|
I my claim is validated as acurate and I haven't received a dime.
I'll be posting here as soon as I get my 50%,
And so I ask, please, everyone to do the same.
Until then, AFAIC, there is NO update to Bitcoinica Payout..
Last email with them was, "I need these BTC badly !!!" Reply : "They are already flagged for special attention."
And that was 13 days ago
|
|
|
|
The claims process (both policies and procedures) are very reasonable.
Dude, if you think that communicating through an obscure thread on a forum about peoples lost monies is reasonable then you should have your brain checked for severe damage. Seriously. Worst communication practices ever. There is nothing reasonable about this process whatsoever. There is no confirmation of deposition of claim, for one. You say claim period is closed, but i don't even know you received or accepted my claim because you didnt care to confirm it. Careless practices. Now stop making it look nicer than it realy is and don't patronize people. And please take a course in communication asap, you clearly need it. If you didn't get a confirmation email then you either did not open a claim successfully or your email provider classified it as spam. Almost everybody has received additional emails requesting payment instructions as well. |
|
|
|
You have no claim.
The online claims process is now closed to new claims.
If you wish to pursue a claim you will need to send a notarized copy of any and all information you have by mail to the registered address as listed by business.govt.nz
I do have a claim, and its a public one. Part of the funds you are holding are for a pending donation list I have including 1000 BTC for the forum. My claim now is aprox. 16500 BTC interest included. If you have no intention of honoring my claim, please let me know. I have a PLAN B for your type of people. Maria. The claims process (both policies and procedures) are very reasonable. Your refusal to go through the standard claims process constitutes clear and obvious bad faith. As I said The online claims process is now closed to new claims.
If you wish to pursue a claim you will need to send a notarized copy of any and all information you have by mail to the registered address as listed by business.govt.nz
Hello genjix,
would you mind explaining some details of how you handle your payout? It seems this could settle the worries of a lot of people here.
(1) assumed someone is considered 100% correct, and this claim is for a position of M bitcoins and N USD.
Is it correct then that this claimant recieves an payout of M bitcoins and N USD? Obviously, as you stated, the first round of payouts will be 50% on each part, but in any case, no conversion whatsoever happens?
It's up to the claimant. They can specify their payment preferences with the main ones at the moment being BTC and MtGox codes. But we're also able to provide other payment options within reason (like bank deposits). (2) you stated in the past that you will close out open positions at a fixed buy/sell rate, which is close to the BTC/USD price at the time the site was taken offline.
Is this statement still valid?
(3) how do you intend to handle the case that a (accurate) claim includes a position, but the opening base price of that position can't be established preciesly?
Thanks for any clarifications
-- Ichthyo
2- not sure. I'll have to check and repost here. I think they are being closed at 5 (not sure though). 3- it's subjective depending on the claim. My preference would be to assume no position, but it depends on the case itself. genjix, how are the 50% disbursements going? It's been a while since anyone's posted about getting a payment. Just wondering if there's a hold up or if you're still making regular payments. Do you email people to notify them that you've sent a payment? Do people get emails notifying them that they're accurate and just in a queue for payments? ~35% of claimants are marked accurate ~86% of total funds are marked accurate ~25% of total funds have been repaid No people aren't getting emails when their account status changes. I want to get whether a claim is marked accurate or not added to the claim ticket. When I finally got an email about my claims status I was told that my "account is in the queue and waiting to be reviewed". I'm assuming that means that my account just hasn't been gotten to at all yet. Is that right? Or does it mean that there's something wrong with my information and it needs to be reviewed in more depth?
Yep, you're right. If your account needs to be reviewed more in depth then you would get a message along the lines of either "your account will take a longer to review" or that "your account is placed at the end of the queue because...".
...
(2) you stated in the past that you will close out open positions at a fixed buy/sell rate, which is close to the BTC/USD price at the time the site was taken offline.
Is this statement still valid?
(3) how do you intend to handle the case that a (accurate) claim includes a position, but the opening base price of that position can't be established preciesly?
