I find it humorous that usagi attacked others for their lack of HTTPS knowledge without implementing it correctly. And yes, the warning still appears:
https://i.imgur.com/tcB37.pngStop being a dink.
"No, u"
Insults like that carry no useful information and add nothing to this thread.
You're wrong. They communicate that you're pissing me off and likely many others.
Well, I guess it does communicate that much.
A lot of your ideas are frankly stupid and have only a tenuous connection to reality. I've explained to you why your idea of 'risked capital' is wrong (for example) due to opportunity cost and related counterparty risk
I've already used multiple examples to show that my model is mathematically correct. The "PPT Paying 7.5% Weekly" is just the most simple of these. Additionally, "opportunity cost" or "time value" is factored in to the more complex version of the model. The "PPT Paying 7.5% Weekly" example contains a time value of just over 1%. However, if the time value were 0% (omitted), the value of YARR and related securities would actually be higher. This is why I omitted it -- it's simple and portrays YARR in a better light. But then...
and you changed what you said to justify the same idea.
I, based on your suggestions, elaborated and expanded on my representation of the model.
But this thread isn't about my mathematical analyses. If you would like, I can find the time to engage you in a formal mathematical debate. If it were worth it to me, I'd even write up a whitepaper. The idea, however, is simple enough that I do not think it merits a whitepaper.
As for counterparty risk, this is something which is mostly subjective and must be evaluated by each investor. It is, however, simple enough to factor in as a variable; I can show this if you intend to take up my debate offer.
That's right, you have a rep for ignoring what people say and justifying your own behavior and ideas.
If you say so. I hope you'll notice, however, that instead of ignoring what you're saying, I am splitting up the quote and responding to every last bit of it.
The "No u" is classic. You're a cheap troll.
Of course the "No u" is classic. That's why I quoted it: it was an attempt to show how worthless insults are. If I were trying to cheaply troll this thread, I'd be insulting you more. However, it would seem that whether or not I am consciously trying to troll you, it's working. (Judging by the number of names you've called me in this thread.)
If you can't understand that this is a new site
I understand that perfectly
and that HTTPS was NOT invented to ensure "who you are talking to"
So tell me, how does HTTPS prevent man-in-the-middle attacks?
then you're a real doofus.
That's a new one
I've obviously been around here much longer than you
Yep, and neither of us has gotten the scammer tag yet. Hallelujah.
and I kinda think you're jealous that I am a creative individual
I much enjoy your creations, especially the fact that you have the courage to create something so involved as an insurance company. You should step back for a moment, however, and look at the word "feedback." Not all feedback needs to be positive; negative feedback, when done correctly, is often termed "constructive criticism." My analysis of each insured pirate bond was neutral feedback. When you contested things such as the market price, I was bewildered. The fact exists that at a certain point in time, it was impossible to get shares of YARR on the open market for less than 1.89. Arguing about that seems rather pointless.
while your special skill is being rita repulsa news reporter on bitcointalk.org.
Who was it who cried wolf about Bitcoinica? Would you call them "rita repulsa?"
I have other "special skills" which I have successfully sold on bitcointalk.org, including GPG tutoring and programming. Aside from that, I enjoy reading posts from "Answer the question above with a question" to "[Full Disclosure] CVE-2012-2459 (block merkle calculation exploit)."
That warning is for sites you've been to before.
The warning contains information pertinent to all websites, and I've never been to Hotwallet before.
No, it does not. If you've never been to a website before it does not make sense to assume someone is doing a man in the middle attack. For what purpose? To gather data that....
doesn't exist? To learn what login you.....
don't have?How about "sniff your login credentials on account creation?" That would work...
It's clear you're not going to shut up about this
I'll shut up when the issue is fixed
so go ahead and have your fun
Thanks
I'll just ignore you.
Have fun with that. lalalala I'm not listening!
I mean it's clear that you're antisocial
Do you need a picture of me skydiving with friends with a shoe on my head?
and are only interested in your crusade against perceived injustices.
Actually, my crusade against MPEX interests me more ATM. You know, the options exchange run by a law-breaking, content-stealing Romanian who runs a net loss business and hosts porn?
Every time something's not quite right there's nimda, pointing it out for all to see. There's quite a few people around here just like you.
Well that's great. I'm glad that potential scammers in lending are pointed out preemptively, that BitDayTrade's security flaws are being exposed, and that people have noticed that VanillaWallet is not open-source and MtGox has apparent solvency issues. Surely these haven't been pointed out by the same guy?
Accept the certificate, leave, and come back the next day.
No new message? That means....
it's okay.
No, it means you're the same person who said he was hotwallet the day before. In a nutshell, it's basically me "signing" your cert.
What can I say? GOOD JOB, MARCO! Keep fishin'!
Thanks. I'm not going to sign your cert, however. In fact, I haven't even signed theymos' public key.
Don't take spectators exposing security flaws as personal insults. Take them as suggestions, and use them to improve your service. It's called feedback, and feedback is the main reason that developers even have this pre-release stage that Hotwallet is currently in.
It's not a FUCKING security flaw nimda. Here's a hint. Even if I have SSL and use LUKS and encrypt everything on the server people can STILL hack the system with a motherfucking AM/FM RADIO from outside the fucking BUILDING if I don't use a god damn FARADAY CAGE! But that's paranoid shit -- you know, like pretending there's hackers out to get you and do a man in the middle attack on you to a website you've never even been to before!
Lol
If hotwallet becomes popular, "do[ing] a man in the middle attack on you to a website you've never even been to before" can become a viable way to make money. Especially if its owner says "oh just ignore that warning."
Seriously, try out the system. Don't deposit any bitcoins in your account? I don't fucking CARE! But please don't come on here and whine about SSL. It's stupid and pointless. Go, find a REAL security flaw -- because you know real security is all about compartmentalization -- and get back to me. This SSL bullshit is noob wannabe shit nimda. Get with the program. You obviously aren't even familiar with SSL spoofing (or you're an unethical asshole). So don't bother. Please, you're just going to make yourself look stupid again.
You wanna talk security? There are dozens of people trying to crack hotwallet right now, not flapping their lips queefing on a forum just talking about it. I've had over 50 SSL injection attacks in the last 3 days on the login page alone. What's the point of getting an independently certified SSL certificate if you can be hacked in some other way or of there's some other gaping security flaw? I loved it when you said that you were wondering what other security holes there were. Yeah I can imagine. All you do is wonder. Like the guy that said he doesn't see any evidence that it's secure. Well frankly I'm not surprised.
I'll come back to this last bit; I g2g.
