Gigamining / Teramining

[Bitcoin Oz]

Scammer tags are meaningless.

[Daily Anarchist]

Scammer tags are meaningless.

Take over 100k for a scammer tag? Sign me up!

[pieppiep]

Theory like that.

Let's suppose Nefario removed some real asset holders from the list, to put false information for addresses controlled by him.  Based on the data GLBSE requested to make an account, it's probably a bunch of usernames with BTC address and assets ID. It's not that hard for Nefario to create a dozen of BTC addresses and simply change some of the address in the list. What happen if gigavps blindly follow the list without any verification?

Don't forget Nefario IS a scammer and has proven himself untrustworthy.

I don't own any gigamining assets, I'm simply looking at that and consider that gigavps is in a "damned if you, damned if you don't" situation.

To be honest, the only reason I vote for scammer tag is because he's gone to a lawyer. I understand that many on this forum aren't anarchists, but from an anarchist's point of view, going to a lawyer to solve your disputes is like going to your local KKK.

Calling a criminal organization for help is never a good idea.

What's the alternative? It's shitty, no doubt. Had I been in Giga's shoes I never would have contacted a lawyer to get the list, which means I likely never would have gotten the list, which means all share holders get F'ed. I probably would have just donated all of the proceeds to charities or something. At least then I couldn't be accused of benefiting from others' loss.

Anarchism is such a stupid thing.
If giga would be an anarchist he would just keep the bitcoins. If someone comes whining about it, he just hires some big guys to break the bones of the whiner. The whiner won't go to the police or what ever because of '**** the regime'.

[SAC]

At least then I couldn't be accused of benefiting from others' loss.

That was the entire business model of these mining bonds to start with it is not like they we ever good deal. Oh and if you cast your gaze back in this thread you will see everyones favorite starfish at the moment pointing out the problems this issue had from the start.

As disclosure, I have subscribed for 500 bonds, and I am very annoyed at the heavy handed "regulator" approach apparently being shown by GLBSE.  I have offered (elsewhere) to run a bond register to facilitate and track user trades for free if GLBSE continues their ridiculous posturing and choses not to register one of the largest and more respectable potential issues we have seen for some time.

This whole farce now playing at this point in time was easily foreseeable yet nothing was done to ensure the running of this venture in the event of further problems like at the beginning

[fcmatt]

He was paying out before.. Why is he not paying out now? Did the bitcoin addresses go bad when glcrapbse went down?

I find it hilarious one runs a biz and trusts some dork of a 3rd party with key info. Talk about foolish and not needed.

[Daily Anarchist]

Theory like that.

Let's suppose Nefario removed some real asset holders from the list, to put false information for addresses controlled by him.  Based on the data GLBSE requested to make an account, it's probably a bunch of usernames with BTC address and assets ID. It's not that hard for Nefario to create a dozen of BTC addresses and simply change some of the address in the list. What happen if gigavps blindly follow the list without any verification?

Don't forget Nefario IS a scammer and has proven himself untrustworthy.

I don't own any gigamining assets, I'm simply looking at that and consider that gigavps is in a "damned if you, damned if you don't" situation.

To be honest, the only reason I vote for scammer tag is because he's gone to a lawyer. I understand that many on this forum aren't anarchists, but from an anarchist's point of view, going to a lawyer to solve your disputes is like going to your local KKK.

Calling a criminal organization for help is never a good idea.

What's the alternative? It's shitty, no doubt. Had I been in Giga's shoes I never would have contacted a lawyer to get the list, which means I likely never would have gotten the list, which means all share holders get F'ed. I probably would have just donated all of the proceeds to charities or something. At least then I couldn't be accused of benefiting from others' loss.

Anarchism is such a stupid thing.
If giga would be an anarchist he would just keep the bitcoins. If someone comes whining about it, he just hires some big guys to break the bones of the whiner. The whiner won't go to the police or what ever because of '**** the regime'.

In absence of the state, if Giga keeps the money, there are a thousand bond holders with an incentive to put a bounty on his head.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Scammer tags are meaningless.

Take over 100k for a scammer tag? Sign me up!

You too can fly to vegas and have dinner with a pirate and become an upstanding community member all for the measly price of 100k

[Bitcoin Oz]

Theory like that.

Let's suppose Nefario removed some real asset holders from the list, to put false information for addresses controlled by him.  Based on the data GLBSE requested to make an account, it's probably a bunch of usernames with BTC address and assets ID. It's not that hard for Nefario to create a dozen of BTC addresses and simply change some of the address in the list. What happen if gigavps blindly follow the list without any verification?

Don't forget Nefario IS a scammer and has proven himself untrustworthy.

I don't own any gigamining assets, I'm simply looking at that and consider that gigavps is in a "damned if you, damned if you don't" situation.

