PirateAt40's Money Laundering Operations: GPUMAX and BST

[symbols]

"I don't always sip fruity drink, but when I do, I sip dos frambuesas"

[splatster]

splatster, while in the US 'innocent until proven guilty' holds, all that is necessary is probable cause to obtain a search warrant that would make proving guilt much easier. In serious money laundering cases, searches/wiretaps/etc have gone on for years prior to the actual indictment. While in the US hacking is still not allowed for obtaining computer records, precedent for offensive information gathering has been set in Germany. Encrypted hard disks provide no defense against that threat vector.

-s

Then why not show your probable cause?  Your argument right now is "He produces high returns and I think he's doing something illegal."  Your hunch is not probable cause.

[symbols]

There's a lot of straw-man arguing in this thread.

Some of us believe that pirate is PROBABLY laundering drug money or something not too far from it.

There's a lot of conjecture about how law enforcement could or could not influence the bitcoin economy.

Some folks are arguing that no-one has proved that pirate is laundering money. Guess what? You're all right! You're also all missing the point: 7% weekly is questionable, to say the least.

It's a rate that is unsustainable unless there are transactions going on at the level of the entire Bitcoin Saving and Trust market cap with a transaction fee greater than 7%. This is relatively easy to achieve in various lines of *questionable* business, accepted as the fee for the added risk of increased scrutiny and potential for legal action (or worse, depending on who your partners are).

I disagree with the notion that pirate going down would hurt bitcoin. I'm indifferent, either way should be fine for bitcoin. Any economy has a continuum of markets, from black through grey to squeaky-clean white. Even black markets have a continuum: hit-money and human trafficking on the one side, and simple goods smuggling and tariff avoidance on the other.

No-one can reasonably argue that pirate is squeaky-clean white, if for no other reason than the incompleteness of his public disclosure.

So what? Decide where you're willing to operate and operate there. Let's skip the 'you don't have proof!' for assertions of opinion.

-s

Then why not show your probable cause?  Your argument right now is "He produces high returns and I think he's doing something illegal."  Your hunch is not probable cause.

I'm not involved in prosecuting anybody, and never claimed my beliefs about pirate's activity constitute probable cause. I was just discussing the parameters affecting the hypothetical situation where a money launderer is being investigated by law enforcement in the US.

As an aside, if law enforcement can convince a judge that a money launderer's operation is 'permeated with fraud', in the specific sense relating to document warrants, they can perform seizure indiscriminately, rather than having to name what they expect to find beforehand. So, effective money laundering requires at least an ostensible cover story to avoid that injunction.

[MarketNeutral]

*sips his fruity drink on his private island while watching the community make him sound like the Most Interesting Man In Bitcoin.

No, Trendon. The Most Interesting Man in Bitcoin is Satoshi Nakamoto.

[dog]

*sips his fruity drink on his private island while watching the community make him sound like the Most Interesting Man In Bitcoin.

No, Trendon. The Most Interesting Man in Bitcoin is Satoshi Nakamoto.

Hello? Yes, this is dog.

[MarketNeutral]

*sips his fruity drink on his private island while watching the community make him sound like the Most Interesting Man In Bitcoin.

No, Trendon. The Most Interesting Man in Bitcoin is Satoshi Nakamoto.

Hello? Yes, this is dog.

Are you the receptionist at Business Cognition? Do you accept bitcoins?

[dog]

Are you the receptionist at Business Cognition? Do you accept bitcoins?

Woof!

[dog]

But more seriously, the unnecessary addition of ", Trendon" (as if that's at all difficult to find or new information, given his #bitcoin-otc profile) to your sentence just comes off as trying too hard.

The way people paint pirateat40, you'd think he really was the most interesting man in the world. I've heard people say he's the secret investor behind bitcoinica, but that he's also the thief behind the coins and is involved in laundering the stolen coins. Others say he's involved in major drug operations. It's astonishing how much of a crime lord the guy is, and how much everyone knows about him given how little he says anywhere public.


