Search content
Sort by

Showing 20 of 300 results by Lordoftherigs
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed[Bittrex/Poloniex]GPU Released
by
Lordoftherigs
on 12/03/2015, 08:47:23 UTC
Is BBR still part of the supernet project ?
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia
by
Lordoftherigs
on 24/02/2015, 15:49:35 UTC
Is there any update ?  Smiley I tried to upload a file but it still doesn't work...
Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: WWRD - What Will Russia Do?
by
Lordoftherigs
on 13/02/2015, 15:26:06 UTC
Russia will not venture the bitcoin road but Ukraine is much more suitable candidate to embrace bitcoin. Their currency is not doing so great and a turbulent times for their economy are just coming  ...
Post
Topic
Board Project Development
Re: reddit notes
by
Lordoftherigs
on 05/02/2015, 14:50:17 UTC
Is there any update on this ? Smiley
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: BitNation
by
Lordoftherigs
on 27/01/2015, 14:16:51 UTC
So how did the crowd sale go ? Did they reach their crowd funding goals ?

Wasn't able to find any numbers besides this article :

https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/23230-bitcoinist-bitnation-crowdsale-raises-less-than-1-of-funding-goal-with-under-2-months-left/
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed[Bittrex/Poloniex]GPU Released
by
Lordoftherigs
on 21/01/2015, 14:58:04 UTC
Would be nice to hear something from james or dev...
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia
by
Lordoftherigs
on 16/01/2015, 08:39:23 UTC
How is the testnet working, can you give us a little update of progress,
can we expect the start of open beta for the beginnning of the new year?

The current target date for the open beta is Jan 16th. We've actually open sourced the new set of code already, you can see it on github.

Any update on this ?
Post
Topic
Board Exchanges
Re: Bitstamp issues statement and temporarily suspends service
by
Lordoftherigs
on 05/01/2015, 13:42:28 UTC
Post
Topic
Board Exchanges
Re: Bitstamp issues statement and temporarily suspends service
by
Lordoftherigs
on 05/01/2015, 13:27:18 UTC
we are talking about 14% of their coins lost ? pffff... Smiley
a lot of money lost. millions !

Where do you see 14% of their total coins is lost?

I think they just lost a few hundred coins max.


http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2re2pw/18864_coins_stolen_from_stamp_that_doesnt_look/

this sucks.

There's still an option that the address belongs to bitstamp and these are all bitstamp withdrawals. I personally hope so.
Post
Topic
Board Exchanges
Re: Bitstamp issues statement and temporarily suspends service
by
Lordoftherigs
on 05/01/2015, 12:56:15 UTC
Post
Topic
Board Service Discussion
Re: Possible atack on Bitstamp ?
by
Lordoftherigs
on 05/01/2015, 12:38:30 UTC
If they can solve this and cover any potential losses it would strengthen their image as a reliable exchange and improve their security. Good things can come out of this.

if not we gonna see a new bottom Cheesy
Post
Topic
Board Exchanges
Re: Bitstamp issues statement and temporarily suspends service
by
Lordoftherigs
on 05/01/2015, 12:35:17 UTC

Bitstamp Service Temporarily Suspended

We have reason to believe that one of Bitstamp’s operational wallets was compromised on January 4th, 2015.

As a security precaution against compromises Bitstamp only maintains a small fraction of customer bitcoins in online systems. Bitstamp maintains more than enough offline reserves to cover the compromised bitcoins.

IN THE MEANTIME, PLEASE DO NOT MAKE DEPOSITS TO PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BITCOIN DEPOSIT ADDRESSES. THEY CANNOT BE HONORED!

Customer deposits made prior to January 5th, 2015 9:00 UTC are fully covered by Bitstamp’s reserves. Deposits made to newly issued addresses provided after January 5th, 2015 9:00 UTC can be honored.

Bitstamp takes our security and soundness very seriously. In an excess of caution, we are suspending service as we continue to investigate. We will return to service and amend our security measures as appropriate.

Bitstamp Team




Seems fine to me
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia
by
Lordoftherigs
on 15/12/2014, 15:59:44 UTC
sia is now on coinmarketcap.com    Shocked Cheesy
Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: >>> Best ASSETS to invest in ~~2015~~!!!
by
Lordoftherigs
on 15/12/2014, 10:24:28 UTC
Sianote on NXT AE. Open bet will be out on January. 2015 could be a storage coins/assets year.

Just my 2 cents.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia
by
Lordoftherigs
on 12/12/2014, 13:28:54 UTC

Now that the Sia network is up and running even though it's a closed beta you could narrow down some specs for future Sia mining rigs.
There should be a whole section about sia storage rigs.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia
by
Lordoftherigs
on 12/12/2014, 11:01:27 UTC
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [ANN] SuperNET asset 12071612744977229797, trading symbol UNITY
by
Lordoftherigs
on 08/12/2014, 08:57:57 UTC
Any idea why BTER is down at the moment ?