Thanks for any clarifications
-- Ichthyo
2- not sure. I'll have to check and repost here. I think they are being closed at 5 (not sure though). ... ...Do you email people to notify them that you've sent a payment? Do people get emails notifying them that they're accurate and just in a queue for payments? ... People have been asking for this from day 1 and this is the answer you have ? "5$, not sure" You've not answered, I suggest you send notice before and after sending payment... to avoid sending to wrong addresses. I'd swear I had answered this. Anyways shorts close @ 4.9 longs @ 5.1 |
|
|
|
Présent. Je neglige bcp le sub FR, desole je vais faire attention  Je vais en parlé a 3-4 noms |
|
|
|
...
(2) you stated in the past that you will close out open positions at a fixed buy/sell rate, which is close to the BTC/USD price at the time the site was taken offline.
Is this statement still valid?
(3) how do you intend to handle the case that a (accurate) claim includes a position, but the opening base price of that position can't be established preciesly?
Thanks for any clarifications
-- Ichthyo
2- not sure. I'll have to check and repost here. I think they are being closed at 5 (not sure though). ... ...Do you email people to notify them that you've sent a payment? Do people get emails notifying them that they're accurate and just in a queue for payments? ... People have been asking for this from day 1 and this is the answer you have ? "5$, not sure" You've not answered, I suggest you send notice before and after sending payment... to avoid sending to wrong addresses. |
|
|
|
Suggestion, to remove hive-mind and noobs kind of threads. New topic of interest. Thread of less than 1 week with more than X (say 5), established member posting. The rational is that a new noob threads will get replied by few established members who'll point to the obvious, end of the story. Current results tend to give to much score to old threads that turned into chat room with subject close to 4 cuils of away from the OP. http://cuiltheory.wikidot.com/what-is-cuil-theory Gold down, BTC up come to mind. I was among the first to call bullshit on this relation and never thought it would last for 100 pages. longer time frame would definitely be interesting. at the moment I am busy moving the scraping backend to a new vServer home. I sold my rig so currently it is living on a laptop  "less than 1 week" is "shorter" timeframe. |
|
|
|
I want to explain the logic behind 50% initial payments:
For each claim you have a certainty of its validity. You have the sum of funds from before the site had the database stolen which is equal to the site's previous balance. This sum must be distributed among claims somehow.
Ideally you would mark claims that you thought were accurate and those that weren't (based on what the data indicates to us). Then you would end up with some total value which you compare to the total funds available.
If less than the total funds, then be more permissive and allow certain more claims in. Repeat the above step.
If more than the total funds, then knock out low certainty claims and maybe redistribute funds among lower certainty claims (better that someone who is maybe legitimate, gets something rather than nothing).
You then end up with claims that are refunded with a best-fit according to the available data.
However people demand funds quickly. So as a compromise, we make 50% payouts initially (for claims we are highly certain are accurate). This allows an error margin so that in the final step we can still juggle balances around to resolve payments for everybody. The only downside is that you cannot decide to pay someone 0% after you've paid them 50%.
Then once people have been refunded for 50% and the final balances are decided, the process goes back over payees and refunds them for the remaining amount. I assume the final step should not take long given that it's just making payments out for known beneficiaries.
|
|
|
|
You have no claim.
The online claims process is now closed to new claims.
If you wish to pursue a claim you will need to send a notarized copy of any and all information you have by mail to the registered address as listed by business.govt.nz
I do have a claim, and its a public one. Part of the funds you are holding are for a pending donation list I have including 1000 BTC for the forum. My claim now is aprox. 16500 BTC interest included. If you have no intention of honoring my claim, please let me know. I have a PLAN B for your type of people. Maria. The claims process (both policies and procedures) are very reasonable. Your refusal to go through the standard claims process constitutes clear and obvious bad faith. As I said The online claims process is now closed to new claims.
If you wish to pursue a claim you will need to send a notarized copy of any and all information you have by mail to the registered address as listed by business.govt.nz
NO CARE !!! ... Please keep private talks where they belong. |
|
|
|
This is how I read your post. Serious ...appear as trolling ....
