|
I asked Goat on IRC, and he acted as if he doesn't know what deleted posts I am talking about, even after I pointed to this thread.
The "confirmation" of this guy is ridiculous. We're down to gigavps now.
|
|
|
|
Is it me, or Goat messages have been removed? I'm pretty sure I saw him posted a couple of post before me. Or maybe I'm crazy or something?  No, I'm seeing this as well. There are multiple posts missing that very strongly implied Pirateat40 met Goat in Vegas. He posted two things, I think. One about Pirate getting lucky when Giga was rolling (and 167 to 1 odds/people handing out free beer), and then another about "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas."
Hmmmmm. Is it staying in Vegas or not?
I remember at least a third post that quoted Gigavps "saw a pirate" and added a "+1", don't remember whether there was more in it. This is very fishy, why would someone wipe all his posts from more than one page? |
|
|
|
Some stuff from IRC: Goat seems to confirm, but Tuxavant says he did not appear yet. <Tuxavant> Vandroiy, well I know he was saying he was going to show, but we've not met yet. he said he would contact several of us.. but nobody has seen him
(...)
<Tuxavant> Vandroiy, I know of at least two people he said he would contact at DC and has not.
I guess we'll know more soon, when DefCon ends and people talk about it. |
|
|
|
I'll add 1BTC to each address.  |
|
|
|
|
None of the options sounds realistic. The first three (5min return, everyone dumping, price going higher than before) would require that everyone goes insane, and the last one, a two-week recovery, would need an unusually high buying volume.
The most likely outcome is for the price to stabilize at a lower level.
|
|
|
|
I dont actually see, how this address is likely related to any of MtGox`s wallets. 1. MtGox has stated some week ago that they do not commit such blatant negligence to leave any large amount (like this) in one account only, but maintain many accounts in many offline places all around. They have not proven this statement though, afaik. 2. The fund size and time interval of existence seems believable as well as the rate of growth in order to be one of pirate's wallets. 3. On the 17th of July, a withdrawal of 70k BTC from this wallet coincides closely to pirate's claims on IRC to play the market (for the first time). 70k BTC were sold that day and again on the following days alternating with buy orders of similar size. 4. The website: www.1DkyBEKt5S2GDtv7aQw6rQepAvnsRyHoYM.com , though with its owner(s) still unknown does not make the impression to be linked to mtgox. (5. Doesnt mtgox reject tainted coins? If that was true the amount of taint in the wallet dequalifies it to be linked to mtgox: https://blockchain.info/taint/1DkyBEKt5S2GDtv7aQw6rQepAvnsRyHoYM ) <-- pls correct me here- 1: I once saw them pay me a 500 BTC withdrawal with a 400k wallet. Admittedly that was last year, but it happened. If they say they no longer do that, I believe them though.
- 2:
 Huh? How so? - 3: As I already said, the withdrawal happened after the dump.
- 4: The domain was registered 23 Jun 2012, anyone could have done that.
On a side note, if that address should belong to Pirate, I'm going to lose faith in Bitcoiners. But that makes no sense at all, it would serve no purpose. So if it's not Gox cold storage, then it's probably some investor who wants to be certain about getting his share of Bitcoins.  |
|
|
|
|
Volatility is expensive to the ones causing it. It's a setup problem that will solve itself over time, and has nothing to do with Bitcoin itself.
Bitcoin volatility has been decreasing. It may go up again if we experience exponential growth, but we all know this can't go forever, so as long as the system stays healthy, it will always settle with time.
Just tell him to come back later, when it's more stable. Smarter would be to already use it for small sums now, to prepare for the case that things get serious.
|
|
|
|
Oops! Anyone who sold at $9 expecting to buy back at $8 now has to buy back at $8.8. And... that's still a profit. Even more so if they bought back at 8.4 or who-knows-where. |
|
|
|
[I don't know about some people *cough* Vandroiy *cough*, but I don't see the people that support Pirate as being paid off or dishonest, just ignorant.
To be fair, most of the times I mentioned these things, I just wanted to see their reaction. IMO, most of them indeed fall under the category "conveniently ignorant" -- or at least I couldn't tell which it is. Still, changing the reasoning doesn't make the actions any better. |
|
|
|
|
It depends on how it happens, so I placed a conservative number. If there's another rally and I sell some, I'd buy back higher.
Hard to tell how much a coin should be worth right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and it's not a problem. The security requirements for micro-transactions are not as high, so using payment processors or p2p micro-banks would be fine.