To be honest, the only reason I vote for scammer tag is because he's gone to a lawyer. I understand that many on this forum aren't anarchists, but from an anarchist's point of view, going to a lawyer to solve your disputes is like going to your local KKK.

Calling a criminal organization for help is never a good idea.

What's the alternative? It's shitty, no doubt. Had I been in Giga's shoes I never would have contacted a lawyer to get the list, which means I likely never would have gotten the list, which means all share holders get F'ed. I probably would have just donated all of the proceeds to charities or something. At least then I couldn't be accused of benefiting from others' loss.

Anarchism is such a stupid thing.
If giga would be an anarchist he would just keep the bitcoins. If someone comes whining about it, he just hires some big guys to break the bones of the whiner. The whiner won't go to the police or what ever because of '**** the regime'.

In absence of the state, if Giga keeps the money, there are a thousand bond holders with an incentive to put a bounty on his head.

Lets be honest, no one will do anything. And the crooks know it 

[SAC]

He was paying out before.. Why is he not paying out now? Did the bitcoin addresses go bad when glcrapbse went down?

Yes and to expand all the information required to determine the payments/ownership of the bonds is contained in the payments made that are in the blockchain. It should be simple enough to continue the payments due based on list of address in already sent payments since those are based on the bonds owned by that address you have your ownership determined.. Too simple a solution with not enough scam potential in it so probably why it was not thought of to be used.

[MPOE-PR]

If ownership of an address cannot be established (particularly in conjunction with an email address), then sadly no further action can be taken. In this circumstance, responsibility rests with the address owner as it is completely outside of giga's control, as well as nefario's.

Yes, well, here's the thing: in your model, if a person can't sign with the address presented as "of record", sadly no action can be taken. This splits the Fo in two: those who can prove it to this standard and those who can't. Neither set is void, so some innocents will be slaughtered.

In Giga's model, as long as a person is willing to swear that they indeed do own the shares, they will (I imagine?) likely get them even without the extra step of signing with the btc address. Obviously the requirement to swear, which implies both identifying themselves and doing some clerical work (apostille etc) also splits Fo in two: those who will and those who won't. Neither set is void here either, so some innocents will be slaughtered here too.

In this sense, the models are not significantly different: they both try to solve a situation as best possible. You are arguing for one rather than the other, which is fine. The OP not picking your favorite is not necessarily a crime: the model he did pick has significant advantages (it is legally sound, for one; it allows the users themselves to choose whether they want to be slaughtered or not, as opposed to just "Oops, you hadn't stamped a card on Aug 17th? Ah well, poopy for you" for another).

However, from the contact I've received, the process appears to be above-board (both from the asset-issues and nefario) and I'm inclined to accept it as legitimate thus far.

The problem, however, is that whether you accept it or not is irrelevant. You're not the standard to measure this by. I'm not either, nor is anyone else (or even, "everyone else", as in, all the F in corpus).

A good representation of the kernel of the problem is right here: we used to have a measuring stick. It burned. Now we have no measuring stick.

Attempts to make the solution acceptable as legitimate by the measuring stick of traditional last resort (ie, courts and the law) are the only sane approach, exactly because Bitcoin is decentralized, it has no authority, no way to issue statutory protections etc (a point discussed in passing in the GPG contracts article).

Sure, it'd have been better if the measuring stick hadn't burned. We agree. However, it doesn't seem that Gigavps set it on fire, as best I can tell.

[Bitcoin Oz]

He was paying out before.. Why is he not paying out now? Did the bitcoin addresses go bad when glcrapbse went down?

Yes and to expand all the information required to determine the payments/ownership of the bonds is contained in the payments made that are in the blockchain. It should be simple enough to continue the payments due based on list of address in already sent payments since those are based on the bonds owned by that address you have your ownership determined.. Too simple a solution with not enough scam potential in it so probably why it was not thought of to be used.

Perpetual mining bonds are a scam to begin with. Its probably a good thing they wont be able to continue on such a  massive scale.

[kjlimo]

I'm glad so many people are posting great questions.

I look forward to Giga's response on Monday.

[jamesg]

I'll post this again since it's already been buried.

To the bitcoin community:

We are all in the very unenviable position of riding in the wake of the aftermath of James McCarthy. I have been placed in a very bad spot in this wake, and my only goal is to protect and serve Gigaminers as I have over the last half year.

I would like to point out that I am the only asset issuer on GLBSE, as far as I am aware, who is trying to move forward and abide by all the laws of local, state, federal and international law. I am the only asset issuer, as far as I am aware, to hire legal counsel and to send via certified mail, a demand letter to James McCarthy after multiple unanswered emails and phone calls. I am fairly confident that the asset lists only started arriving once the letter was received.