... resembles as HYIP ponzi scheme ... no actual credible evidence that would either confirm or deny ... some circumstantial evidence ... tip the scale slightly ...
So all of this depend on high boson quantum properties ? ,,, very interesting / Following. |
|
|
|
|
Good that you hold principles, And hope a silent ASIC vendor come out soon enough.
|
|
|
|
...
Genjix, can you please clarify to me under which status does my accounts hold at the moment?
Maria. <3
You have no claim.The online claims process is now closed to new claims. If you wish to pursue a claim you will need to send a notarized copy of any and all information you have by mail to the registered address as listed by business.govt.nz @Maria , Please keep private talks where they belong. |
|
|
|
I am supposed to only give out the status for emails. Accounts are in 3 states:
- Fake. This is a minority of accounts so far we are certain are impostors.
- Accurate. At my last count, this was around 1 in 20 (5%). Only a portion of these has been paid so far. Still working through paying these people back (I don't have access to funds personally. It works like Donald gets a portion and does them in chunks at a time with proper authorisation from Tihan and Patrick).
- Queued. Majority of claims are in the queue waiting to be examined. Around half (a guess) of claims I believed were accurate, and various fakes got pushed back into the "lets examine then later category". Most simply haven't been looked at yet.
The idea is to sort out claims with the highest certainty (this means quicker payouts), then as you work down, you reconcile them with other payments. I know people here are congratulating me, but I've actually been a hindrance for the claims process. Several times, I caused some mix-ups and confusion so Donald hands me batches/tasks to complete at a time.
Genjix, can you please clarify to me under which status does my accounts hold at the moment? Maria. <3 You have no claim. The online claims process is now closed to new claims.
If you wish to pursue a claim you will need to send a notarized copy of any and all information you have by mail to the registered address as listed by business.govt.nz |
|
|
|
Not with an ASIC, not even for sha256(sha256(password))-type hashes, not even for the simplest single-hash case as opposed to the hashlist scenario which is much more complicated. Bitcoin mining is different as compared to hash cracking, inputs follow a certain pattern. It doesn't have to worry about candidate generation, full-length hash comparisons and more complex cases involving comparisons against lists of hashes where hash bitmaps or similar technique needs to be employed for early rejects in order to reduce the SLOW host-device transfers.
Sorry, you can't profit on mining ASICs in case something generally f***s up.
Bandwidth ? the low amount of memory required for the hash to be checked can fit easily on-board, (512bk for ~16 000 hashes ?) I'm no expert but there is certainly a way to reuse the hashing blocks for cracking, even if that mean adding 10x to the cost of hardware. (If someone see the chance of bitcoin to succeed at 10% that'll be worth it for him.) |
|
|
|
Suggestion, to remove hive-mind and noobs kind of threads. New topic of interest. Thread of less than 1 week with more than X (say 5), established member posting. The rational is that a new noob threads will get replied by few established members who'll point to the obvious, end of the story. Current results tend to give to much score to old threads that turned into chat room with subject close to 4 cuils of away from the OP. http://cuiltheory.wikidot.com/what-is-cuil-theory Gold down, BTC up come to mind. I was among the first to call bullshit on this relation and never thought it would last for 100 pages. |
|
|
|
about forum PMs - please email the address. Getting too many messages and need them all in one place.
bitcoinBull, OK, take it up with Patrick. I'm just retelling a story.
bitcoinBull, OK, take it up with Patrick. I'm just retelling a story.
No, you take it up with Patrick. You're the one who works with him. Get your story straight before retelling it. Two people of a three-person company should be be communicating better. I did. I told you what I know happened. You said no. I said OK, fine ask Patrick. Patrick requested him to be added because he wanted to reset server root passwords. And he did receive several email reset confirmations. Whether the email is his personal email or work email, it shouldn't matter. It's the same email that he use to receive the confirmations and all Bitcoinica sensitive emails.