In fact, it has the advantage of being much faster. Your savings would still be safely in your own hands, and if tx volume at any given time is small compared to the cost to gain peoples' trust, micro-transaction fraud yields no profit.
|
|
|
|
Uh-huh. So which option will you be choosing? It's Bitcoinmax deposit. Confirmed by someone who actually used them. Besides, if you have any other explanation that even remotely makes sense, go ahead. If you're talking about "options" of this thread, you can't be serious. |
|
|
|
from what i understand bitcoinmax is not run by pirate himself so those coins would have went into the personal wallet of pay.btc first
if someone wants a withdrawl of 100 BTC at the same time as someone else is investing 100BTC ,it wouldnt make sense for payb.tc to upload the first 100 BTC from the investor and then download another 100 btc to pay the withdrawl
it makes sense to give 100 coins that just arrived in the personal wallet to the person that wants to take out 100 coins rather than pointlessly run it all through the btcst account just to take it out again immediately ......unless im missing something
You're missing that most people re-invest. 5k coins in this case. Bitcoinmax knew the rough amount of re-investments beforehand, maybe they have a feature for it. It sent that fraction back right after the 7% interest payment arrived. Look at the block chain and try to understand for yourselves. Bitcoinmax pay-out target: 19kEo3qmuUdAQb1Q7VZhRwahw5v3NSZCeW, other large BS&T client: 131YyEEz7wYMMuS6Qk4gMnEs2SgtqJ2GTE, potential Bitcoinmax deposit: 1FmC6gUV1tkT7HHmQzo3NwtgZs3WGSz4Rd |
|
|
|
hmmm. Those don't look like interest payments at all. Not with such round numbers, sorry.
The same round number came one week earlier, on the exact block that paid other accounts. Also, 1400 is 7% of a non-compunding account with 20k paper coins in it, and non-compunding people might just choose round numbers. Check out Block 189342 and how well that payment was synchronized on all of the accounts in question! |
|
|
|
|
No.
I think the purpose of this thread is to focus attention on the date Aug 14, to make people believe there's still time. The actual topic should be "yesterday's" interest pay-out. It was not a normal, simultaneous pay-out at all. Some coins saw multiple investor addresses on the same day; for example, Bitcoinmax re-investment ended up with the next customer as soon as it returned. Multiple payments look like interest that was sent much later than anticipated.
See as an example transaction c9a38ef5482a24575d9ff38cd76aa524a8ec2f498836a2b98f42e352e30874cf -- two simultaneous payments that look like interest, but 23 hours later?
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, okay!
In that case, I apologize. I have misunderstood what piotr_n said. *strikes out the last post*
I still don't understand the reason for the delay though. But I guess that's for the users to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
piotr_n: at least give some correcting comment for calling my post "crap" and "trolling" prematurely. Goat just confirmed he was paid with 26 hours delay. That most certainly does not fall into any of yesterday's payments.
Also, it's interesting he's being paid with a round sum. Not a pure pass-through.
Nevermind this post, I misunderstood what was being said.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, what? Another payment irregularity for yesterday? When did he pay?
I looked at the block chain yesterday, just wondering whether the payment happened, and ran into strange proceedings. It seems he paid his second-largest target with the re-investments from Bitcoinmax. Check it out yourselves:
19kEo3qmuUdAQb1Q7VZhRwahw5v3NSZCeW is quite obviously Bitcoinmax pay-out. 131YyEEz7wYMMuS6Qk4gMnEs2SgtqJ2GTE was paid in time regularly in the past, but this time, a part of the Bitcoinmax re-investment was sent there several blocks later. Two different block chain analysts said they believe the same thing. 1FmC6gUV1tkT7HHmQzo3NwtgZs3WGSz4Rd would then be the BS&T deposit address of Bitcoinmax.
Overall, yesterday seemed to have a four-phase-payout according to one analysis, but there were holes. If this is another one, it could be five-phase now.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems blockchain.info is disagreeing with itself. On one page, it shows a final balance >400k, on the other it shows "final balance 0".
I'll stick to blockexplorer for now. I prefer to get no graphs to getting wrong graphs. (If the graph is not wrong, the info page from the same page is -- it's not reasonable either way.)
|
|
|
|
|
Could it be Gox cold storage?
Assuming I got all the times properly in UTC, Pirate first dump happened, and about half an hour later, chunks went out of that address. I also know some part of Gox storage had roughly that size at another time.
Proceedings would be: dump occurs, people who bought want to withdraw, hot wallet runs low, gets manually replenished. Japan is UTC+9, so it would be around noon -- credible that someone is there to balance out the wallets.
Just a theory. It could also explain why the funds were moved in irregular chunks. Anyway, I can't quite get the timings of some other theories to work out with the dump happening before the address activity.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