Further more, how exactly would you like me to handle situations where claims are made against gigamining that are not in the list provided from GLBSE? Should I and all Gigaminers just keep trusting nefario? This is the exact reason to have a claims process in the first place. Nefario is withholding information for a mistake he made, Gigaminers should not have to suffer because of Nefario's mistakes any longer.

I have received claims for over 10% of Gigamining that are NOT on the lists given to me by GLBSE. This is a significant percentage and it warrants the claims process.

Finally, what should happen if I pay the wrong individual a large amount of the held coins? Guess what, I'm still on the hook according to the law. It is only right to protect the interests of all Gigaminers by making sure I have legal recourse should such a situation occur.

I hope it is clear that I am only trying to clean up and move forward from the situation at hand.

Best regards,
James

[SAC]

I'll post this again since it's already been buried.

To the bitcoin community:

We are all in the very unenviable position of riding in the wake of the aftermath of James McCarthy. I have been placed in a very bad spot in this wake, and my only goal is to protect and serve Gigaminers as I have over the last half year.

Yet you could not be bothered with having a backup plan in place for the bonds issued after such a troubled launch.

[Bitcoin Oz]

I'll post this again since it's already been buried.

To the bitcoin community:

We are all in the very unenviable position of riding in the wake of the aftermath of James McCarthy. I have been placed in a very bad spot in this wake, and my only goal is to protect and serve Gigaminers as I have over the last half year.

I would like to point out that I am the only asset issuer on GLBSE, as far as I am aware, who is trying to move forward and abide by all the laws of local, state, federal and international law. I am the only asset issuer, as far as I am aware, to hire legal counsel and to send via certified mail, a demand letter to James McCarthy after multiple unanswered emails and phone calls. I am fairly confident that the asset lists only started arriving once the letter was received.

Further more, how exactly would you like me to handle situations where claims are made against gigamining that are not in the list provided from GLBSE? Should I and all Gigaminers just keep trusting nefario? This is the exact reason to have a claims process in the first place. Nefario is withholding information for a mistake he made, Gigaminers should not have to suffer because of Nefario's mistakes any longer.

I have received claims for over 10% of Gigamining that are NOT on the lists given to me by GLBSE. This is a significant percentage and it warrants the claims process.

Finally, what should happen if I pay the wrong individual a large amount of the held coins? Guess what, I'm still on the hook according to the law. It is only right to protect the interests of all Gigaminers by making sure I have legal recourse should such a situation occur.

I hope it is clear that I am only trying to clean up and move forward from the situation at hand.

Best regards,
James

Did you have any plan at all for what would happen to your business if glbse went  down? If not, what are you doing running such a  large business in the first place. Do you even have business insurance ? Do you even have a business plan that considered these risks ?

[MPOE-PR]

Did you have any plan at all for what would happen to your business if glbse went  down? If not, what are you doing running such a  large business in the first place. Do you even have business insurance ? Do you even have a business plan that considered these risks ?

This coming from GLBSE shareholderX has such a lulzy feel to it.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Did you have any plan at all for what would happen to your business if glbse went  down? If not, what are you doing running such a  large business in the first place. Do you even have business insurance ? Do you even have a business plan that considered these risks ?

This coming from GLBSE shareholderX has such a lulzy feel to it.

Since when are shareholders responsible for the actions of company officers ?

Do you have the power to tell steve jobs how to design an iphone because you own a few apple shares ?

[Bitcoin Oz]

Did you have any plan at all for what would happen to your business if glbse went  down? If not, what are you doing running such a  large business in the first place. Do you even have business insurance ? Do you even have a business plan that considered these risks ?

This coming from GLBSE shareholderX has such a lulzy feel to it.

Will people who buy MPEX shares be liable if Mr Popescu shuts down and runs off with everyones coins ?

[kjlimo]

Did you have any plan at all for what would happen to your business if glbse went  down? If not, what are you doing running such a  large business in the first place. Do you even have business insurance ? Do you even have a business plan that considered these risks ?

This coming from GLBSE shareholderX has such a lulzy feel to it.

Since when are shareholders responsible for the actions of company officers ?

Do you have the power to tell steve jobs how to design an iphone because you own a few apple shares ?

Exactly, so why are you trying to tell him how to run his business now??!?!?!?!?

haha, burn

[Bitcoin Oz]

Did you have any plan at all for what would happen to your business if glbse went  down? If not, what are you doing running such a  large business in the first place. Do you even have business insurance ? Do you even have a business plan that considered these risks ?

This coming from GLBSE shareholderX has such a lulzy feel to it.

Since when are shareholders responsible for the actions of company officers ?

Do you have the power to tell steve jobs how to design an iphone because you own a few apple shares ?

Exactly, so why are you trying to tell him how to run his business now??!?!?!?!?

haha, burn

Regardless, buying stock in a company doesnt make you liable for its actions.