It seems like it would be easy to answer the simple questions asked by Marcus above.
If it so easy then I suggest you start putting together the report with all the transactions reported here. I'll fill in the blanks.
You can be a volunteer too like the people who ran instawalllet as a free service.
...unless there is reason those 'haters' are correct. Lots of MtGox people used similar arguments when people challenged their solvency.
Mtgox customers are victims, not haters.
The haters are not victims because they got their money back yet continue to spread FUD.
Did Phinn ever get his 1000 BTC returned?
Ask him. I do not know about any valid claim of such amount. It sounds insane to store so much on an instawallet.
If there was ever a valid claim from this person, it would have been paid back.
Well, jack me off and happy 1 year anniversary.
Back in December, a dialog was started between me and Davout via emails to look into the three claims I submitted on the first day last year claims were able to be made. Back then I submitted three claims: 1000 BTC; 132 BC; 0.835 BTC. After several back-and-forths, and after even denying all three claims, guess which one they finally honored. You guessed it! The latter. I can finally retire and purchase my own island with that ~$700 USD and falling (actually already fell) amount.
So, because I was insane to have 1,132 BTC on InstaWallet, it gives them the right to keep it. I consider that insane, not my actions. What's really insane is just a couple weeks prior to the supposed "hack" I expressed a concern about InstaWallet, but was rest assured that all is well with no need to worry.
Well, it now is going to look like Paymium and Bitcoin-Central will need to do the worrying for if this is not settle fairly quickly, the bank backing Bitcoin-Central WILL be conducting an audit on both those and InstaWallet's concerns. After asked hundreds of times to provide who conducted the audit investigation, that question was never answered, thus safely assuming there never was one, simply doing it themselves.
I'm Goddamn sure they don't want ANY official body looking into their books, fearing what they will find. The following is not a threat, but a promise. If this is not resolved immediately, I WILL make this a crusade to have said books of ALL three entities opened. We can all clearly see via the 'blockchain' that there's still over a million bucks in InstaWallet's coffer that belongs to its customers, and 1,132 BTC of it is mine.
I will start on that promise now by penning a Scam thread about all three entities, and only lock it once this issue has been resolved, with Post #2 of said thread reserved for later stating that InstaWallet has resolved my issue.
I started penning in this thread relatively calm, but soon went on a vitriol attack, then later was informed by a fellow Bitcoiner to chill, whereupon I did, realizing that you'll get more with honey than vinegar. Well, I'm sad to say that vinegar was stuck up my ass and my balls about to rust off, thus it's back to my turn to bust some balls.
My two wallets that yet to be returned to me:
https://www.instawallet.org/w/rL2DhMWW9tDvs24oFwtiq99zhh7A3ii6bghttps://www.instawallet.org/w/gZh1afVVl5aAtjNwXo0BiYChTxjwln33abWhere I was rest assured that all is well...
I like IW, but something has changed recently and I can't put my finger on it.
[...]
~Bruno K~
PS: To be clear, the wallet address is 1JppeHVdYQEBGR4uHVTqLQsb2FY1wUTziH
Dear Bruno,
Instawallet has always worked like a shared wallet, nothing has ever changed in this respect.
The fact you used to see coins remain at the deposit address simply means that :
- there used to be less coin turnover,
- the cold storage was less used,
- any combination of the previous reasons.
Some stuff does change though, you used to get your transaction ID back immediately when sending coins, that's not the case anymore, sends are now asynchronously handled by a background worker. That's much more secure in terms of potential race conditions, much more robust in terms of infrastructure, much more maintenable (since now I can simply stop the worker, do some work on bitcoind and switch it back on).
The traffic also increases a lot, to give you an idea, our average weekly turnover is around 10kBTC in, and 10kBTC out, it recently peaked at around 50kBTC/week.
Your wallet has exactly the amount you expect to be available, you can't rely on blockchain.info to tell you how much is available in an account on a shared wallet.
This is how your balance is calculated :
Hope it's clearer
That's a fine explanation I can live with. Thanks, bud.
~Bruno K~
I felt all was well in spite of this comment...
I like IW, but something has changed recently and I can't put my finger on it.
[...]
~Bruno K~
PS: To be clear, the wallet address is 1JppeHVdYQEBGR4uHVTqLQsb2FY1wUTziH
Dear Bruno,
Instawallet has always worked like a shared wallet, nothing has ever changed in this respect.
The fact you used to see coins remain at the deposit address simply means that :
- there used to be less coin turnover,
- the cold storage was less used,
- any combination of the previous reasons.
Some stuff does change though, you used to get your transaction ID back immediately when sending coins, that's not the case anymore, sends are now asynchronously handled by a background worker. That's much more secure in terms of potential race conditions, much more robust in terms of infrastructure, much more maintenable (since now I can simply stop the worker, do some work on bitcoind and switch it back on).
The traffic also increases a lot, to give you an idea, our average weekly turnover is around 10kBTC in, and 10kBTC out, it recently peaked at around 50kBTC/week.
Your wallet has exactly the amount you expect to be available, you can't rely on blockchain.info to tell you how much is available in an account on a shared wallet.
This is how your balance is calculated :
Hope it's clearer
I'm pretty sure that the above will not bode well with ANY authorities. Ironically, it was shortly after all the above was brought to light that InstaWallet went dark with their supposed "hack".
It seems like it would be easy to answer the simple questions asked by Marcus above.
...unless there is reason those 'haters' are correct. Lots of MtGox people used similar arguments when people challenged their solvency.
Did Phinn ever get his 1000 BTC returned?
Unless BTC-Central Paymium is running fractional reserve they should have no problem demonstrating the exact status of their solvency and the Instawallet coins using the blockchain.
As has already been done recently by other reputable, transparent exchanges in wake of Mt. Gox debacle.Notice how Boussac avoided this post like the plague.
Now, back to my promise/threat (however you desire to view it), if I'm not made satisfied, Paymium and Bitcoin-Central WILL be looked into. You folks were given more than ample time to get this resolved, but I sincerely feel that that time was used to cover your tracks.
Sure is strange that after the last payout was made last year, not counting February's payout, millions were still in InstaWallet's coffer:
https://blockchain.info/address/1Kk8rWQGX87pc15J3J6ehzFfkC5y7dG1NrI am more that prepared to post a myriad more bitcoin wallet addresses all stemming from InstaWallet depicting none of the moneys going to customers (in spite of InstaWallet claiming they didn't have customers) of theirs.
I'm prepared to open up a major can of worms. Just say when. I'm willing to bet that with Mt Gox being predominantly in the news, this is the last thing Paymium and Bitcoin-Central desire.
Money currently classified as being stolen from me WILL NOT be used to fund either Paymium or Bitcoin-Central. And, from what I can ascertain from the 'blockchain' that's exactly what it's being used for.
~Bruno Kucinskas