Will you be trying to unmask this mysterious "dog" character next? I bet I run a massive prostitution and human slavery ring in bitcoins, or something like that, right?

[MarketNeutral]

But more seriously, the unnecessary addition of ", Trendon" (as if that's at all difficult to find or new information, given his #bitcoin-otc profile) to your sentence just comes off as trying too hard.

The way people paint pirateat40, you'd think he really was the most interesting man in the world. I've heard people say he's the secret investor behind bitcoinica, but that he's also the thief behind the coins and is involved in laundering the stolen coins. Others say he's involved in major drug operations. It's astonishing how much of a crime lord the guy is, and how much everyone knows about him given how little he says anywhere public.


Will you be trying to unmask this mysterious "dog" character next? I bet I run a massive prostitution and human slavery ring in bitcoins, or something like that, right?

Relax. I like dogs.

[splatster]

I'm not involved in prosecuting anybody, and never claimed my beliefs about pirate's activity constitute probable cause. I was just discussing the parameters affecting the hypothetical situation where a money launderer is being investigated by law enforcement in the US.

Hypothetical, or whatever you want to call it, it's all FUD.

[JusticeForYou]

But more seriously, the unnecessary addition of ", Trendon" (as if that's at all difficult to find or new information, given his #bitcoin-otc profile) to your sentence just comes off as trying too hard.

The way people paint pirateat40, you'd think he really was the most interesting man in the world. I've heard people say he's the secret investor behind bitcoinica, but that he's also the thief behind the coins and is involved in laundering the stolen coins. Others say he's involved in major drug operations. It's astonishing how much of a crime lord the guy is, and how much everyone knows about him given how little he says anywhere public.


Will you be trying to unmask this mysterious "dog" character next? I bet I run a massive prostitution and human slavery ring in bitcoins, or something like that, right?

Hey Dawg,

How are you? Is Hawaii still good for business?  I like your show. You always get your man. Your wife looks mean though.

Nice to see that you like Bitcoins. Will you be taking them for Bail-Bonds? I bet that will go over really well here.

[MarketNeutral]

There's a lot of straw-man arguing in this thread.

Some of us believe that pirate is PROBABLY laundering drug money or something not too far from it.

There's a lot of conjecture about how law enforcement could or could not influence the bitcoin economy.

Some folks are arguing that no-one has proved that pirate is laundering money. Guess what? You're all right! You're also all missing the point: 7% weekly is questionable, to say the least.

It's a rate that is unsustainable unless there are transactions going on at the level of the entire Bitcoin Saving and Trust market cap with a transaction fee greater than 7%. This is relatively easy to achieve in various lines of *questionable* business, accepted as the fee for the added risk of increased scrutiny and potential for legal action (or worse, depending on who your partners are).

I disagree with the notion that pirate going down would hurt bitcoin. I'm indifferent, either way should be fine for bitcoin. Any economy has a continuum of markets, from black through grey to squeaky-clean white. Even black markets have a continuum: hit-money and human trafficking on the one side, and simple goods smuggling and tariff avoidance on the other.

No-one can reasonably argue that pirate is squeaky-clean white, if for no other reason than the incompleteness of his public disclosure.

So what? Decide where you're willing to operate and operate there. Let's skip the 'you don't have proof!' for assertions of opinion.

-s

Then why not show your probable cause?  Your argument right now is "He produces high returns and I think he's doing something illegal."  Your hunch is not probable cause.

I'm not involved in prosecuting anybody, and never claimed my beliefs about pirate's activity constitute probable cause. I was just discussing the parameters affecting the hypothetical situation where a money launderer is being investigated by law enforcement in the US.

As an aside, if law enforcement can convince a judge that a money launderer's operation is 'permeated with fraud', in the specific sense relating to document warrants, they can perform seizure indiscriminately, rather than having to name what they expect to find beforehand. So, effective money laundering requires at least an ostensible cover story to avoid that injunction.

+1

Yes, straw-men and red herrings. 
And dogs. 

You make reasonable points, especially about the continuum. Avoiding VAT is not the same as trafficking children. An obvious point, I know, but it bears repeating.