Maybe it's just me that's unable to get to their page.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed[Bittrex/Poloniex]GPU Released
by
Lordoftherigs
on 01/12/2014, 09:02:46 UTC
was this coin abandoned, where is dev  Huh

Last Active:    23-11-2014, 20:48:51

probably working on some neat improvement Smiley
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia: Siacoin (scn) and Siastock (stk)
by
Lordoftherigs
on 28/11/2014, 09:10:11 UTC
But you are buying back shares for 2000 at NXT ae, way below IPO price.

Yes we are, we feel that the price was at a point that was unjustifiably low. By no means are we encouraging anyone to sell their coins.

We didn't put up a buy wall at the moment of the crash because we didn't want to see a crazy panic sell, and also because it was news that I had presented that caused the crash, felt dishonest. But then the price sat at a very low level for over a month and we felt that it was worth buying back some of our notes and driving the price back up. We feel that we've got enough cash to get through at least the beta, and we've only managed to buy 17 notes at our asking price of 2000. We were never planning on buying more than around 60, because that's all the money we're willing to spend propping the price up.

But it seems to be all the money that's needed. We are feeling optimistic and you guys should be feeling optimistic too.

In hindsight, I should have been more transparent about putting the buy wall in place. If I had said 1 week in advance that I was throwing up a buy wall (up to ~60 notes) at 2000 nxt each, you guys probably would have pushed the price above that all by yourselves.


We bought 1/10000 per share not 1/25000. Your 0,00039% is just Math and not the agreement. The aggreement is 10000 shares in total.
Are you really want to play us that bad?

The sianote directly derives its value from the volume of money being spent on storage through the Sia network, because the fees provide a payout in siacoins to the holders of the sianote. If we decided to make the fee 0%, but still keep 10,000 sianotes and give out the ~1200 that we sold in the crowd sale, that would be insulting to everyone. It's not the 1/10000 that counts or adds value, it's the 0.00039%.

Plus, as msin is suggesting, 10% might be too high, and we may need to lower the price back down to 5%, 3.9%, or even something lower like 2%. All of these price changes should not affect the crowdfund holders, because I've always stated that they will be getting 0.00039% per sianote, and that's the number that's most important when trying to put a financial price on a sianote.


Hey put the fees to a price you feel that is best for the project. I will agree with it.
BUT there are 10000 shares, you just cannot print 15000 more. Are you the FED or what?
Honestly don´t do that, it looks like a huge scam. Do you really want to ruin your reputation now.
I have never said a bad word about Sia, not even when you told us that the original project can´t be realised.
But you sold us 15% of 10000 shares. That´s what it is, not changeable at all.
Your behavior is not acceptable.







As stated in Taeks post : It's not the 1/10000 that counts or adds value, it's the 0.00039%.

That's the number you should be interested in and that number is not changing. That is what you bough and what you have guaranteed.
Post
Topic
Board Announcements (Altcoins)
Re: Sia: Siacoin (scn) and Siastock (stk)
by
Lordoftherigs
on 25/11/2014, 13:07:04 UTC
Most importantly though, I feel very obligated to stick to the 0.00039% value that I've repeated many times. I've encouraged everyone to make decisions around that number and not any other number. Changing that number means we're altering what we told people to expect when they were making their investment decisions. People who chose not to buy may have decided to buy in the event that each sianote would actually be worth more than 0.00039%.  Furthermore, if we create a precedent for changing this value, you lose the security of knowing that it won't decrease. If we decide later that a 10% fee is actually bad (because Storj, for example, ends up being 10% cheaper) and we need to reduce it, do we also drop how much a sianote is worth? How will that affect people who have been investing in the sianote?

I realize that changing the total fee is a big move, but I am trying to do the right thing. If it ends up being a major source of contention, and you guys feel universally that you are being cheated because we raised our fee without including you, all that will happen is we reduce the fee back to the original 3.9%. I feel that this would hurt Sia overall because it affects the number of people that we can hire, that affects the quality of the product. But I would much rather set the total fee at 3.9% than set a precedent of adjusting the income provided by the sianote, even if the first adjustment was upwards. I don't  think that I would ever feel comfortable adjusting the number down from a previous amount (if I did decide to set it at 0.001%, I would never lower it), and that would back us into a corner if we suddenly realized that the fee was too high, because either we have to fully take the hit ourselves (to isolate our crowdfunders) or we have to lower the value of the sianote back down from 0.001%, which would violate expectations that we had set.

I'm willing to work with you guys on this, but I'm very nervous about straying from the 0.00039% value that I've repeated so many times. I don't think it would be right to adjust those expectations.

Sounds good to me. I think it is fine to stick to that original number becasue the investors still have the same value for their investment. I believe you guys will make sure that the project will be competitive.

+1 the original number needs to be maintained. Neither increased or decreased.