Topic: Weed / Realpolitik / Crypto / Civil Asset Forefeiture and Any Other Chosen Topic (Read 18987 times)

i pop in n out

Just checking to see who is still around.

its a pretty small amount compared to yours, lol.   It pisses me off because i had $2000 of namecoin stolen before.

i dont understand your question.

@sgt moth - attack their twitter etc with 72point red fonts

it took me a while and they may have built up some resistance to it by now, but no one likes bad publicity.

attack attack attack

its your fucking money, fight for it, be relentess

Is it possible to influence all this if you are robbed or have been cheated by you? I thought that if all the transactions that occur with Bitcoin are somewhat wrong, then you can dispose of your money.

they wont even answer me...

i havent touched them since they tried robbing me in 2013

it took months and months of harassment to get them to cough up.

fuck btc-e!!

warning to others...dont leave coins on btc-e.  I just lost another 126 namecoins cause those fuckers suspended my account after a year idle.  I cant seem to get it back.  I moved the coins from cryptsy and only have a conformation email that i moved them.

Dear Customer,

Thank you for contacting BTC-e.
Your BTC-e account was blocked automatically after 1 calendar year of inactivity. This was done as a security measure to protect your funds against potential hacking.
To unblock it, you must provide verification documents and other information.

Go to https://support.btc-e1.com/index.php?/Tickets/Submit/ and submit a ticket to department Account > Account Banned
Your ticket must contain the text “Requesting to unsuspend an inactive account according to BTC-e Rules https://btc-e.com/page/1, p. 9.10”

When creating the ticket, please, attach the following documents for verification:
(1) Scans of your IDs (passport or another national ID displaying your personal information and address (if applicable) and a utility bill in .jpg or .pdf formats.
(2) Detailed information about your deposits and withdrawals in Crypto currencies – a screenshot (.jpg or .pdf) of your local or on-line crypto wallet (or a mining account, or another similar electronic wallet) displaying deposits and withdrawals to/from BTC-e.
Important: We will not accept screenshots, links or txids from blockchain.
Only a screenshot must be provided.
(3) Detailed information about deposits and withdrawals in FIAT (USD, RUB, EUR, etc) and BTC-e codes including:
o Payment system (International Wire transfer, Yandex, Okpay, etc);
o Your account/ e-wallet number in this payment system;
o Date of payment;
o Exact amount of payment;
o Transaction ID from within this payment system
o BTC-e code can be provided in text format.

We will check your ticket within 24 to 72 hours.
If you have further questions, do not hesitate to contact us again.
Best Regards,
BTC-e Support
Knowledge Base http://bit.ly/BTC-e-Support

Just stopped by the off topic thread to say hello.

Nothing really too off topic to contribute today.

I like ice cream.

Also...

UNO markets are active again on Cryptopia. Lets make the most of them.

‘Vapour Cap’: my suggestion that folks collapse Uno’s price stretched my ethics to the limit. It seems like manipulation. But it’s not. As IT folk understand ‘vapour ware,’ so crypto folk should understand ‘vapour cap.’

So, apart from the indefensibility of claims of ‘store of value’ for a crypto whose price has dropped 90% in the second half of its life, the demonstrable fact is that the market cap is ‘vapour.’ Uno’s ‘real’ price – putting aside recent divestment volume/the ‘lift’ volume of recent days – is far lower than the stats suggest. So ‘collapsing’ Uno’s price is no more unscrupulous than stomping on a floor board to see if it’s solid.

Yes, value is a relative thing. 

I don't know if the price will go up or down or if I will be rewarded for my stubbornness.

It has been a tough slog down and there's probably not too much more I can absorb at this price (which is expensively cheap).

Though it would not take much to move the price up, holding it there is tiring, like swimming against a rip tide.

A lot of Uno has traded hands at .001, so to push it up to .002 would probably meet a lot of resistance now.

And all the while the Cryptsy Uno just hangs over my head.

People who don't want to be in UNO should sell their UNO.  But I am going to stay a stubborn bagholder.

EDIT: I note that I posed this question when Uno was fifty bucks short of an 0009 handle on C-Cex, and the fate of the Cryptsy coin remained unknown. My goal was to gain price stability as a precursor to maintaining volume (through an OTC program). But today, 8/3/17, the '#FUKLIQUIDTY' perspective has Uno in Coinmarketcap's low-volume penalty box.


‘My wild guess (short version) is that Uno’s price could drop another 50-70%, and will then either stabilize, or you will slip go down the gurgler.’
Me, six months ago, in a post above.


Unobtanium’s price has now been declining for over a year and a half. Its merchant activity and development is practically nil. Now, there are other factors, positive and negative; but I want to think out loud here:

the prevailing problem IMHO is that just being ‘rare’ has been used as an excuse for doing nothing.

