Its Official Pirate Has Defaulted!!

[policja71]

If this mess with pirate isnt straightened out, than the resulting media-hype will cause the general public to see bitcoin as a currency where you can run multimillion dolar scams and get away with it...not to mention it will act as a magnet attracting more "profesional" scams.

[The_Duke]

If this mess with pirate isnt straightened out, than the resulting media-hype will cause the general public to see bitcoin as a currency where you can run multimillion dolar scams and get away with it...

Wait... you think that isn't already how the general public views bitcoin 

[the_thing]

If this mess with pirate isnt straightened out, than the resulting media-hype will cause the general public to see bitcoin as a currency where you can run multimillion dolar scams and get away with it...not to mention it will act as a magnet attracting more "profesional" scams.

Then don't run around talking about a bitcoin scam to everyone you know irl. We've had enough of negative publicity. I wish those of you who got scammed would either effectively solve the problem or be quiet. But I think the exact oppositve will happen - everyone talking shit and doing nothing at all.

[muyuu]

If this mess with pirate isnt straightened out, than the resulting media-hype will cause the general public to see bitcoin as a currency where you can run multimillion dolar scams and get away with it...

Wait... you think that isn't already how the general public views bitcoin 

The general public doesn't know about bitcoin at all yet. Only a fraction does.

[The_Duke]

If this mess with pirate isnt straightened out, than the resulting media-hype will cause the general public to see bitcoin as a currency where you can run multimillion dolar scams and get away with it...

Wait... you think that isn't already how the general public views bitcoin 

The general public doesn't know about bitcoin at all yet. Only a fraction does.

Wait... you think that isn't already how the fraction of the general public that actually knows about bitcoin already views bitcoin 

Better?

[muyuu]

If this mess with pirate isnt straightened out, than the resulting media-hype will cause the general public to see bitcoin as a currency where you can run multimillion dolar scams and get away with it...

Wait... you think that isn't already how the general public views bitcoin 

The general public doesn't know about bitcoin at all yet. Only a fraction does.

Wait... you think that isn't already how the fraction of the general public that actually knows about bitcoin already views bitcoin 

Better?

Better. Now, if we can have a few months stint without a big scandal, new users won't such an impression. Or at least not to such degree.

[myrkul]

"Weak members" is a value judgement call, one that I don't believe he has any right to make. How do you know that a naive nerd was driven broke by pirate (yes, the culprit is pirate), who will now leave bitcoins forever, but had he stayed because we empathized, would have created a business that doubled the number of bitcoin users? Just because they sucked at picking dodgy schemes doesn't mean they're a weak member in everything, and that we should celebrate them fucking off. Even geniuses can be wrong.

/sigh. Again with the exile. We're not kicking them out. We're not even "celebrating them fucking off". We're just not patting them on the head, saying "it's OK, baby, let me cover your losses." Don't get me wrong, Pirate needs to pay his debts. But no bailouts. If someone doesn't get all their Bitcoins back (which is a certainty, either a lot of people are going to get fucked somewhat, or a few people are going to get fucked royally, or a lot of people are going to get fucked royally - all depends on whether Pirate sticks around long enough to pay anything), I do not support covering that loss.

Neither I, nor anyone else, is making the "weak" judgment call. Those people who can't hack the loss judge themselves the weaker members, and prove it by getting out. Those that stick around have proven themselves more fit - again, not necessarily in all things, simply more fit to manage their own finances - by not putting more than they could afford to lose in a magic black box with "7% weekly!!!" printed on it.

"Doing it out of self interest" doesn't explain anything. Give me an example of one animal or plant on Earth that does not do something repetitively out of self interest.

That has been my point all along. Acting in one's own self interest is the only way you can remain fit for continued survival, whether that is in the market, or in the competition for food.

What you do in self interest is not what causes you to remain fit. What causes you to remain fit is, firstly, a change in the environment to require the need for your fitness to be checked, and secondly, that your linear weaknesses do not fall beyond the scope of the new fitness requirements.

