GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :)

[bitpop]

Nice, that does help a lot. From my very basic understanding, it looks like fees are destroyed, but I am unsure. Particularly about the PRI64d\n part. I see PRI64d in other PoS coins by doing a simple google search and a few more times in the code. My guess is it is somehow related to CoinAge, but again, I am really speaking out of my element here. (like, so much so, I am sure someone will come here and tell me how much of an idiot I am any second)

I'm pretty sure PRI64d is just formatting an integer. So that would be where "nFees" goes in the string.

So, if I find a PR164d that receives "nFee" then that would show they haven't been destroyed?

The fee for a transaction is the difference between the input total and the output total. The destination for the fees is set in the block that contains the transaction.

So here's an example of a bitcoin transaction:
https://blockchain.info/tx/e967550ef95d28a95a4ea2e679b8b9463cea28943d3053ef65d7f5fe109ce3ad
Click to find the block it's in:
https://blockchain.info/block-index/757279
In the top transaction you see listed there, you can see where the fees (0.25520967 BTC) are sent, along with the 25BTC reward for mining the block.

Here's the paycoin transaction that destroyed the coins:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/tx.dws?a5709810941a93fd8060c830dd0a725d2b11cf916e1e48b62f581b86b1f5f437.htm
Click through to the block (the "block height" link):
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/block.dws?66506.htm

You can see that the destroyed coins leave the addresses that were inputs to the transaction, and don't go anywhere. They're gone. The blockchain never lies.

So they really are destroyed, but the question remains about why they only destroyed those coins, and not all of the hyperinflation coins. Not that the answer isn't obvious.

That's not true. They could be redeemed later through orion controllers or hidden keys like the secret staking it all began with, or future updates. Staking is centralized do any fork can happen instantly. I could be wrong. A true destruction requires an address with no key.

[bananafana]

Nice, that does help a lot. From my very basic understanding, it looks like fees are destroyed, but I am unsure. Particularly about the PRI64d\n part. I see PRI64d in other PoS coins by doing a simple google search and a few more times in the code. My guess is it is somehow related to CoinAge, but again, I am really speaking out of my element here. (like, so much so, I am sure someone will come here and tell me how much of an idiot I am any second)

I'm pretty sure PRI64d is just formatting an integer. So that would be where "nFees" goes in the string.

So, if I find a PR164d that receives "nFee" then that would show they haven't been destroyed?

The fee for a transaction is the difference between the input total and the output total. The destination for the fees is set in the block that contains the transaction.

So here's an example of a bitcoin transaction:
https://blockchain.info/tx/e967550ef95d28a95a4ea2e679b8b9463cea28943d3053ef65d7f5fe109ce3ad
Click to find the block it's in:
https://blockchain.info/block-index/757279
In the top transaction you see listed there, you can see where the fees (0.25520967 BTC) are sent, along with the 25BTC reward for mining the block.

Here's the paycoin transaction that destroyed the coins:
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/tx.dws?a5709810941a93fd8060c830dd0a725d2b11cf916e1e48b62f581b86b1f5f437.htm
Click through to the block (the "block height" link):
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xpy/block.dws?66506.htm

You can see that the destroyed coins leave the addresses that were inputs to the transaction, and don't go anywhere. They're gone. The blockchain never lies.

So they really are destroyed, but the question remains about why they only destroyed those coins, and not all of the hyperinflation coins. Not that the answer isn't obvious.

That's not true. They could be redeemed later through orion controllers or hidden keys like the secret staking it all began with, or future updates. Staking is centralized do any fork can happen instantly. I could be wrong. A true destruction requires an address with no key.

The coins no longer exist. They're not at any address whatsoever. Another way of destroying coins is, as you say, sending them to an address for which there's no private key, but if anything the destruction is even more clear when the coins simply no longer exist anywhere.

They could, of course, create an arbitrary number of *new* coins, but that's a different problem.

[ab8989]

You can see that the destroyed coins leave the addresses that were inputs to the transaction, and don't go anywhere. They're gone.
So they really are destroyed, but the question remains about why they only destroyed those coins, and not all of the hyperinflation coins. Not that the answer isn't obvious.