According to zhou, Patrick's email was added at Patrick's request to reset passwords. I can't believe Bitcoin Consultancy doesn't have their story straight this late in the game, and we are still seeing communication failures among their team. Why would I need that? I already had the password for rackspace. Indeed I had recently reset the root password for one of the virtual machines by using that password. I can understand how this might be slightly confusing so I'll clarify. There are two password reset mechanisms at rackspace. One is for the rackspace control panel, this sends you an email with a password reset link, I had no use for this. The second is for the root password of the virtual machines, this is accessible from the control panel, this is what I had used. |
|
|
|
His account was banned. (He still needs to pay back his lenders, of course.)
Would the mods mind moving this thread somewhere else... or changing it's title. Discussion of some random persons fraud in a thread about our company might be misleading to people who don't take the time to sort through all the details. Thx Why ? Title is neutral and reading OP = fail at first look. I don't think it's going to affect BFL reputation, Just let it die. Free bump |
|
|
|
Amir-
Please, I am not challenging you as a person, or your commitment to the cause of smashing the State or eliminating debt. A person is paid what he values himself at- if you want to be paid more for your development time, stop coding in industrial squats, promote your skills and work with people who value your ability. Sounds to me like the murky cabal of unknowns behind Bitcoinica has made you their code-jockey and are giving you the crap duties. Yes, you have been more communicative than the other alleged owners, but your communication has not addressed the issues. Stories have changed, directives have been announced that contradict earlier plans, new players have been introduced throughout this disaster... I am not going to humor you by dredging up all the inconsistencies in 65 pages of dialogue, anyone who has been following along at all knows exactly what I'm talking about.
When Zhou was the spokesperson, you were not heard from, now you are the spokesperson but you still can't give an OFFICIAL or CONSISTENT or ACCURATE answer to any of the questions.
Why are you not paying out in full for the funds that you have good clearance on?
What about the US$ funds you are holding- they have never been disputed?
Who is truly in charge, and more importantly, what business entity has taken on the legal responsibility for the fiduciary responsibility of all of the many tens of thousands of dollars in value you hold in trust?
Instead you keep offering up these little teases of a couple of pennies to this person, a minor payout to another of your select friends on the inside, and you maintain a smoke screen of silliness that you hide behind.
Do you really want anybody in the community to believe that the speed of your laptop is the reason that you haven't made good on 95% of the payouts in bitcoin yet? That's nonsense. I use a ThinkPad 43 as my main laptop for work every single day, and I would be embarrassed to suggest that the reason I couldn't initiate a simple transfer of funds is because that machine is slowing me down. Get Tihan, if he is the leader of this gang, to come forward and speak for his plans and the approach they are taking. Your group makes all sorts of forward looking statements about your knowledge, abilities and financial strength, but all anyone sees is strawmen coming forward to sling the next line of bullshit.
Its been said very well- this is just business. Act that way. Do the proper ethical, legal and moral thing to do and be honest. Don't play the little bluffing game of go ahead and sue me, I'm available... start making some payments, speak only the truth, and if your partners are not willing to empower you to act then out them for it, and demand they come and take the heat. This is the marketplace that you have chosen to work in- you have an obligation to this marketplace to act with integrity and transparency.
I'm not involved in verifying the claims or refunding customers (if Bitcoinica wants me to I would be glad to dedicate some of my time), but I'm following this thread continuously.
I may not be able to give you some official information, but based on all the sources I have (including some big customers who have close contact with people at Bitcoinica), I can answer some of your questions:> Why are you not paying out in full for the funds that you have good clearance on? The team is quite skeptical in making payments. Because the amount of funds is limited (Tihan has exceeded his legal responsibility as a Limited Partner by chipping in *personal* funds, and no more such kind of contributions is available or expected), every cent extra paid to claimants means one cent less for other honest customers. AFAIK Donald doesn't want the team to consider the reputation of the customers so it's assumed that all the money paid out cannot be recovered if it's found to be wrong later.> What about the US$ funds you are holding- they have never been disputed? The funding account has sufficient funds to cover the vast majority of the claims. Whether Bitcoinica LP is still solvent depends on the claim verification. After removing the scammers from the list, they may have the funds to cover all the claims. But it's also possible for the company to become insolvent. In that case, Bitcoinica should make fractional payments to customers with less evidence or verifiable data. Again, this is just a suggestion based on my personal value judgement. It's not official.> Who is truly in charge, and more importantly, what business entity has taken on the legal responsibility for the fiduciary responsibility of all of the many tens of thousands of dollars in value you hold in trust? Based on government records, Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd is the General Partner of Bitcoinica LP. AFAIK the owners of Bitcoinica Consultancy Ltd are Donald, Patrick and Amir (or possibly Bitcoin Consultancy Ltd). Tihan is a representative of an investment group, which is the Limited Partner. He is never in charge of the company after the corporate reorganization.
