► ❎ ► LEALANA PHYSICAL LITECOINS FOR SALE - RESUMING SALES!!!

[smoothie]

A delay in funding is not, "forever unfunded".

Even if he dies he said it could get funded.

Could != Would/Will

Keep in mind he would be dead. This would sort of limit his actions and he would thus have to rely on others.

Which still does not make it absolute that the coins will get funded in that case. Hence my inquiry to him about lost/stolen coins and unfunded coins.

He did mention that if he was not around to fund coins then the coins unfunded would be a rare specimen. So perhaps you are right, but we will see what he says about lost/stolen coins and funding of them.

[1715113049]

1715113049

[1715113049]

1715113049

[1715113049]

1715113049

[smoothie]

Here is mike's response to me via email:

I ship only using fully trackable shipping and will avoid funding if the carrier will tell me in writing they lost it.  This applies only to coins I send out, not ones remailed by resellers.

Looks like I'm doing the exact same thing. Coins may exist unfunded if they are reported by the carrier as lost during shipment from mike to the original buyer and in no other circumstances. In a similar circumstance I would be doing the same as it makes the most sense.

If Mike chooses he can verify this quote as I have copy-pasted it here.

Keep in mind that this scenario has not happened for me. So my method of funding will remain until I can see a better way to go about dealing with a situation like this. Given ALL of my packages are going through USPS registered mail, it may be some time until I see this manifest itself.

If a package ever went missing or stolen through the carrier and I got confirmation (in writing as well) I would eat the cost and replace the package to the buyer.

[molecular]

The first bits address you will be able to look up on the litecoin block chain. This has always been an option to verify funds.

I will release a public list of funded addresses in the near future. This way you can cross check to see if the coin being resold (assuming you are buying from someone else besides me) does in fact have coins at the specified address.

Each coin comes with a certificate with the FULL ADDRESS of the coin too.

Firstbits is not sufficient. Recipient of unloaded coin could vanity-gen an address with identical firsbits. You have to use producer list to verify coin.

[smoothie]

The first bits address you will be able to look up on the litecoin block chain. This has always been an option to verify funds.

I will release a public list of funded addresses in the near future. This way you can cross check to see if the coin being resold (assuming you are buying from someone else besides me) does in fact have coins at the specified address.

Each coin comes with a certificate with the FULL ADDRESS of the coin too.

Firstbits is not sufficient. Recipient of unloaded coin could vanity-gen an address with identical firsbits. You have to use producer list to verify coin.

Good point. Then the certificate and the list I provide will be sufficient.

[Otoh]

The first bits address you will be able to look up on the litecoin block chain. This has always been an option to verify funds.

I will release a public list of funded addresses in the near future. This way you can cross check to see if the coin being resold (assuming you are buying from someone else besides me) does in fact have coins at the specified address.

Each coin comes with a certificate with the FULL ADDRESS of the coin too.

Firstbits is not sufficient. Recipient of unloaded coin could vanity-gen an address with identical firsbits. You have to use producer list to verify coin.

Good point. Then the certificate and the list I provide will be sufficient.

Not sure about that, as I understand it, say the coin's FirstBit was Labcde then anyone vanity generating the same would get a FirstBits of Labcdex, so when checking the original Firstbits would show as an unfunded address still.

edit: if FirstBits is just the first 5 chars, ie Labcd, then that would be the coin's & a van-gen would have Labcdx

[smoothie]

Please note that I am shipping through USPS and not UPS.

I know there can be some confusion as they are similar in names. It is worth mentioning once again in case anyone missed it.

[El Cabron]

Looks like I'm doing the exact same thing.

No, Mike has offered to ship coins that have been funded to me personally. You are not doing the same thing. Keep in mind that is what this whole tangent was about. I asked you to do what Mike had offered me. You refused.

You do what you will but let us all be honest about it.

[smoothie]

Looks like I'm doing the exact same thing.

No, Mike has offered to ship coins that have been funded to me personally. You are not doing the same thing. Keep in mind that is what this whole tangent was about. I asked you to do what Mike had offered me. You refused.

You do what you will but let us all be honest about it.

If you had read the OP in its entirety you would have known what was to be expected with this batch.

If what you claim is true then Mike has funded your coins before being delivered and confirmed. That is his choice obviously. It is not up for debate with this current batch.

[Blazed]

Just cant wait to get my "your LTC have shipped" notice!!

[hennessyhemp]

I am also looking forward to getting my coins...any update as to when these begin shipping out?

These are sweet...I can't wait.

[TheSwede75]

Yep, waiting for a shipping notice myself. Will be wanting to order more

[cypherdoc]

@Smoothie,

Gotta give you credit where credit is due

You hit a grand slam with these coins.


~BCX~

hmmm.  someone else used that same analogy just last nite 

[cypherdoc]

The first bits address you will be able to look up on the litecoin block chain. This has always been an option to verify funds.