If they only leave the input addresses but do not go anywhere, they are not destroyed, but they sit in the blockchain in a manner that fees could be chosen to be programmed into the blockchain even in a functioning fee system. Any further updated version of paycoin SW can take them from where they currently are and use them for whatever purpose the update is written to use fees for. A good guess is that the future version of paycoin SW gives them to the orion controllers like whitepaper says and voila' these destroyed coins reappear in the orion controllers wallet. The part that is currently not implemented into the paycoin SW is the one that takes the fees from the blockchain and gives them into the orion controller wallets. The writing of the fees into the blockchain works fine like they are supposed to be written into the blockchain in a working fee system and that is where the coins are.

This is a major flaw in the current design situation of paycoin SW and the way GAW 'destroyed' a huge number of coins makes it so much worse. If you are going to design a good coin that you want people to trust you must design it so that stealing coins and any other unmoral act is very hard for anybody to pull off including yourself. You must try your utmost not to plant any low hanging fruit to tempt anybody. These coins that sit now in there as fees are such a low hanging fruit tempting any people implementing updates to paycoin core code.

It is totally unrealistic to assume that the completion of the fee system including the currently missing one small part taking the fees from blockchain and giving them to orion controllers is never implemented into the coin. Fees serve a useful purpose and so if paycoin ever catches on, there is a major push to complete it. But because there are now those 110000 coins written into the blockchain as fees it presents a major problem.

The coins no longer exist. They're not at any address whatsoever. Another way of destroying coins is, as you say, sending them to an address for which there's no private key, but if anything the destruction is even more clear when the coins simply no longer exist anywhere.

No. Sending them to an address with no keys is a proper and only way to destroy coins. These coins are now not destroyed, but they are still as fees and their further fate is currently not defined. 'Not defined' is a good mental image for where they are now.

[gawneedstobestopped]

This just in....

Garza plans to bring Paycoin back to life with Paycoin 2.0 .... He's going to base it in Dubai with a business partner by the name of Rishab Jain.




Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

TL;DR

I am going to launch hashbase. Which is basically
 
Zencloud on steroids. But base it in Dubai. Imagine having your old sales
 
back

So apparently, Josh is wooing his brother Carlos with all the millions he could make by helping him relaunch Hashbase in Dubai... I guess Rishab Jain probably has something to do with it as well.

WE MUST PUT A STOP TO THIS INTERNATIONAL SCAM!!!!

[bananafana]

You can see that the destroyed coins leave the addresses that were inputs to the transaction, and don't go anywhere. They're gone.
So they really are destroyed, but the question remains about why they only destroyed those coins, and not all of the hyperinflation coins. Not that the answer isn't obvious.

If they only leave the input addresses but do not go anywhere, they are not destroyed, but they sit in the blockchain in a manner that fees were always supposed to be programmed into the blockchain even in a functioning fee system. Any further updated version of paycoin SW can take them from where they currently are and use them for whatever purpose the update is written to use fees for. A good guess is that the future version of paycoin SW gives them to the orion controllers like whitepaper says and voila' these destroyed coins reappear in the orion controllers wallet. The part that is currently not implemented into the paycoin SW is the one that takes the fees from the blockchain and gives them into the orion controller wallets. The writing of the fees into the blockchain works fine like they are supposed to be written into the blockchain in a working fee system and that is where the coins are.

This is a major flaw in the current design situation of paycoin SW and the way GAW 'destroyed' a huge number of coins makes it so much worse. If you are going to design a good coin that you want people to trust you must design it so that stealing coins and any other unmoral act is very hard for anybody to pull off including yourself. You must try your utmost not to plant any low hanging fruit to tempt anybody. These coins that sit now in there as fees are such a low hanging fruit tempting any people implementing updates to paycoin core code.

It is totally unrealistic to assume that the completion of the fee system including the currently missing one small part taking the fees from blockchain and giving them to orion controllers is never implemented into the coin. Fees serve a useful purpose and so if paycoin ever catches on, there is a major push to complete it. But because there are now those 110000 coins written into the blockchain as fees it presents a major problem.

The coins no longer exist. They're not at any address whatsoever. Another way of destroying coins is, as you say, sending them to an address for which there's no private key, but if anything the destruction is even more clear when the coins simply no longer exist anywhere.

No. Sending them to an address with no keys is a proper and only way to destroy coins. These coins are now not destroyed, but they are still as fees and their further fate is currently not defined. 'Not defined' is a good mental image for where they are now.

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

[bitpop]

You can see that the destroyed coins leave the addresses that were inputs to the transaction, and don't go anywhere. They're gone.
So they really are destroyed, but the question remains about why they only destroyed those coins, and not all of the hyperinflation coins. Not that the answer isn't obvious.

