Bitcoin Video Series Available

[SgtSpike]

Hi everyone,

This was not an attempt to deceive, this is just a segmentation issue.  We have a social team who is responsible for handling all of our social media efforts, while I am just the web analytics guy who is also a Bitcoin enthusiast.  I'm not in sales, and the series is free, which I tried to emphasize, so I didn't mean any harm.

I knew that this link was going to go out on the official channels on Twitter, FB, and reddit, but I was afraid that it wouldn't hit the places I personally thought that it would be most valuable, in these threads where I tend to be.

I thought that from my posts it was clear that I was involved, but I could have done a better job of making that clear at the beginning, which also would have made it obvious that my posts here were in only a semi-official capacity as a guy who loves Bitcoin and is excited that his company does too.

This is why we have people who do this professionally, and I shouldn't have stepped on their toes, but I assure you that I just wanted to make sure more people saw that we had a free Bitcoin video series.

Mea culpa, but I would still love to see feedback on the actual video content.

Please share how your first post made it "clear that [you] were involved"?  Because I fail to see it.

Stop beating around the bush.  Just admit that you screwed up.  This WAS an attempt to deceive (you were trying to make us believe that you were unaffiliated with the content you were advertising) - you attempted to share the videos as a third party when you were not.

I am very willing to forgive and forget when the person who screwed up is willing to admit their mistake.  But when you refuse to admit your mistake, it just makes you look bad and digs you a deeper hole.

[1715422903]

1715422903

[1715422903]

1715422903

[1715422903]

1715422903

[1715422903]

1715422903

[Zebulon Pike]

Sgt Spike:  I thought that as I was posting using the pronoun "we" in all of the answers to the first reply regarding the browser problems, it would be understood that I work at CBT Nuggets.

I have taken, and continue to take, full responsibility and admit my error, and I have already apologized to other members who posted in the thread personally.  As soon as I saw that there was an problem I issued a literal "mea culpa," and I extend the apology to you as well.

To be clear, I am fully recognizing that I made a mistake, and I thought that I had done so earlier, but lest I once again cause confusion:  I screwed up, and I am sorry.

[dooglus]

The videos are pretty good, but I found they're much longer than they need to be to cover the ground.  Get to the point.

There are a few mistakes.  Wish I'd made notes as I watched.  One was when you claim to be able to send fractions of a bitcent without incurring a few, when you can't.  You show on blockchain.info's wallet where you send 0.0001 or so and it shows up as 0.0006 (0.0005 is fee).  That's a 500% fee!    In general if a transaction has any output that's less than 0.01 BTC then a fee of at least 0.0005 BTC is required.

You keep talking about addresses being "linked to a wallet", whereas a wallet is really just a bunch of private keys, each of which corresponds to an address.  The same private key can be in multiple wallets, and there's no "link" from an address to a wallet - it's more the other way around.  The wallet contains the address.

Also, in the paper wallet video you forgot to blur out the private keys.  I guess they've been emptied by now.  The couple  I checked were empty already.

Also in the paper wallet one, you suggest taking a photo of your paper wallet printout and keeping it online.  That's a pretty bad idea, even if you do keep the photo encrypted.  The whole point of paper wallets is that you don't trust your computer not to have malware on it.

[Zebulon Pike]

We appreciate the feedback, Dooglus.  I will be making a list from all of the comments in these forums to make sure that we can address the issues, though for the published ones it might have to come at the end once the upcoming videos in the series are done. 

There have been a number of comments to the effect of "too long to get to it" on the first video, but I think that one in particular was intended for people who were completely unfamiliar with Bitcoin and needed to first understand why we would need an alternative currency type to begin with.

[dooglus]

There have been a number of comments to the effect of "too long to get to it" on the first video, but I think that one in particular was intended for people who were completely unfamiliar with Bitcoin and needed to first understand why we would need an alternative currency type to begin with.

I think it's more of a general comment though.  For example, in the truecrypt video I lost count of the number of times you told me the encrypted files were all really just one big file called boring.dat.

One time you called it something different too - not "truecrypt" but something else - "drivecrypt" perhaps?  I forget.  Maybe there's a similar product you got mixed up with.

Are you Keith by the way?

[Zebulon Pike]

I think it's more of a general comment though.  For example, in the truecrypt video I lost count of the number of times you told me the encrypted files were all really just one big file called boring.dat.

One time you called it something different too - not "truecrypt" but something else - "drivecrypt" perhaps?  I forget.  Maybe there's a similar product you got mixed up with.

Are you Keith by the way?

I wish that I were!  But alas, I am just a CBT employee who happened to already have accounts on the Bitcoin forums.  I do e-mail him though, so I can get information to him.

This isn't a "so I have a friend named Keith..." situation.