I have not received any official information from Bitcoinica for more than a month. So there are nothing more I can comment on. The whole thing is very complicated and I do believe that the team has good reasons for the delay.
[/b]
~35% of claimants are marked accurate ~86% of total funds are marked accurate ~25% of total funds have been repaid [12:45:25] Amir Taaki: if we spend a whole day doing claims over skype
[12:45:33] Amir Taaki: we can maybe finish 50 of them in a day
[12:46:14] Incitatus: dude I have so many lined up for patrick to do
[12:46:21] Incitatus: where all the work is done
[12:46:49] Incitatus: he spent from friday to monday working on trying to automate withdraws
[12:47:04] Amir Taaki: i can do withdrawals
[12:47:14] Amir Taaki: we need those bitcoinica payments out
[12:47:16] Incitatus: you can build code to automate it?
[12:47:19] Amir Taaki: no
[12:47:19] Incitatus: you can't do withdraws
[12:47:47] Incitatus: everythign you touch that has to do with money blows up in our face
[12:48:08] Incitatus: we cannot fuck up
[12:48:12] Amir Taaki: ok
[12:49:47] Incitatus: looks like a good article
[12:49:53] Incitatus: can't read it now
[12:58:56] Amir Taaki: so what's happening with bitcoinica payments?
[12:59:05] Amir Taaki: why doesn't patrick give you some mtgox USD?
[12:59:58] Amir Taaki: i see lots of claims marked as accurate though. very nice.
[13:02:06] Incitatus: yea idk, too busy i guess. As long as mtgox wouldn't lock my account down then that would be cool but that's very possible. Techinically we'd have to get permission i think that's why
[13:02:23] Incitatus: but yea there are many that patrick himself has to do and we're just waiting on that
[13:02:26] Incitatus: obv he's uber busy
(about blow ups, I am careless/irresponsible and not security conscious - hence I don't have admin root access on Intersango.) Zhou is totally correct in what he says. We (Bitcoin Consultancy) have taken on responsibility for the payments. In order to do that, we had to complete the paperwork for the formation of Bitcoinica Consultancy. He's also not directly involved, but has been helpful with the odd query when needed (despite not being involved). About converting the balances: if you prefer USD, then you can specify it on your payments option for the claims.
|
|
|
|
A) Hashing an already hashed password does nothing for us. How is an ASIC (that only does hashes) gonna find a twice hashed password? B) This discussion has already run its course, and been answered. I was corrected 2 posts down: For cracking, you have the hash of the password. You then take your password guess, hash it, then compare that hash to the value you have. Rinse and repeat several trillion times.
Granted BFL ASICs can't be used to crack password but I'm pretty sure a more complex ASICs could be used for both. The hash has to be compared a list of wanted password hashes instead of the required difficulty mask. I wish someone could come-up with an estimate of the difference in gates and bandwidth required for the simplest of dual uses. |
|
|
|
Eh, ASIC totally locks the whole global bitcoin mining equipment into SHA256, which will be millions of dollars worth of hardware. Say somebody breaks SHA256 and 99% are mining with ASIC then bitcoin is dead.
Switching gradually? How do you suggest doing that?
EDIT: We should move towards making bitcoin MORE flexible/scalable in the core (change hashing algorithm (on the fly?) and transaction speed) instead of focusing on stuff like BIP16/17...
If there is a significant risk of someone breaking SHA256 ... then ... you could start a new thread about it, hopefully with a descriptive title. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