If they only leave the input addresses but do not go anywhere, they are not destroyed, but they sit in the blockchain in a manner that fees were always supposed to be programmed into the blockchain even in a functioning fee system. Any further updated version of paycoin SW can take them from where they currently are and use them for whatever purpose the update is written to use fees for. A good guess is that the future version of paycoin SW gives them to the orion controllers like whitepaper says and voila' these destroyed coins reappear in the orion controllers wallet. The part that is currently not implemented into the paycoin SW is the one that takes the fees from the blockchain and gives them into the orion controller wallets. The writing of the fees into the blockchain works fine like they are supposed to be written into the blockchain in a working fee system and that is where the coins are.

This is a major flaw in the current design situation of paycoin SW and the way GAW 'destroyed' a huge number of coins makes it so much worse. If you are going to design a good coin that you want people to trust you must design it so that stealing coins and any other unmoral act is very hard for anybody to pull off including yourself. You must try your utmost not to plant any low hanging fruit to tempt anybody. These coins that sit now in there as fees are such a low hanging fruit tempting any people implementing updates to paycoin core code.

It is totally unrealistic to assume that the completion of the fee system including the currently missing one small part taking the fees from blockchain and giving them to orion controllers is never implemented into the coin. Fees serve a useful purpose and so if paycoin ever catches on, there is a major push to complete it. But because there are now those 110000 coins written into the blockchain as fees it presents a major problem.

The coins no longer exist. They're not at any address whatsoever. Another way of destroying coins is, as you say, sending them to an address for which there's no private key, but if anything the destruction is even more clear when the coins simply no longer exist anywhere.

No. Sending them to an address with no keys is a proper and only way to destroy coins. These coins are now not destroyed, but they are still as fees and their further fate is currently not defined. 'Not defined' is a good mental image for where they are now.

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

I'm pretty sure they can be transported into a staked Coinbase like a regular fee, the difference between inputs and outputs, just mention the original transaction to redeem it.

[ab8989]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this like the output address is just given later hardcoded in the paycoin core SW rather than earlier programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

I know, it is a little shitty system but there are now the 110000 paycoins sitting there tempting the person writing the paycoin core SW to implement it in this shitty manner. Shit happens if you plant low hanging fruit trees to tempt you.

[gawneedstobestopped]

This just in....

Garza plans to bring Paycoin back to life with Paycoin 2.0 .... He's going to base it in Dubai with a business partner by the name of Rishab Jain.




Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

TL;DR

I am going to launch hashbase. Which is basically
 
Zencloud on steroids. But base it in Dubai. Imagine having your old sales
 
back

So apparently, Josh is wooing his brother Carlos with all the millions he could make by helping him relaunch Hashbase in Dubai... I guess Rishab Jain probably has something to do with it as well.

WE MUST PUT A STOP TO THIS INTERNATIONAL SCAM!!!!

Carlos apparently thought it was a good idea to get wasted drunk in Miami and leave his phone and iPad floating around with strangers Can't wait to see the rest of this story unfold.

[bananafana]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this as that the output address is just given later in the paycoin core SW rather than as programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

(1) The coins don't exist at any address. You can't create a transaction that sends them anywhere, because they don't exist at any address that could be an input to the transaction. Anyone who thinks these coins still exist somewhere in the blockchain, go find them in the blockchain and post the address where they can currently be found. But you can't -- they don't exist at any address. Which in blockchain terms means, they don't exist at all.

(2) Nothing is impossible with a hard fork. They could do a hard fork and create special stakers that receive any number of coins they want to create, but those are *new coins*. They could add up the lost fees and create that many *new* coins. They could just as easily create a billion *new* coins.

The second point there is a very real problem, given the degree of centralization. They could do a hard fork any time they wanted (except for the fact that they have no devs left who could actually do the work). But it has nothing to do with the fees.

[Fargo]

This just in....

Garza plans to bring Paycoin back to life with Paycoin 2.0 .... He's going to base it in Dubai with a business partner by the name of Rishab Jain.




Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

TL;DR

I am going to launch hashbase. Which is basically
 
Zencloud on steroids. But base it in Dubai. Imagine having your old sales
 
back

So apparently, Josh is wooing his brother Carlos with all the millions he could make by helping him relaunch Hashbase in Dubai... I guess Rishab Jain probably has something to do with it as well.

