Why the hell would someone pay Bitcoins for that? There isn't even a photo of the real thing lol  you guys have too much money to piss away. I also just looked at this properly and realised what it was, wtf? LOL :p It takes a few brain cells to realize tha the gem is in demand, and you are going to make a few coins in 6 confirms. |
|
|
|
|
Just want to say thanks for the initial IPO shares - you're not losing money if I redeem them for silver right?
|
|
|
|
The stuff I'm reading in this thread...
Yawn. Yet another low effort post. |
|
|
|
|
Really? It was one line in the OP.
I'm an atheist, but stop derailing this topic to religion. Let people decide for themselves what to follow (if any), and don't bring more religious debates to unrelated topics.
|
|
|
|
It is worth 78.76 bitcoins (~ $1400) and currently owned by TF2Intel. Thanks for that fast return :3 |
|
|
|
Btw in less than "only" 100 rounds the gem will hit 1M (75*1.1^100).
Yep. A linear growth rate won't really work through, because the reward isn't proportionally scaled to the risk. |
|
|
|
Note: This is a ponzi, that's why it's in the gambling section. It's risky.EDIT: Check out Bitcoin Gold - get in early while you can, and if you get in late you can get the script behind it for free!Bitcoin gem takes the concept where you buy the gem for XX bitcoins (currently 78.76 btc). Then, the price of the gem will be raised to 86.64 btc, and you get 82.7 btc sent back. http://www.bitcoingem.com/index.phpThe higher the price is, the less likely people is going to buy in. The price is raised by 10% each round, and the higher the price is raised, the more profit there is (but it will collapse/halt in less rounds). It might be interesting to allow users to buy "shares" of the gem and pull together fractions of the price, so future rounds would require (i) more users and/or (ii) higher amounts. There's also the free advertising aspect, which might be worth it for smaller amounts and advertising bitcoin-related services (eg a new gambling game, etc). Also, the system requires 6 confirmations, which delays the time when a new round happens. Looking at the list of transactions, it seems that at this price point there are a lot of people that purchase quite soon after 6 confs.
|
|
|
|
Probably someone who entered the name Kim Dotcom  |
|
|
|
I will play too, thanks for the free start.
Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Requirements:
1. Scanned government issued photo ID, matching paypal account name.
2. At least 100 posts here, and registered for at least two weeks.
Max per person: 1 btc
Total I'm selling for now: 3 btc
Price: $20.99 USD/btc (may be adjusted)
|
|
|
|
2) After 1.5+ years of operation, we have never had an incident. That being said, I know many players that deposit each session, play, then withdraw after they are done. They usually go to sleep and wake up with confirmed coins in whatever wallet on whatever device or service they choose to use. This is the least amount of trust you have to have in SwC and still play, and it is no problem from our perspective as we have paid around $30 total in btc transaction fees in those 1.5 years. Fire coins on or off at will.
Bitcoin. >5,000 payments $30 fee |
|
|
|
I keep reading this as bitchyip |
|
|
|
Looks like it's shut down.. a new record?? Server not found Firefox can't find the server at www.bitelfin.com. EDIT: Up again |
|
|
|
Thanks johnthedong |
|
|
|
Not another satoshiDICE clone.. 1. "The most popular Bitcoin betting game in the universe."  2. Why do you have the bootstrap favicon? 3. "Warnning!" 4. Did you literally rip images off satoshiDICE?5. To be able to pay off winning max bets, you need at least 3,000 BTC as a reserve. Where is your 3,000 BTC? 6. It's lessthan, not lessthen 7. You just ripped all the text for the "how it works" page from satoshiDICE 8. What is your double spending risk migration strategy? 9. House edge of 0.0190% That means you will need a betting volume of 10,000 BTC to make two bitcoins. Have you heard of variance? |
|
|
|
While working on the above issue, I noticed that BitFunder's volume as of this moment for the last 24hrs is over 175 BTC and earlier was at 230 BTC for a new record. Your trade has definitely picked up significantly in the last week - but a word of caution. Your policy of allowing anything to list will bump your trade volume in the short-term but at the cost of possible loss of trade later on. One of the types of assets which bumps trade significantly is ponzis. They bump it by trading shares to themselves early to make it look like demand - then pay high dividends (most of which gos to themself) to lure in investors to scam. Right now you have one pretty blatant ponzi on your site: Exchange.ESIF Here's all the obvious things that make it a ponzi: 1. No identity here or anywhere for issuer. 2. Claims of very good past record - with absolutely zero evidence to support it. 3. Zero records of what assets he claims to hold (he can't just make them up - as then he'd be unable to pay high dividends when it was apparent his pretend portfolio had made a loss) 4. Willing to sell shares at any price - No stated face value or valuation of units and already sold into an order below his lowest Ask (quite probably to himself to make it look like demand - and did it cheap to reduce transaction fees he lost). 5. Paid a high initial dividend despite fund only having been running a few days and where he claims to be investing in fiat-denominated assets (how CAN he make a high profit when assets are denominated in fiat and BTC was rising massively?). There's a very similar one on Crypto (JDBIF) which amusingly still gets trades despite having stopped paying out his promised dividends back in October. Hopefully nearly all the trades were sales to himself - as once he gains any traction you can bet that he'll just dividend out a percentage of his sales each week then vanish once sales dry up. I'd seriously suggest you refuse to list such obvious crap - whilst it may generate some trade in the short-term, longer term a portion of all capital going into it is going to just vanish from your market. Not only does that reduce the funds available for future trade it can also deter some investors from investing entirely. There is one explanation for the first dividends - the asset issuer might have gambled the funds (however many shares they sold) and sold at the $19 peak to rebuy at $16. But the fact that shares are traded not at face value but on a *massive* tiered system makes it very likely that it is a ponzi / scam asset. |
|
|
|
No but anyone who has the link should be able to read it, no? No. You will need to set the access to everyone with link. You need permission to access this item. You are signed in as [snio], but you don't have permission to access this item. You can request access from the owner or choose a different account. Learn more Choose a different account |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
