Quote from: BlindMixerDR on April 06, 2013, 10:23:37 PM

Quote from: molecular on April 06, 2013, 09:59:58 PM

nice, I love this. Thanks for doing this BlindMixerDR, I was hoping someone would replicate the effort.

I think you already lasted longer than I did. However by your rules I wouldn't have had to admit discovery (no hard evidence).

I can give people here one hint: it's not molecular this time Wink

Good luck!

I read all your thread and I am following almost all the advice you received, but I think the evidence against you was very specific - if someone discovers a unique thing like that about me and links directly to my real user, then I will admit it. But you can see that people think "IP-address" or ' ' single quotes identify me, and they are not right yet. Also, you released some information about yourself, I will release only the URL of the onion website (it is not fully ready yet). But your bounty was 14BTC at $7 per bitcoin. Mine is 2.5BTC at $140 per bitcoin.

If everyone agrees, I will let molecular be the judge of what is "hard evidence". molecular must imagine he is the police chief trying to find out who I am, and must decide if he should spend lots of money to enter my home and to confiscate all my computers and then to pay the IT specialists much more money to investigate my computer hardware and to crack the encryption and so on. Obviously he cannot do it for just stupid random guesses. So if molecular says so, then I must respond to a post. Do you agree molecular?

edit: if everyone wants, I will also place 2.5BTC in escrow with a reputable hero member of the forum. But if someone does gets the right answer, then everyone needs to trust me to say the truth anyway.

edit: or to rubberhose the encryption

Hmm. How about this: everyone can be police, but an investigation incurs cost, so to simulate an investigation they'd have to put up some money (that goes to charity or to BlindMixerDR). Something like 0.2 BTC. They would receive a share of the bounty, of course. BlindMixerDR would have to answer yes/no to any (payed) police inquiry asking "are you xzy?". Of course someone having hard evindence could play the police role themselves, also.

That way wild guessing is disincentivised while still allowing for "hunches of a detective" not supported by hard evidence to play out (viable investigative method if I can believe TV shows Wink

. In other words: If someone is sure to have found you but has no hard evidence, he can still "corrupt" the police to pay a visit to you and see if it's you.

Am I just babbling nonsense?