I don't expect to get straight answers that explain the absurd returns, but the lack of a legit answer is what piques people's interest, including mine. Yes, I am calling out Pirate. Is he running a ponzi scheme? Probably.

Pirate/Trendon is not obliged to explain himself to us, but neither does seeking answers constitute FUD.

So-called 'Pass through bonds' issued by someone who called himself 'Pirate' and who had an outstanding hot check warrant? Years from now a much larger bitcoin community will find this funny. 



Pirate/Trendon's extraordinary returns obviously bring extraordinary scrutiny. Why would one think otherwise?

[edited for grammar]

[dog]

Pirate/Trendon's extraordinary returns obviously bring extraordinary scrutiny. Why would one think otherwise?

Certainly. I was hoping the scrutiny would be of a higher quality, though. When people make reputation-tarnishing statements about someone based on nothing but idle speculation, it bothers me. I know this forum's membership has an aggregate mean IQ of about 50, but I was disappointed that certain people chimed into this bullshit that I wasn't expecting.

[terrytibbs]

Certainly. I was hoping the scrutiny would be of a higher quality, though. When people make reputation-tarnishing statements about someone based on nothing but idle speculation, it bothers me. I know this forum's membership has an aggregate mean IQ of about 50, but I was disappointed that certain people chimed into this bullshit that I wasn't expecting.

Can we stop the sockpuppetry now, please?

[dog]

Certainly. I was hoping the scrutiny would be of a higher quality, though. When people make reputation-tarnishing statements about someone based on nothing but idle speculation, it bothers me. I know this forum's membership has an aggregate mean IQ of about 50, but I was disappointed that certain people chimed into this bullshit that I wasn't expecting.

Can we stop the sockpuppetry now, please?

Did you have a problem with the OP doing it? What's wrong with it? This isn't about who I am as much as what I'm saying: "Woof" means "Woof" no matter which dog says it.

[notme]

What if the returns for BTCST come from GPUMAX?  He is earning 10% on all purchases after all...  How would that be illegal?

[tgmarks]

If nothing else this will be a fun rant to follow.

[MarketNeutral]

Pirate/Trendon's extraordinary returns obviously bring extraordinary scrutiny. Why would one think otherwise?

Certainly. I was hoping the scrutiny would be of a higher quality, though. When people make reputation-tarnishing statements about someone based on nothing but idle speculation, it bothers me. I know this forum's membership has an aggregate mean IQ of about 50, but I was disappointed that certain people chimed into this bullshit that I wasn't expecting.

Be careful what you wish for.

The scrutiny is there, make no mistake.

"...based on nothing but idle speculation..."? That's funny.

Frankly, I don't hold the members of this forum in such low esteem to consider their mean IQ to be equivalent to one with mental retardation.

Read between the lines. The forum members here are actually quite bright.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who is withholding revealing and damaging information out of respect to all the members of this forum, especially Pirateat40. You think we all rely on google? Woof, woof.

[N12]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who is withholding revealing and damaging information out of respect to all the members of this forum, especially Pirateat40. You think we all rely on google? Woof, woof.

Put up or shut up.

[finkleshnorts]

i am confident that it is a ponzi. I do not have proof, because I do not need proof. If it is a ponzi, there is no proof to be had. Sort of like how you can't prove that unicorns do or don't exist. in what universe does somebody offer 7% weekly when half that much would still have people lining up to get in? The 7% keeps people from withdrawing their principal. It is set at 7% for that reason and no other. If this were a real business, run by a real business man, all of that excess profit would be kept by the promoter. Depositors are too greedy to withdraw with those returns on the table. It really is very simple.

I have only 10 btc in BTCST as I type this (hedged with betsofbitcoin). But that is also most of my bitcoins atm. I am looking for a quick buck or two. But honestly, the sooner this shit defaults, the sooner bitcoin can start recovering from all the damage. But go ahead and flame me anyway.

This is the one post I will make regarding the ponzi issue. Peace.