|
strangerdanger101
|
 |
January 23, 2015, 05:50:55 PM |
|
Uh looks like CoinFire has been hacked or something. It's redirecting to an ads website.
confirmed privacy error  |
What has it got in its pocketses precious? BTC: 1KctJNLwzFK8qJPsSwDrQRNxxKnVCrZm93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Every time a block is mined, a certain amount of BTC (called the
subsidy) is created out of thin air and given to the miner. The
subsidy halves every four years and will reach 0 in about 130 years.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
msarro
|
|
January 23, 2015, 05:53:34 PM |
|
Uh looks like CoinFire has been hacked or something. It's redirecting to an ads website.
confirmed privacy error That means that the URL coinfire.cf takes you to has a different common name on its SSL certificate. It could be something as simple as the website being set to redirect you to www.coinfire.cf and the certificate has coinfire.cf on it. That said, when I go there I'm being taken to a DNS hijack page. |
|
|
|
seedtrue
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 963
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 23, 2015, 05:53:53 PM |
|
Don't worry Homero is hard at work visiting Tesla and stuff...  That is probably the name of his dog. |
|
|
|
|
|
AnimoEsto
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:03:59 PM |
|
They should at least start by releasing the name of that "third party" escrow! "Escrow" is a loosely employed term over there.
Josh confirmed that there is no third party escrow I believe - they will be escrowing customers coins |
|
|
|
|
AnimoEsto
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:04:48 PM |
|
I shouldn't have upset him by using Latin against him  |
|
|
|
not.you
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1726
Merit: 1018
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:09:00 PM |
|
Be careful, as we get closer to feb more people will realize that the "buyback" doesn't actually start till march, and that they will not get their actual 20 for a while.
It doesn't even start in March. The enrollment ends March 2, and buybacks are on the first of the month, so the earliest possible date for the first payment is April 1. The buyback as they've described it is a seriously stupid idea. It gives them a short-term boost at best, for a long-term liability that costs them real money. Plus, after it's started, if they make the payments month after month it's not news after a while, so they get little good PR out of it. But if they ever miss or reduce the payments it's bad PR. I fully expect that if this thing goes forward there won't be any actual payouts. Some sock puppet will pop up on crashtalk (or whatever the hell POS forum they have going at the time) saying "Thanks for buying all my XPY at $20 paybase! You're gawsome!" or some equally brown nosed comment and no actual real purchases will ever take place. It seems equally likely that the whole thing will get quietly pushed to a back burner, then disappeared and forgotten like so many other promises from josh. |
|
|
|
|
Paul Revere
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 406
Merit: 260
The Scamcoats are coming!
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:29:49 PM |
|
*Or the buyback will happen, and all or most of the purchases will be coins belonging to Josh&Co (or inside investors). Perfect way to funnel corporate assets into personal and *anonymous* pockets. I bet that is exactly what went on with the 2 minute "$20 floor" attempt. They funneled company funds into private accounts. They will toss a few bones to some of the believers so they can have a couple of "real" testimonials about how GAW is buying back XPY @ $20.
|
All of my posts are simply statements of my own personal opinions based on available information and pondering what might be possible considering human nature, with the goal of finding truth and preventing fraud. Please look at all of the facts and theories and put your thinking cap on to draw your own conclusions. If you feel that I have made a false statement or have been unnecessarily derogatory, I encourage you to please point it out, and if proven correct and/or reasonable I will remedy it. ~ Paul Revere
|
|
|
|
geegaw
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:30:19 PM |
|
Domain name: COINFIRE.CF is Active Domain Nameservers: NS1.PARKINGCREW.NET NS2.PARKINGCREW.NET Domain registered: 01/23/2015 Record will expire on: 01/23/2016 Record maintained by: Dot CF Domain Registry https://archive.today/prkyI
allcryptocoins posted about an hour ago ,
oh they went down due to DDOS....oh.....such a shame.....pissed off the wrong bunch of people I guess. tear. As I said a few days ago "they will get there's..no worry about that...at all".
Perhaps someone got into their registrar and changed some things....hmmm...tooo bad...guess we will never know
Also they are setting up cloudflare to try to avoid this, ha. This is why it appears down at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
cryptofunk
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:36:33 PM |
|
They should at least start by releasing the name of that "third party" escrow! "Escrow" is a loosely employed term over there.
Josh confirmed that there is no third party escrow I believe - they will be escrowing customers coins I thought that quote was for the pre-mine "escrow". Do we know that will also applies for the buyback? |
|
|
|
|
|
msarro
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:38:51 PM |
|
Domain name: COINFIRE.CF is Active Domain Nameservers: NS1.PARKINGCREW.NET NS2.PARKINGCREW.NET Domain registered: 01/23/2015 Record will expire on: 01/23/2016 Record maintained by: Dot CF Domain Registry https://archive.today/prkyI
allcryptocoins posted about an hour ago ,
oh they went down due to DDOS....oh.....such a shame.....pissed off the wrong bunch of people I guess. tear. As I said a few days ago "they will get there's..no worry about that...at all".
Perhaps someone got into their registrar and changed some things....hmmm...tooo bad...guess we will never know
Also they are setting up cloudflare to try to avoid this, ha. This is why it appears down at the moment.
Crap. I wonder if they just forgot to renew their domain? |
|
|
|
|
strangerdanger101
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:46:49 PM |
|
Domain name: COINFIRE.CF is Active Domain Nameservers: NS1.PARKINGCREW.NET NS2.PARKINGCREW.NET Domain registered: 01/23/2015 Record will expire on: 01/23/2016 Record maintained by: Dot CF Domain Registry https://archive.today/prkyI
allcryptocoins posted about an hour ago ,
oh they went down due to DDOS....oh.....such a shame.....pissed off the wrong bunch of people I guess. tear. As I said a few days ago "they will get there's..no worry about that...at all".