Acting in one's best interest may fail - be insufficient to ensure continued fitness - but it's still a required state. If the person in your example failed to act in their own best interest or acted against it, for instance, learned about the law, and then immediately phoned up the FBI and confessed, then they would be rendered unfit - dead. The same goes for just sitting. Furthermore, of those that do run, the weaker members, those that get caught because they weren't fast or clever enough to evade the dragnet, increase the average level of competency when they do get caught. Those that remain are the more fit. It's not the conditions that kill, but the inability to meet them. Desire is necessary, but not solely sufficient.

Self regulation is self interest plus self control. Let logic guide your greed, not the other way around.

[Ente]

Will you two cut it off already?
I understand there is little news in this thread.
Still, please find the solution for a perfect society in PMs or in OT.
Thank you.

Ente

[mobodick]

Don't you understand? This is exactly the way it is supposed to be. Free market not only gives freedom to individuals; it also liberates the society from weak members. We all have much to learn. We must be responsible, cautious, wise... Some of us already are, others are learning it the hard way.

So like...a team of champions but not a champion team?

Weak is by definition of task.

You don't get it, do you? I'm not on your team. Nobody is. Only you are on your "team". Only I am on mine. Self-regulation = self interest+self control.

If that was true you would propably not have food to eat.
Also no internet.

As it happens, one of the best ways for long-term profit on the market is to provide goods and services to others. They need these things (like food and internet), and if you can provide them, you can turn a pretty penny. You're still looking out for yourself, but you're doing it by helping others.

With current technology standards I'm afraid that the best way for long term profits is to just rob people and enslave them.
There will be noone to stop someone from doing so.
And the best part is people won't know. They just take out a morgage and bingo.
I don't think this will lead to a productive society.
If there is no protection from excess it will compe to a point when one self-serving corporation will have total control over human life.
Don't like it? Go talk to the rehabilitation manager. They'll implant a chip in your brain that makes you a happy little worker.
Since you have a contract with this company you will of course comply because otherwise your kids get sterilized. Also you will get free food coupons for your compliance and because of your protest you havent got payed for 2 weeks.

A completely unregulated market will create monopolies and in these times it could very well mean the end of human freedom as we know it.
A completely selfish multinational monopoly will keep you alive just enough to spend your life working for them.
Think of china as a global corporation and you have your future.
Fun little world you imagine.

[myrkul]

With current technology standards I'm afraid that the best way for long term profits is to just rob people and enslave them.
There will be noone to stop someone from doing so.
And the best part is people won't know. They just take out a morgage and bingo.
I don't think this will lead to a productive society.
If there is no protection from excess it will compe to a point when one self-serving corporation will have total control over human life.
Don't like it? Go talk to the rehabilitation manager. They'll implant a chip in your brain that makes you a happy little worker.
Since you have a contract with this company you will of course comply because otherwise your kids get sterilized. Also you will get free food coupons for your compliance and because of your protest you havent got payed for 2 weeks.

A completely unregulated market will create monopolies and in these times it could very well mean the end of human freedom as we know it.
A completely selfish multinational monopoly will keep you alive just enough to spend your life working for them.
Think of china as a global corporation and you have your future.
Fun little world you imagine.

I think you're projecting, here. This isn't my world you're imagining, it's yours. The problem is this assumption right here: "A completely unregulated market will create monopolies"

How?

I can explain how it will destroy monopolies, but I want to see your reasoning, first.

[unclescrooge]

Don't you understand? This is exactly the way it is supposed to be. Free market not only gives freedom to individuals; it also liberates the society from weak members. We all have much to learn. We must be responsible, cautious, wise... Some of us already are, others are learning it the hard way.

So like...a team of champions but not a champion team?

Weak is by definition of task.

You don't get it, do you? I'm not on your team. Nobody is. Only you are on your "team". Only I am on mine. Self-regulation = self interest+self control.

If that was true you would propably not have food to eat.
Also no internet.

As it happens, one of the best ways for long-term profit on the market is to provide goods and services to others. They need these things (like food and internet), and if you can provide them, you can turn a pretty penny. You're still looking out for yourself, but you're doing it by helping others.