I will release a public list of funded addresses in the near future. This way you can cross check to see if the coin being resold (assuming you are buying from someone else besides me) does in fact have coins at the specified address.

Each coin comes with a certificate with the FULL ADDRESS of the coin too.

Firstbits is not sufficient. Recipient of unloaded coin could vanity-gen an address with identical firsbits. You have to use producer list to verify coin.

Good point. Then the certificate and the list I provide will be sufficient.

Not sure about that, as I understand it, say the coin's FirstBit was Labcde then anyone vanity generating the same would get a FirstBits of Labcdex, so when checking the original Firstbits would show as an unfunded address still.

edit: if FirstBits is just the first 5 chars, ie Labcd, then that would be the coin's & a van-gen would have Labcdx

i think this is correct.

[molecular]

The first bits address you will be able to look up on the litecoin block chain. This has always been an option to verify funds.

I will release a public list of funded addresses in the near future. This way you can cross check to see if the coin being resold (assuming you are buying from someone else besides me) does in fact have coins at the specified address.

Each coin comes with a certificate with the FULL ADDRESS of the coin too.

Firstbits is not sufficient. Recipient of unloaded coin could vanity-gen an address with identical firsbits. You have to use producer list to verify coin.

Good point. Then the certificate and the list I provide will be sufficient.

Not sure about that, as I understand it, say the coin's FirstBit was Labcde then anyone vanity generating the same would get a FirstBits of Labcdex, so when checking the original Firstbits would show as an unfunded address still.

edit: if FirstBits is just the first 5 chars, ie Labcd, then that would be the coin's & a van-gen would have Labcdx

i think this is correct.

I thought the assumption was smoothie would send unfunded coins. In such a case the attacker firstbits would be Labcd and smoothie would not even load the coin because it was reported "lost" by postal service / recipient / attacker. Therefore everything would look fine (even 10 LTC would be on Labcd) to an unsuspecting user only checking firstbits. Only upon redemption attempt would he find out the private key doesn't match (or when attacker moves the 10 LTC and the user checks the firstbits again).

Also: firstbits is handled a little differently by different sites. For example blockchain.info just searches for the first occurrence of a given prefix (no matter the length).

[Scott J]

I think it would be in the best interest of both casascius and lealana coin owners if there was a guarantee that and un-tampered hologram = a funded coin.

People can check on the internet, but this is a physical coin.

[Noitev]

Why not just register the firstbits by sending like 0.001 ltc to each address and put the rest in later?

[molecular]

Why not just register the firstbits by sending like 0.001 ltc to each address and put the rest in later?

I think this is a good suggestion.

Other remark: Mike is specifically offering delayed loading for customs purposes. Afaik he will fund coins at some point in any case.

[clearcrystal]

Good looking coins

[cypherdoc]

The first bits address you will be able to look up on the litecoin block chain. This has always been an option to verify funds.

I will release a public list of funded addresses in the near future. This way you can cross check to see if the coin being resold (assuming you are buying from someone else besides me) does in fact have coins at the specified address.

Each coin comes with a certificate with the FULL ADDRESS of the coin too.

Firstbits is not sufficient. Recipient of unloaded coin could vanity-gen an address with identical firsbits. You have to use producer list to verify coin.

Good point. Then the certificate and the list I provide will be sufficient.

Not sure about that, as I understand it, say the coin's FirstBit was Labcde then anyone vanity generating the same would get a FirstBits of Labcdex, so when checking the original Firstbits would show as an unfunded address still.

edit: if FirstBits is just the first 5 chars, ie Labcd, then that would be the coin's & a van-gen would have Labcdx

i think this is correct.

I thought the assumption was smoothie would send unfunded coins. In such a case the attacker firstbits would be Labcd and smoothie would not even load the coin because it was reported "lost" by postal service / recipient / attacker. Therefore everything would look fine (even 10 LTC would be on Labcd) to an unsuspecting user only checking firstbits. Only upon redemption attempt would he find out the private key doesn't match (or when attacker moves the 10 LTC and the user checks the firstbits again).

Also: firstbits is handled a little differently by different sites. For example blockchain.info just searches for the first occurrence of a given prefix (no matter the length).

doesn't FirstBits also depend on Labcd being on the blockchain?  that's how it knows that that address is reserved.  anyone generating the next Labcd is forced to add another character/number.

thus, it seems that for the FirstBits to be valid it has to used once, ie, funded by Smoothie.

[weex]

Why not just register the firstbits by sending like 0.001 ltc to each address and put the rest in later?

I think this is a good suggestion.

Other remark: Mike is specifically offering delayed loading for customs purposes. Afaik he will fund coins at some point in any case.

I'd much rather have coins funded with a single output of 10ltc than some 0.001 + 9.999 thing and could care less about first bits. Printing enough characters to discourage a vanitygen prank is easy enough since the time to generate grows quickly with each char.