Perhaps someone got into their registrar and changed some things....hmmm...tooo bad...guess we will never know
Also they are setting up cloudflare to try to avoid this, ha. This is why it appears down at the moment.
"Perhaps someone got into their registrar" nice catch and damning post because that looks like exactly what happened |
What has it got in its pocketses precious? BTC: 1KctJNLwzFK8qJPsSwDrQRNxxKnVCrZm93
|
|
|
|
bananafana
|
|
January 23, 2015, 06:55:46 PM |
|
I have a question. When coinfire released the SEC investigation article HT was basically calling for Josh to sue them on the basis of making false claims and posting forged documents of GAW doing illegal trading and so on. Now for Josh to sue coinfire wouldn't he have to prove for his lawsuit against coinfire that he not doing anything illegal to say that coinfire was making false claims and it has hurt his business. In theory if Josh does not sue coinfire he is probably doing something illegal and a lawsuit would prove that or am I just pulling this out my ass and it means nothing. I know almost nothing about the law.
Yup. Part of a libel/slander lawsuit is proving that the person you are suing is lying. If they are telling the truth, you have no case. My old prof in college used to put it this way: "Truth is the ultimate defense for a slander case." In theory in the following months if Josh doesn't show he is going to sue CoinFire then he is more than likely doing something illegal. We all know how Josh loves to send cease and desists to news outlets with opposing view points. All Coinfire said was that they got a file about an "active" investigation. But here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=857670.msg10212034#msg10212034he clarifies that at this point it's just a preliminary investigation, "to determine if it warrants any sort of major investigation." And furthermore: One of our sources even ended with a remark that now is the time to submit information or else more resources won't be spent on this.
In other words, out of that thousand pages ("the bulk of it is just things people have sent in") the SEC hasn't found enough to justify spending more resources on the investigation. If all of the material available, plus whatever was submitted privately, isn't enough to justify spending the resources to give it a closer look then the prospects are dim, at least from an SEC point of view. |
|
|
|
|
|
KC6TTR
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:00:26 PM |
|
In other words, out of that thousand pages ("the bulk of it is just things people have sent in") the SEC hasn't found enough to justify spending more resources on the investigation. If all of the material available, plus whatever was submitted privately, isn't enough to justify spending the resources to give it a closer look then the prospects are dim, at least from an SEC point of view.
I wouldn't say or conclude anything of the sort at this time. Scott- |
|
|
|
|
|
CoinFire
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:13:09 PM |
|
I have a question. When coinfire released the SEC investigation article HT was basically calling for Josh to sue them on the basis of making false claims and posting forged documents of GAW doing illegal trading and so on. Now for Josh to sue coinfire wouldn't he have to prove for his lawsuit against coinfire that he not doing anything illegal to say that coinfire was making false claims and it has hurt his business. In theory if Josh does not sue coinfire he is probably doing something illegal and a lawsuit would prove that or am I just pulling this out my ass and it means nothing. I know almost nothing about the law.
The most telling thing here is that Josh really wanted to sue us. Now that we are a bit further in the shit on things I'm just going to tell you guys this... Josh's lawyers have dropped everything (for now). It took about one minute of pre-discovery to show we were reporting the truth and suddenly they aren't coming at us anymore. That is VERY telling. |
|
|
|
|
strangerdanger101
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:16:12 PM |
|
I have a question. When coinfire released the SEC investigation article HT was basically calling for Josh to sue them on the basis of making false claims and posting forged documents of GAW doing illegal trading and so on. Now for Josh to sue coinfire wouldn't he have to prove for his lawsuit against coinfire that he not doing anything illegal to say that coinfire was making false claims and it has hurt his business. In theory if Josh does not sue coinfire he is probably doing something illegal and a lawsuit would prove that or am I just pulling this out my ass and it means nothing. I know almost nothing about the law.
The most telling thing here is that Josh really wanted to sue us. Now that we are a bit further in the shit on things I'm just going to tell you guys this... Josh's lawyers have dropped everything (for now). It took about one minute of pre-discovery to show we were reporting the truth and suddenly they aren't coming at us anymore. That is VERY telling. That IS very telling indeed.  So did you guys have your cpannel hacked? |
What has it got in its pocketses precious? BTC: 1KctJNLwzFK8qJPsSwDrQRNxxKnVCrZm93
|
|
|
|
|
|
dave01
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:26:30 PM |
|
In other words, out of that thousand pages ("the bulk of it is just things people have sent in") the SEC hasn't found enough to justify spending more resources on the investigation. If all of the material available, plus whatever was submitted privately, isn't enough to justify spending the resources to give it a closer look then the prospects are dim, at least from an SEC point of view.
I wouldn't say or conclude anything of the sort at this time. Scott- Got that right would be like calling columbo wen no ones dead yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
strangerdanger101
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:29:07 PM |
|
 they shot the messenger... |
What has it got in its pocketses precious? BTC: 1KctJNLwzFK8qJPsSwDrQRNxxKnVCrZm93
|
|
|
|
AnimoEsto
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:29:59 PM |
|
I thought that quote was for the pre-mine "escrow". Do we know that will also applies for the buyback?
Josh also stated in that thread that they ALWAYS escrowed their own customers coins. |
|
|
|
|
strangerdanger101
|
|
January 23, 2015, 07:32:57 PM |
|
hmm just had this come across my feed.... did they lose twitter account also?  |
What has it got in its pocketses precious? BTC: 1KctJNLwzFK8qJPsSwDrQRNxxKnVCrZm93
|
|
|
|
