I have to admit the significance of this image is lost on me; hand-egg isn't as popular up here in Canada  |
|
|
|
|
Bumpity bump! Prices and quantities updated.
|
|
|
|
Nubbins, how did you extend the chain of custody on your coin?
Easy peasy. I take Mike's signed document, append text after his signature that identifies the new buyer, and sign the whole thing with my key. For sake of illustration, Mike's original document is in blue, and mine is in red. ---Begin PGP doc---- ---Begin PGP doc---
I, Mike Caldwell, sent coins a,b,c to nubbins,
and his PGP fingerprint is ABCD EFGH.
See attached document scanned-coins.pdf
with MD5 checksum blahblah
- ---Begin PGP sig---
234C%#@4fv524 <---PGP signature for Mike's key
- ---End PGP sig---I, nubbins, sent coin b to zipmaster,
and his PGP fingerprint is IJKL MNOP.
---Begin PGP sig---
@%$Y#H/Rgef4e <---PGP signature for my key (ABCD EFGH)
---End PGP sig---Then I just take this block of text and scanned-coins.pdf and send them along to the new owner. |
|
|
|
Mike, I disagree. You wouldn't be performing the role of a bank. Guaranteeing the chain of ownership of the coins is a logical extension of your "trust in Mike Caldwell" product. Furthermore, following with the educational philosophy, you'd be incentivizing people to accept and understand the fundamental concept of a digital signature: a "technology" foundational to the premise of bitcoin itself.
Of all the coins I've sold (and there have been many), only ONE buyer has taken me up on the offer to extend the chain of custody. Bank or not, what you're asking him to do is pour tens of thousands of dollars and countless hours of effort into something that most people don't even want. Buyers who want a chain of custody can find a seller that provides it -- I can think of several off the top of my head. Buyers who don't want a chain of custody can carry on as usual. It's not Mike's responsibility to track down every coin he's sold through a labyrinth of ownership in order to provide a service that most people don't care about. |
|
|
|
Yes, the metal's shape is changed...but the imaging equipment is not nearly sensitive enough to pick up etched characters on a coin... we're talking perhaps two thousandths of an inch in depth. Medical imaging equipment could determine the difference between a 50 cent piece and a silver dollar, because of size. It could not differentiate between a Canadian quarter vs a US quarter, let alone etching on a coin's surface... not even close. Furthermore, MRI and CT cannot accurately image metallic objects because of extensive noise and scattering.
Interesting to know, thanks. |
|
|
|
I believe the reason that the codes aren't etched into the metal is because common medical imaging equipment could read the code without removing the holo.
I doubt that any available medical imaging equipment is sensitive enough to pick up an etched engraving. In the first place, x-rays are very low resolution. CT and MRI don't work with metal objects because of extensive scattering and noise. When you engrave characters to metal, this changes the metal's shape, making the characters clearly readable with pretty much any sort of reflective radiation. The tamper proof case may look great but what if tampering is unnecessary because any physician can take it to work and see through the case with medical imaging gear? An engraved secret in a metal coin is also going to be vulnerable to magnetic imaging techniques.
|
|
|
|
Value parameters
1- Denomination
2- Rarity
3- Metal scrap value
4- BTC scrap value
5- Utility , as a hardware wallet
New versions will lose simple denomination, but the hardware wallet value could be enhanced.
a) Durability, I see other products able to survive high temperatures with codes built into the metal.
b) A public address QR code to make balance checking easy.
c) A signed QR code balance sticker generated by Casascius, to place on the new coins later.
I believe the reason that the codes aren't etched into the metal is because common medical imaging equipment could read the code without removing the holo. Regarding point c, can you elaborate? If you're suggesting a second public/private key holo that the purchaser could apply after the fact, I don't think that would ever be something that'd be offered. |
|
|
|
I suggest to change "1 BITCOIN" message on coin face to be changed just to BITCOIN. Without quotes.
PHYSICAL BITCOIN, even. I do understand the point that you'd like to discourage people from putting limitless amounts of funds on the coins, but I think the quotation marks slightly degrade the appearance of the coins, and the distinction that they are intended to convey will be lost on many. FWIW, people can already add limitless funds to any Casascius coin. That said, I haven't yet seen a coin that was overfunded by more than a trivial amount of money (0.001 is the most I've seen so far). I am 100% against selling 1 btc coin with seals without actually have the listed btc in them (that's actually committing fraud)
Fraud, really?  |
|
|
|
|
Because you didn't fix the sticker, Mike Caldwell did.
|
|
|
|
Sad thing it has to be like that. The pre funded coins had some sort of credibility. Now you can not know for sure if those coins are safe...
AFAIK the coins were never pre-funded. The funds were always added after purchasers received their coins. This is no different; it's just you funding them upon receipt instead of Mike funding them. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, they fucked their shareholders raw. Pretty surprised that Havelock let them delist the way they did -- shame on them as well.
|
|
|
|
I wonder how the possibility of counterfeiting these coins is going to be cooked in their market value of time.
How does one prove that the coin for sale is an absolute original unless it somehow was graded BEFORE the august announcement of counterfeit coins in circulation??
I keep the original documentation showing the original owner but how can even that be trusted?
Do you think that someone who is able to counterfeit a convincing replica of a Casascius coin is unable to counterfeit a convincing replica of an ANACS grading slab?  |
|
|
|
|
Bump! SaltySpitoon has received his coin; quantities have been updated in the OP.
|
|
|
|
|
Right on! Let's get this going:
1.05
|
|
|
|
Misspelling of "Casascius" on the hologram.
Does anyone know how many misspelled coins were made?
My impression is about 3,000
That doesn't seem very rare to me.
About 3,500 1BTC brass coins have the error, I believe. Mintages are all over the place, for example, there are around 7,000 2013 brass 0.5s. Not sure on the count for 2012/2013 brass 1s. |
|
|
|
|
I think there are two different markets, both for the 10s and the 1s. I believe that in both cases, the all-silvers came first, and some collectors prefer an earlier funding date. Other collectors prefer the aesthetics of the gold plating and are less concerned with the funding date.
I'll agree, though, that you see gold-plated 1s and 10s for sale much more frequently. Seems like most people with all-silvers are sitting on them.
|
|
|
|
I have two 2013 Silver with Gold B singles left 2.5B or best offer.
Have quite a few 2013 Brass singles and halves 1.28 for singles and .78 for halves. Willing to negotiate in multiple coin purchase.
I also have the three MS65 singles left. 1.7B or best offer.
Last but not least 1 2012 5B coin asking 7B for it.
Post here or PM me with offers.
Interested in coin-for-coin trades? I've got some first-funded (1Ag1) all-silver 2013 1BTC coins, with pgp docs from Mike identifying me as the original owner. Wouldn't mind trading one or two of them for the gold-plated ones to help round out my collection. |
|
|
|
And yes blazedout, nubbins and I have the same address for him.
BlackLilac didn't learn a lesson from the SR/DPR debacle. He left footprints all over the place  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