With current technology standards I'm afraid that the best way for long term profits is to just rob people and enslave them.
There will be noone to stop someone from doing so.
And the best part is people won't know. They just take out a morgage and bingo.
I don't think this will lead to a productive society.
If there is no protection from excess it will compe to a point when one self-serving corporation will have total control over human life.
Don't like it? Go talk to the rehabilitation manager. They'll implant a chip in your brain that makes you a happy little worker.
Since you have a contract with this company you will of course comply because otherwise your kids get sterilized. Also you will get free food coupons for your compliance and because of your protest you havent got payed for 2 weeks.

A completely unregulated market will create monopolies and in these times it could very well mean the end of human freedom as we know it.
A completely selfish multinational monopoly will keep you alive just enough to spend your life working for them.
Think of china as a global corporation and you have your future.
Fun little world you imagine.

So we live in a world where we have monopolies maintained by violence (governements), where freedom erodes every passing month with every new laws pooped by the power the be. But we can't have a free market (which by definition means that everyone is free and entitled to the same rights) because it will leads to less freedom and monopolies?

I'm trying to follow the anti-capitalist propag reasonning here.

[justusranvier]

So we live in a world where we have monopolies maintained by violence (governements), where freedom erodes every passing month with every new laws pooped by the power the be. But we can't have a free market (which by definition means that everyone is free and entitled to the same rights) because it will leads to less freedom and monopolies?

I'm trying to follow the anti-capitalist propag reasonning here.

The relevant question is not "will it lead to more or less freedom?", but ""freedom for whom?"

A free market will lead to less freedom for the rent-seekers to exploit everybody else.

[mobodick]

With current technology standards I'm afraid that the best way for long term profits is to just rob people and enslave them.
There will be noone to stop someone from doing so.
And the best part is people won't know. They just take out a morgage and bingo.
I don't think this will lead to a productive society.
If there is no protection from excess it will compe to a point when one self-serving corporation will have total control over human life.
Don't like it? Go talk to the rehabilitation manager. They'll implant a chip in your brain that makes you a happy little worker.
Since you have a contract with this company you will of course comply because otherwise your kids get sterilized. Also you will get free food coupons for your compliance and because of your protest you havent got payed for 2 weeks.

A completely unregulated market will create monopolies and in these times it could very well mean the end of human freedom as we know it.
A completely selfish multinational monopoly will keep you alive just enough to spend your life working for them.
Think of china as a global corporation and you have your future.
Fun little world you imagine.

I think you're projecting, here. This isn't my world you're imagining, it's yours. The problem is this assumption right here: "A completely unregulated market will create monopolies"

How?

I can explain how it will destroy monopolies, but I want to see your reasoning, first.

Unregulated market == dog eat dog.
At some point the top dog will assert itself and will be selfish.
At this point smaller dogs can be eliminated.
Want to protest that the working conditions are bad?
Tough luck, top dog controls food supply so you shut up.
Want to start your own farm to grow your own food?
Tough luck, top dog owns the land that you are alowed to live on.
It would bring us a new era of feudalism.
Check history on how far that got humanity...
Check history also on why people gave their lifes to change this system after enlightment hit them.

[amgomez]

So we live in a world where we have monopolies maintained by violence (governements), where freedom erodes every passing month with every new laws pooped by the power the be. But we can't have a free market (which by definition means that everyone is free and entitled to the same rights) because it will leads to less freedom and monopolies?

I'm trying to follow the anti-capitalist propag reasonning here.

The relevant question is not "will it lead to more or less freedom?", but ""freedom for whom?"

A free market will lead to less freedom for the rent-seekers to exploit everybody else.

+1

I can't agree... more.

[JoelKatz]

Is there any proof yet that this is a pure ponzi?

It depends what you mean by "pure ponzi". I can think of a few possible (though frankly, not very likely) scenarios that might not be considered a "pure" Ponzi.

For example, Pirate might have operated as a Ponzi scheme to build up investment thinking that once he had enough coins, he could make enough money by manipulating the market to pay everyone back. Or Pirate might have operated as a Ponzi scheme while selling all excess Bitcoins for USD figuring he could continue operation until a "BTC crash" where he could use the USD to buy everyone's Bitcoins back.

