it shouldn't be considered a blanket association.  We'll probably have to wait a generation for more progressive minds to replace the dinosaurs and suffer the consequences of it because there is no real social cohesion.