WE MUST PUT A STOP TO THIS INTERNATIONAL SCAM!!!!

Carlos apparently thought it was a good idea to get wasted drunk in Miami and leave his phone and iPad floating around with strangers Can't wait to see the rest of this story unfold.

is this real?

[gawneedstobestopped]

This just in....

Garza plans to bring Paycoin back to life with Paycoin 2.0 .... He's going to base it in Dubai with a business partner by the name of Rishab Jain.




Oh and based on these text messages between Josh Garza and Carlos Garza, Josh has some clever plans for Ponzi 2.0!

http://pastebin.com/GmUCCmkp

TL;DR

I am going to launch hashbase. Which is basically
 
Zencloud on steroids. But base it in Dubai. Imagine having your old sales
 
back

So apparently, Josh is wooing his brother Carlos with all the millions he could make by helping him relaunch Hashbase in Dubai... I guess Rishab Jain probably has something to do with it as well.

WE MUST PUT A STOP TO THIS INTERNATIONAL SCAM!!!!

Carlos apparently thought it was a good idea to get wasted drunk in Miami and leave his phone and iPad floating around with strangers Can't wait to see the rest of this story unfold.

is this real?

This entire thread exists to out the scam that is Josh Garza... The irony is that when actual leaked evidence hits this forum, it gets overlooked or scrutinized... However, sillier and unsubstantiated claims are exchanged constantly.

I am trying to feed you guys what's been given to me from internal sources. If you doubt the authenticity of it, by all means ignore it... Feel free to copy and paste this post to reference back to in a couple months when it all goes public anyway

[ab8989]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this as that the output address is just given later in the paycoin core SW rather than as programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

(1) The coins don't exist at any address. You can't create a transaction that sends them anywhere, because they don't exist at any address that could be an input to the transaction. Anyone who thinks these coins still exist somewhere in the blockchain, go find them in the blockchain and post the address where they can currently be found. But you can't -- they don't exist at any address. Which in blockchain terms means, they don't exist at all.

(2) Nothing is impossible with a hard fork. They could do a hard fork and create special stakers that receive any number of coins they want to create, but those are *new coins*. They could add up the lost fees and create that many *new* coins. They could just as easily create a billion *new* coins.

The second point there is a very real problem, given the degree of centralization. They could do a hard fork any time they wanted (except for the fact that they have no devs left who could actually do the work). But it has nothing to do with the fees.

If paycoin ever takes off there is going to be a need to implement the fee system and the hard fork for it is going to happen. There is no question about that and the centralization guarantees the hard fork will go through. There are also going to be multiple other hard forks to implement all the other missing features.

The fact that they are currently not in any address is totally immaterial. Pretty soon they are back in circulation in orion controllers wallet address like any other fees ever sent.

[Fargo]

someone should post that on HT ^^

[bananafana]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this as that the output address is just given later in the paycoin core SW rather than as programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

(1) The coins don't exist at any address. You can't create a transaction that sends them anywhere, because they don't exist at any address that could be an input to the transaction. Anyone who thinks these coins still exist somewhere in the blockchain, go find them in the blockchain and post the address where they can currently be found. But you can't -- they don't exist at any address. Which in blockchain terms means, they don't exist at all.

(2) Nothing is impossible with a hard fork. They could do a hard fork and create special stakers that receive any number of coins they want to create, but those are *new coins*. They could add up the lost fees and create that many *new* coins. They could just as easily create a billion *new* coins.

The second point there is a very real problem, given the degree of centralization. They could do a hard fork any time they wanted (except for the fact that they have no devs left who could actually do the work). But it has nothing to do with the fees.

If paycoin ever takes off there is going to be a need to implement the fee system and the hard fork for it is going to happen. There is no question about that and the centralization guarantees the hard fork will go through. There are going to be a lot of other hard forks as well in addition to this to implement all the other missing features.

The other missing features? The features that are missing are never going to happen. The white paper is no longer relevant, not that it had any ideas that were both good and original in the first place.

They might do a hard fork to add fee collection, but why would they bother? They're swimming in paycoins from the hyper-inflationary stakers.

The fact that they are currently not in any address is totally immaterial. Pretty soon they are back in circulation in orion controllers wallet address like all other fees as well.

