|
Factory
|
 |
August 15, 2012, 09:20:34 PM |
|
I just wanted to give my thanks for this list. Everyone should read it over once.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
August 29, 2012, 01:43:35 AM |
|
I'm at odds about how to handle the recent occurrences. Please read this and offer suggestions accordingly. |
|
|
|
|
|
finkleshnorts
|
|
August 29, 2012, 01:49:02 AM |
|
he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC. Nice thread, btw.
|
|
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
August 29, 2012, 01:49:59 AM |
|
he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.
Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage. New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though. Ah, found the citation (it was from the Verge, which cited Maged's post containing Pirate's own words). This thread, if anyone is curious. |
|
|
|
|
Littleshop
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1003
|
|
August 29, 2012, 02:03:27 AM |
|
he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.
Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage. New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though. It is a guess though a pretty accurate number could be had if all of the pass-through published data and you added that to bitcoinmax and gpumax. You do have to figure that the interest is not real though. If you deposited 100 BTC in the beginning and it compounded to 300 BTC it should be counted as 100 BTC. Pirate may have lied to you , but he did not take 300 BTC. |
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
August 29, 2012, 02:05:32 AM |
|
he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.
Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage. New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though. It is a guess though a pretty accurate number could be had if all of the pass-through published data and you added that to bitcoinmax and gpumax. You do have to figure that the interest is not real though. If you deposited 100 BTC in the beginning and it compounded to 300 BTC it should be counted as 100 BTC. Pirate may have lied to you , but he did not take 300 BTC. I prefer to stay away from reconstructions expect as a last resort. Do any Pirate insiders have a more accurate number? If none of these numbers are available, interest can be estimated by estimating growth, which can be inferred from GLBSE passthrough volumes. |
|
|
|
|
|
dust
|
|
August 29, 2012, 02:05:49 AM |
|
he actually "stole" much less than 500,00 BTC.
Could you please elaborate? I am trying to collect as many sources as possible to provide an objective but accurate estimate to the extent of damage. New source states 500000 BTC stolen: DailyTech. Uncited, though. Ah, found the citation (it was from the Verge, which cited Maged's post containing Pirate's own words). This thread, if anyone is curious. In a ponzi scheme, investors are paid out with other investors money. The operator never has enough money to cover everyone withdrawing at once. So while there is BTC500k on paper, much fewer real coins exist if in fact pirate was running a ponzi. |
|
|
|
|
finkleshnorts
|
|
August 29, 2012, 02:08:31 AM |
|
Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.
|
|
|
|
|
|
finkleshnorts
|
|
August 29, 2012, 02:09:10 AM |
|
I think nanotube has access to all account information? maybe I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
August 29, 2012, 02:19:31 AM |
|
Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.
Okay, I understand what you are saying. Before I doze off (it's late here!), I will publish my thoughts on a ballpark guess (not an estimate, just wild speculation). Let T be 500000 BTC (the total amount in the fund), I be the total interest credited. As the scheme was not 500000 BTC from the start, there must have been a growth. Assume that growth started April at 10000 BTC. This works out to 25% growth in the scheme per week, which is reasonable. The geometric sequence based on this growth extrapolates to 140000 BTC interest, which we can round up to 150000 BTC. This is reasonable, and implies the total amount stolen is near 350000 BTC. |
|
|
|
|
|
finkleshnorts
|
|
August 29, 2012, 04:56:07 PM |
|
That's probably a good ballpark. I think over the next few weeks we will have a lot more details on the deposit specifics.
|
|
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
August 30, 2012, 11:57:54 PM |
|
Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
unclescrooge
|
|
August 31, 2012, 08:46:27 AM |
|
Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.
No proof of that unfortunately. |
|
|
|
|
proudhon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1311
|
|
August 31, 2012, 12:42:04 PM |
|
Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.
Also, it doesn't matter if tomorrow he pays back every last bitcent. It will still have been the case that he was in default. |
Bitcoin Fact: the price of bitcoin will not be greater than $70k for more than 25 consecutive days at any point in the rest of recorded human history.
|
|
|
|
makomk
|
|
September 02, 2012, 11:29:53 AM |
|
Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.
This is assuming that Pirate isn't understating the total paper value of everyone's balances at BTCS&T. Some have theorized that the paper loss is much higher than that and that just the actual principle lost alone could reach 500,000 BTC. Maged seems to reckon based on blockchain analysis that Pirate alone made off with about 200,000 BTC from this, not counting the money paid out as interest, though sadly he doesn't seem to be able to publish details of that analysis. |
Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so. SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS |
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
September 02, 2012, 02:12:40 PM |
|
Basically, the investors had built their accounts up to over 500,000 BTC collectively via compound interest, so they feel like they lost more bitcoins than they actually had. Those bitcoins never existed. Only the principle deposited and whatever pirate made from his market shenanigans were available to the fund.
This is assuming that Pirate isn't understating the total paper value of everyone's balances at BTCS&T. Some have theorized that the paper loss is much higher than that and that just the actual principle lost alone could reach 500,000 BTC. Maged seems to reckon based on blockchain analysis that Pirate alone made off with about 200,000 BTC from this, not counting the money paid out as interest, though sadly he doesn't seem to be able to publish details of that analysis. 200000 BTC is an even lower estimate than 350000 BTC I gave, but I figure also more accurate. If worse goes to worst, then that is the figure I may preliminarily use. |
|
|
|
|
LoweryCBS
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
firstbits 1LoCBS
|
|
September 04, 2012, 07:51:02 PM |
|
Keeping up with this list is getting to be a full time job lately. (bitfloor coin theft details)
|
|
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
September 04, 2012, 09:28:29 PM |
|
Keeping up with this list is getting to be a full time job lately. (bitfloor coin theft details)
Thank you. New theft: Bitfloor. Ranks #5 (preliminary, not including Pirate). |
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
|
|
September 05, 2012, 01:14:36 AM |
|
New theft: Bitfloor. Ranks #5 (preliminary, not including Pirate). A quarter million dollars worth of funds gone and it only ranks fifth? Incidentally, the list ordered by USD is missing a few ..., this BitFloor event and also the Linode (Bitcoina, Slush and Faucet), Bitcionica (May) and Bitcoinica (June) events. - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0#post_sect_listby_usd |
|
|
|
dree12 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1077
|
|
September 05, 2012, 07:52:34 PM |
|
New theft: Bitfloor. Ranks #5 (preliminary, not including Pirate). A quarter million dollars worth of funds gone and it only ranks fifth? Incidentally, the list ordered by USD is missing a few ..., this BitFloor event and also the Linode (Bitcoina, Slush and Faucet), Bitcionica (May) and Bitcoinica (June) events. - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0#post_sect_listby_usdThe USD list is missing a lot, most of them. I will fix that. On a related note, this thread has just gotten slashdotted or something, because it jumped from ~5000 views to ~8000. |
|
|
|
|
|
