ICO Broker's (Koos) been helping me.  Very hard worker, dedicated to getting into the tough ICOs.  Putting in alot of time and always very communicative.  So far he's helped me get some in on Bee token and we're waiting on confirmation from Arcblock.  Two ICOs that I would have had no chance getting into if it wasn't for Koos.  Good guy you can trust.  If you have any questions, PM me.

I just meant in reference to buying during the ICO .. In other words, he got the calculation correct lol..

Exactly .. as in you're right!

Where do you get .25 ETH?  The amount will be variable depending on Eth spent during each particular phase.

https://steemit.com/eos/@dowha/eos-how-much-will-cost-me-1

When chinese first started getting involved in altcoin, that's when ZET price was all time high.  It broke three decimals if I'm not mistaken.  As in .000XXXXX.  That was exciting lol.

Anyone know what the payment schedule for crypto-coinz is?  Maybe I'm just reading the chart wrong but I see a good bit of coins as unconfirmed and they've been sitting there for a while.  I have payout address set up, doesn't seem like any coins are coming my way.

I thought the same thing.. Almost immediately after this happened, I checked my gmail logs to see if any foreign IP had accessed my account.  None at all. 

I do appreciate your apologies... it's more then cryptsy's given us haha.  We'd be happy with just some simple answers.  Give me the IP addresses involved w/ the transactions so I can see if it came from our homes or if it could have possibly been a MITM attack.  Were they API calls that were responsible for the transactions.  Something so simple, to let us know how to react.  And if it turns out it was their end, I'd expect them to reimburse us no questions asked.

Something incredibly similar happened to me, only involving alot more BTC, and I've YET to get a response from cryptsy.  It happened not too long after their last major update.  All we want is an answer.  Give us IP addresses involved with the transactions so we can figure out if it was MITM attack or as Automatic pointed out, session hijacking.  If I remember correctly, none of our systems were connected to cryptsy, so session hijacking seems unlikely.  Could it be a site bug? Perhaps, but cryptsy isn't answering any of our questions.  Our ticket's been open for MONTHS now with no update.  We're pretty irked.  This has happened not once but TWICE.  Since then I've increased password size and complexity and regenerated API keys and disabled api feature completely. 

Unlike your misfortune, no BTC was actually withdrawn from our account.  2 Billion CENT was sold for LTC, then our ZET was sold for BTC.  The LTC balance was sold for BTC, all ending with a very large and expensive NMC purchase.  Then finally NMC was sold for BTC for a VERY TINY fraction of the worth of the rest of the coins.  The end result is our entire balances of alt coins and btc were essentially wiped out.  No withdrawals were made at all.  So it made me wonder if this was a server side bug.  As stated before I'm fairly certain no computers were connected to cryptsy and all sessions timed out. 

I've updated the ticket on my end at least 4 times and NO response from cryptsy.  The only way we were ever even given any type of support is when we caught BitJohn on IRC.  He basically gave us the run around and said he'd look into it.  TWO months ago.  We WANT to be reimbursed, and we'd be satisfied if they'd dig through some logs and give us some HINT of an answer so we can either format the secure computers we transact with OR be completely reimbursed.  Maybe if enough people come forward in this thread with similar problems, cryptsy will start to pay attention.

As a side note, me and my friends that trade take more precautions then the average user securing our trading PCs.  We use deep freeze to lock down the drive from changes and lastpass to manage our very long and complex passwords, noscript and adblocker in the browser to minimize malware infections and the PCs used to trade are ONLY used for that and nothing else.  We trade on MANY sites on these computers (including BTER, bitstamp, btc-e, gox, dgex), yet cryptsy was the only one affected.

the value of the payment system determines the price.  fiat needs competition, something it hasn't experienced much since it was snuffed out in 1913 after the creation of the federal reserve central banking cartel lol.

IMO if banks are recommending bitcoin be regulated, then I do believe the exact opposite must happen lol.  "Regulations" to banks mean price fixing (gold & silver) to thwart competition.  Bitcoin is in direct competition with banks, why would they suggest anything in its favor.

Would it be beyond reason or scope for developers of bitcoin to implement a hybrid proof of stake / PoW system?  Is it too late to do this?  This gives much more security to the chain as it requires both 51% of all coins AND 51% of network hash to be owned by one person or pool.

Proof is in the proverbial blockchain.  If OP claims to have the project pretty much 100% complete, show us da monay, give us the escrow 

Yea i'm sure Visacoin / Veracoin and Aerocoin investors had to have "balls" too after they ran off with $130,000 worth in those IPO scams.  I think those with brains win over balls.  Just ask the Federal reserve. 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=402536.0

from that thread

BUYERS BEWARE!!

quick blacklist the address so they're less usable! 

escrow is kind of like bitcoin.  it limits foul play.  if you all believe in your coin enough, you'd allow escrow with a trusted 3rd party source.  as it stands you put the burden of risk 100% on investors.  believe in your product? put your neon where your mouth is and allow escrow.  You'll probably get 10x the amount of support if you do.  Win-win.  If you don't, you just cast a greater shadow of doubt.  You saying investors will leave makes no sense.  If you have a hickup in development, our coins will still be safe in escrow, why would we back out as long as you always keep us in the loop with the development process.  Next excuse?

you were really a cryptanalyst in 1952?  very interesting, maybe someday you could share some stories with us.

pre-orders ... dun dun duuuuuuuun 

lol I'm pretty sure protoshares are related to Invictus Innovations' decentralized autonomous corporations/communities, henceforth known as DACs. They're taking the idea of decentralized coins and applying it to entire companies, which in theory, is pretty revolutionary.  The way they explain it, is for every ProtoShare you buy/mine/own, it will be converted to every new DACs share, which is why people are saying if you get ProtoShares, you will own Bitshares when that project is finished, and you'll own stock in any other new DAC that's released afterwards.  And so far there's quite a few planned including a decentralized Youtube.  Whether they'll be successful we've yet to know.  But I'm pretty impressed by the theoretical implications of it all.  Do I own PTS?  No.  Do I want some ... well sure.

Some of the things protoshares (Invictus) claim to accomplish are some of the same things Mastercoin are working on.  Bitshares is similar to Mastercoins decentralized exchange.  BUt they're both using different techniques to provide real time ticckers for virtual versions of real world assets such as a virtual USD or virtual Gold.  THere's an entire forum dedicated to Protoshares and Bitshare and the DACs.  If you want to learn more, check it out......you adorable lil' 5 yr old, you

https://bitsharestalk.org/

Have you all considered ProtoShare as a method of crowd funding (think p2p crowd sourcing like kickstarter).  They seem to be gaining traction in the decentralized autonomous community sector, and I think an idea of your magnitude would receive lots of attention!  You guys are running an incredibly noble cause, and a lot of us respect this project!


Is there any way you could use the Proof of Work system to have "miners" validate any results returned from nodes on F@H network?  After the work is done, is there a way to submit that work to the blockchain for verification?  And any fraudulent results would incur non payment to the party who submitted.  It would also mean 51% of the miners would have to agree on the fraudulent submission for it to be accepted.  Maybe in that way you could separate the important work of the nodes (solving real world problems to benefit humanity) from the verification system which is still rewarded for its purpose.  I don't know enough about folding at home to know if this would work, just a thought.