The fact that they are currently not in any address = they don't exist. That's relevant. They can't come back into circulation because there's no address for them to come *from*. Whether they destroy them by actually destroying them, so they no longer exist in the blockchain, or do it by making them inaccessible in an address with no private key, they could always come along later and crate the same number of *new* coins in an orion controller or whatever. Or a billion new coins or any number they want. It's a separate issue.

[Revelation]

Coins only exist at addresses. A transaction takes coins from one address, and sends them to another. If you think these coins still exist, what address do you think they're at?

These were taken from various addresses, and sent nowhere. They aren't in the addresses they came from -- you can check that, the blockchain doesn't lie. They weren't sent to any new address. It's impossible for a new transaction to send them somewhere new, because they don't exist at any address anywhere in the blockchain.

Nothing is impossible. Any new version of paycoin core SW can be programmed to go through blockchain searching for all fees that were ever sent and interpret them belonging to a hardcoded wallet address that represents orion controllers. Imagine this as that the output address is just given later in the paycoin core SW rather than as programmed into the blockchain at the time when the fees were sent in a transaction. Same thing happens, just later.

(1) The coins don't exist at any address. You can't create a transaction that sends them anywhere, because they don't exist at any address that could be an input to the transaction. Anyone who thinks these coins still exist somewhere in the blockchain, go find them in the blockchain and post the address where they can currently be found. But you can't -- they don't exist at any address. Which in blockchain terms means, they don't exist at all.

(2) Nothing is impossible with a hard fork. They could do a hard fork and create special stakers that receive any number of coins they want to create, but those are *new coins*. They could add up the lost fees and create that many *new* coins. They could just as easily create a billion *new* coins.

The second point there is a very real problem, given the degree of centralization. They could do a hard fork any time they wanted (except for the fact that they have no devs left who could actually do the work). But it has nothing to do with the fees.

If paycoin ever takes off there is going to be a need to implement the fee system and the hard fork for it is going to happen. There is no question about that and the centralization guarantees the hard fork will go through. There are going to be a lot of other hard forks as well in addition to this to implement all the other missing features.

The other missing features? The features that are missing are never going to happen. The white paper is no longer relevant, not that it had any ideas that were both good and original in the first place.

They might do a hard fork to add fee collection, but why would they bother? They're swimming in paycoins from the hyper-inflationary stakers.

The fact that they are currently not in any address is totally immaterial. Pretty soon they are back in circulation in orion controllers wallet address like all other fees as well.

The fact that they are currently not in any address = they don't exist. That's relevant. They can't come back into circulation because there's no address for them to come *from*. Whether they destroy them by actually destroying them, so they no longer exist in the blockchain, or do it by making them inaccessible in an address with no private key, they could always come along later and crate the same number of *new* coins in an orion controller or whatever. Or a billion new coins or any number they want. It's a separate issue.

Apparently, you have hard time understanding amazing posts by ab8989
In their Whitepaper one of the features are fees and sooner or later (if Paycoin is to have widespread use) they will have to implement the fees, which in turn will resurface the problem of recently "destroyed" coins.
The coins are not destroyed, they are sitting in the parameter nFees which currently are not awarded to anyone. However, this probably isn't good long-term solution.
Creating new coins in a hard fork is by no means the same as reinstating nFees, which should be an integral part of any coin and was planned to be part of PayCoin.

[bitpop]

Is anyone else having css issues here?

[AnimoEsto]

Is anyone else having css issues here?

No but I am having trouble accessing the truth at Hashtalk if that helps?

[coinits]

Is anyone else having css issues here?

nope

[coinits]

In a Muslim country - now he will probably end up financing ISIS and the US Guberment can drone doom his has!

[gawneedstobestopped]

Just fired this off to Homero... And yes, that's a street view image of the Belgium address we obtained from an inside source.

To: josh@gaw.com, garza@gaw.com, jessica@gaw.com
Subject: You're going to jail

How does it feel that society knows you what sort of fucking reject you are? Now the same community you thought would swear by you is collectively mounting an attack against you. Not to mention, the smarter ones are all speaking with the SEC attorneys to help them take you down.

You thought you were smart. You called yourself the Hashking. Well I know EVERYTHING about you and I plan to make sure that the authorities do too. I am curious what they will think about your ponzi plans for Dubai or your current whereabouts in Europe. Furthermore, what will FinCEN say about all the money you've taken in from undocumented sources? This is not going to end well for you... Your life will never be the same again.

Oh by the way, how's Belgium?


That's right, we know where you are.