‘rare’: ‘not often seen or found, and therefore admired or valued very much’ [http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/rare ]

You’ll grant me that there’s a problem here. That is, it’s hard to claim Uno is ‘rare’ if there are consistently more sold than bought.

And here’s a related fact: members of communities stubbornly ignore the fact that, when a crypto has fallen as low as Uno, the market cap is indicative of nothing much at all. Us IndiaMikeZulu guys have thoroughly proven this as a theoretical exercise: you ‘drop’ a tiny amount of coin into an illiquid market, and tens of thousands of dollars disappears from the market cap (‘cause it wasn’t really there in the first place . . . ).

Now a definition of ‘bagholderism’:

bagholders are, logically enough, those who stick with the community; and bagholderism is – it’s clearly present in the Uno ANN thread at present – the stubborn conviction that (a) the crypto has some ‘real’ value that is higher than its present value (as indicated by the market cap . . . ), and (b) that all we have to do is wait, and the price will  . . . eventually . . . rise.

The difficulty here, though, is that any one of us long-timers, if we were analyzing another crypto, would immediately recognize the signs of bagholderism, and be warned off: ‘Price so low!! Great buying opportunity!!’

So, here’s my pitch: rather than advocate a full-on sell-to-collapse-the-price initiative, I’m gonna call for a half measure, and of course it relies on (Good luck with this one, Mark . . . ) the bagholders really appreciating the fact that the Uno they hold is very likely to end up being worth nothing, as has been the case with hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of cryptos before us:

Guys, you can't reasonably assume your Uno is worth what you (or I) paid for it!

I propose that members of the community communicate by PM; decide upon some number of Uno that they’re willing to sacrifice; and then sell those willy nilly, to drive the price solidly under 0.000~. Heck, I’m a dirt-poor disability pensioner, and I’ll chuck in a hundred.

Why would anyone propose such a move?

Glad you asked!! Instead of the death dwindle continuing, wearing away at our psyches as we wonder if there’s ever gonna be a bottom at which folks start saying, ‘What? Well over a thou Uno for one Bitcoin!? Yeh, I’m up for that!’ we end the waiting ourselves. Bam! Here we are!!

Finally, I ask readers to go and check some All charts on CMC. Many and many a crypto has had sudden price-drops of 30-50%; so, in a year or two from now, looking back, we’ll see the ‘price-point’ at which Uno stopped going down, and either went up, or began its life anew as a high-volume instrument that actually ‘stores value’; but that final dip will be just a half a centimeter of down at the end of a meter of down – basically indistinguishable.

"time and time again, by staying on past the use-by date"

Well each one teach one.  IMZ may have formulated a fundamental LAW of CRYPTO here.

I'm completely in shock how far and deep some projects can sink after rising so high in the charts and public eye.

I've spent buckets on what I thought were well oiled machines.  

Then small change on risky outer limit range networks. And learned that with a modicum of effort a few folks can keep the lights on.  DIY stage.  Self reliance.

The major projects, once the captain abandons the ship, very few stay a float.  Because noone knows how to maintain the basics, they just bought a ticket on voyage 'get rich / no effort'.    

UNO @ $1.  Bothers me not.  Because I know the numbers, it is still a great product, and even though no one knows this basic FACT, it is fundamental to the greater BTC ecology.  We are creating a wing of the BTC beast called 'store of value'.  And I reckon (since STEEM has this as part of their platform), the general IQ will start to pick up the idea.  But beast BTC has run into hazardous territory by destroying the secondary networks attached to it.  This includes silly little projects like p$ or maza, because they facilitate a second-life market for retired mining equipment, that the industry rapidly burns through.  They also need store houses to house $15-$20 B, within the greater SHA256 network.

So back to the DIY stage.

1. I think the current team can keep the network healthy and growing for at least +10 months.
2. under a buck UNO is appealing to outside spectators. perhaps they'll take a LONG position of half a dozen kilos.
3. the resistance is feather light, +100% gains/-50% losses, every 30-60 days ... already organic and visible.
4. the magic of UNO @ $1ish - dead simple marked to market calculating

I learn so much from you, B.N.

To blow our own trumpet:

guys, IndiaMikeZulu exists to dev on altcoins. Continuously since 2013: Franko, Litecoin, Nxttycoin, CGB, CBX, Unobtanium [DVC], Dokdo, Dogecoin, Ham Radio Coin, TX, Dnotes, Yacoin, and DASH.

And if we have seemed to be fickle, it’s because we’ve had the Godawful experience of ship after ship goin’ down under our feet. We’ve lost absurd amounts of money, time and time again, by staying on past the use-by date.

So, about a year ago, guys, when I was tryin’ a second time at CBX, the crypto clearly had its back to the wall: massive sell-walls (likely early miners wanting to get Bitcoin for the likes of Ether). The community had a price-support program in place, which we all know was a bad tactic; but things were so dark that ANY activity seemed positive.