Some people might not consider these "pure" Ponzi schemes since the operator had an expectation the scheme would make a profit or because some legitimate investment were made in addition to the classic Ponzi mechanism.

But the evidence is all but conclusive at this point that the primary mechanism of the scheme was to pay off previous investors with funds deposited by new investors. Likely Pirate was also trying to make money with the funds he had at the same time, possibly to only enrich himself or possibly with the unrealistic fantasy that he'd make some huge killing that would let him pay everyone back.

[Frankie]

But the evidence is all but conclusive at this point that the primary mechanism of the scheme was to pay off previous investors with funds deposited by new investors. Likely Pirate was also trying to make money with the funds he had at the same time, possibly to only enrich himself or possibly with the unrealistic fantasy that he'd make some huge killing that would let him pay everyone back.

Yeah; some Ponzi schemes have been started by people who believe that they can or will be able to make enough money to pay the exponential interest. Some operators may be willfully deluding themselves into believing they can cover the losses, just as Ponzi investors may choose to be ignorant of the scheme's nature.

It's human behavior, so difficult to cleanly define, but at bottom the result turns out to be the same: New investments pay off old until they don't.

[Stephen Gornick]

Usury

Usury refers to the charging of an exorbitant interest rate on a loan. Texas state laws specify maximum legal interest rates for certain loans like commercial loans.

Commercial loans are made primarily for the operation of a business or for investment, agriculture or similar ventures. Commercial loans are authorized by Chapter 306 of the Texas Finance Code and can not bear more than 18 percent of interest annually although the loan may float with inflation to 24 percent. Commercial loans exceeding $250,000 can bear up to 28 percent.

 - https://www.oag.state.tx.us/consumer/loans.shtml

So, you loaned money to BS&T.  Say it was 100 BTC on April 30  and the exchange rate was $6.

So today, four months later, you are owed no more than $600 principal plus $36 interest (calculated as 4 months at the maximum 18% APR, any more and that is unenforceable as it is legally usurious).

So he pays you $636 and he has settled, in full.

U.S. dollars must be accepted for all debts, public and private.

If you would like that as 58.7 BTC ($636 paid out at today's exchange rate) I'm sure that it would be acceptable for you to request that as your payment method.

[AndrewBUD]

Wow.. I guess they found a way to screw everyone.... So will it work out that everyone lent out their bitcoins for free due to the large hike in value?


Nice,,, seems like a big fuck you.......

[Raoul Duke]

U.S. dollars must be accepted for all debts, public and private.

Not where I live...

Also, about usury: not one user charged 7% to pirateat40. He was the one to set the rates, not us.

[MrTeal]

Usury

Usury refers to the charging of an exorbitant interest rate on a loan. Texas state laws specify maximum legal interest rates for certain loans like commercial loans.

Commercial loans are made primarily for the operation of a business or for investment, agriculture or similar ventures. Commercial loans are authorized by Chapter 306 of the Texas Finance Code and can not bear more than 18 percent of interest annually although the loan may float with inflation to 24 percent. Commercial loans exceeding $250,000 can bear up to 28 percent.

 - https://www.oag.state.tx.us/consumer/loans.shtml

So, you loaned money to BS&T.  Say it was 100 BTC on April 30  and the exchange rate was $6.

So today, four months later, you are owed no more than $600 principal plus $36 interest (calculated as 4 months at the maximum 18% APR, any more and that is unenforceable as it is legally usurious).

So he pays you $636 and he has settled, in full.

U.S. dollars must be accepted for all debts, public and private.

If you would like that as 58.7 BTC ($636 paid out at today's exchange rate) I'm sure that it would be acceptable for you to request that as your payment method.

On the bolded part, are you sure the price is indexed to the value of the asset at the time of the loan or at the time of discharge? Or would he owe 100BTC * 1.06 = 106BTC, payable either in the terms of the contract (BTC) or in the equivalent USD?