Some time later, I called publicly that the community COLLAPSE the price of the coin: everyone buy and sell like mad, thus providing a low-price/high-volume currency that might then be worked with.

Stony silence. No one acknowledged the post.

Then CBX sputtered to a halt.

Then a guy named ‘Major Max’ said almost exactly the same thing I did.

My point is not that I’m suggesting we collapse Uno’s price (I’ll call for that in about a fortnight . . . ); but that ‘bagholderism’ is our real problem:

too few people own too many units of a currency. The price begins to fall. Volume slows. The user-base shrinks. Too few folks do too much of the daily devving work. People are exhorted to ‘Buy at these great low prices!!!’ – which increases the bagholder problem.

But most importantly of all, no decisive action is taken. The talk about The Amazing Feature goes on. No honest discourse is undertaken.

C-Uno.

If you look at the UNO pair market, you might get the feeling that bots are already onto a concept much like this.   INSTEAD of trading @ the resistance or support level ... there seems to be a policy of letting the price range set and then speed trade.  This concept seems to be capable of handling high voltage loads. 

There are 2 classes of participants here:

a. classic stronghand day/trader (with knowledge of high quality networks NOT pump operations)

b. merchants (with intent to take a stake in a particular network and underwrite the value w/ services,goods)   

class A provides quick solutions to avoid the ‘slippage’
class B provides cash flow via business operations

Text Number One:

Merchants are entitled to sell the Uno they accept if they want to or need to – but the ‘slippage’ in doing so makes the acceptance of Uno unprofitable. ‘Coin-wholesaling’ is undertaken by a facilitator – in this case, me – who simply buys at the going rate any amounts of Uno that the merchant needs to unload: no slippage.

I have always agreed with the notion that Uno is best suited to 'big-ticket' stuff* -- and think about it: coin-wholesaling, which facilitates large trades at low profit-margins, is exactly what we need to make this happen. In the case of this little project, though, we're just working on proof of concept: the android wallet needs testing; we wanna figure out how such a project integrates with our security protocols, etc.


[Next time: the lunch-for-two-at-Subway test]


*We gotta be pro-active on the blockchain-bloat issue. My first thought is 'C-Uno': we tend to buy and sell Unobtanium a hundred at a time -- the exact opposite direction of milli-Bits.

in agreement (mostly); UNO is $USD determined instrument, see the 1 yr charts; UNO despite slipping on the BTC peg has had a fair $USD performance and is preforming as expected ... currently positioned at the bottom of a down swing ... the evidence speaks for itself.

in time UNO will be a hybrid of fiat/crypto/commodity backed store of value.

what ratios is determined by the wise strong hands and how they choose to manage their personal portfolios.  thus, true to the decentralized principle.  

i would suggest that the better UNO portfolio managers stay away from (or at least segregate) this ICO flim flam that is hot and trending these days.  

the intention is to make UNO a low risk yet consistently preforming asset/fund/coin/network, organizing that concept with the decentralized principle takes some time



The "crypto-commodity' idea is still valid, but not for UNO, as stated above UNO is not definitively pegged to a singular commodity.

This is not to say that the UNO investor community can not lend a hand to a coin project that is pegged to a singular commodity.

IMZ is not alone in exploring the idea, but in practice it will require  real world delivery of said commodity.  Organizing that ... is the pickle.  Plus, the right coin(s) have to be identified ... and the likely better technical solution are 2.0 tokiens ... but that realm is still too grey  

---
the other stuff

old miserable man men ...  the main vein of UNO community seems to older, yes and that is for the better ... lets hope wisdom is acquired with the grey hairs ...  act in accordance to your age.   

this community is bone lazy, and adopts ‘theory’ that validates inactivity ... not sure if this is true ... and I seek to participate with consistent and regularly participant crowds ... UNO is still one of very few camps that have held long term members.  yes, it appears like nothing is happening, if you're only measure is market cap and volume.  i would suggest measure in terms of market depth and market complexity.  and if you can't see that, this factor, which is always at work, then you're not on the mark  

note that UNO is the anti thesis of constant code development, such platforms will be forked often and regularly, just a matter of manufacturing 51% consensus.  

give me the enshrined for 250 years, the code is the law, coin.

----
copy pasta

decent in 3 necessary Keys

Immutability is necessary. The blockchain is a truth machine preserving one universally accepted version of history, one immutable sequence of events. What’s true once is always true, regardless of political or business interests, and no amount of lobbying can change that.

Neutrality is necessary. It’s important for anyone participating in blockchain-enabled cooperation to be on an equal footing with everyone else. 

Openness is necessary. It goes without saying that the rules of the game should be open for anyone to see and understand.
  

This is natural, it is diverging from Bitcoin and becoming more like a fiat instrument.


@IMZ perfect summary. But to resurrect the original "crypto-commodity' idea of your is still possible. Just not here.