231–240 of 306 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ponzi scheme is ok if you are in at the beginning of the scheme. That's what makes this interesting - it's basically a bet that other people will also believe this will go on.
Ponzi schemes aren't OK. They're a form of theft, both immoral and illegal.
First, I fully understood what I was getting in to. I first deposited .1 bitcoin to see if it was real and got 0.11978 back. Ok, this will be fun. I then deposited .8591 and got back 1.1999. Ha this is hilariously fun. More gambling! I then sent 1.2001 and got back 0.8589. Wait what.. The game ended and he skimmed from me to hopefully pay someone else back and not pocket it.
Why bother with a faceless ponzi scheme? Send your bitcoin directly to me, and I will invest it by hand, making sure to maximize your return: 1HbNxRhrv5Jocr7Q9ZqbbqCwuNNy4UsR77 This is totally legit. Seriously.
I have sent you $50 though coinbase. I expect you to honor your word. Return address: 1JEGu8qiaKbLgheAWCjRkeZNyEqhhaFVY3
https://blockchain.info/address/1HbNxRhrv5Jocr7Q9ZqbbqCwuNNy...
So far, no such honor has been extended from the OP:
https://blockchain.info/address/1JEGu8qiaKbLgheAWCjRkeZNyEqh...
This is one of the beauties of Bitcoin - complete transaction transparency.
First, I fully understood what I was getting in to. I first deposited .1 bitcoin to see if it was real and got 0.11978 back. Ok, this will be fun. I then deposited .8591 and got back 1.1999. Ha this is hilariously fun. More gambling! I then sent 1.2001 and got back 0.8589. Wait what.. The game ended and he skimmed from me to hopefully pay someone else back and not pocket it.
So you actually have 0.01938 more than you started with, 0.01938 of someone elses coins who didn't get them back and you feel that he skimmed you?
What I'm saying is that he skimmed from my last deposit. I'm hoping he did use it so others got their coin back.
I'm sure the Dogecoin Ponzi scheme will be better.
What a great illustration of how investment bubbles can rationally occur.
The greater fool theory says there are fools who know their purchase is either worthless or overpriced but purchase it anyway in order to sell it to greater fools at a profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess we are talking about difference things. Sorry, I meant Pyramid scheme: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme But regarding pyramid schema, you mean hierarchical structure, right? I have the same concern, but flat tagging does not help much as we can observe from many sites. Let people browsing from multiple levels of the category is fun. The rule of thumb is: don't expect perfect structure and don't ne…
I think it was a joke?
There are a lot of people like to participate in the BTC game, it's not bad. But if people take it seriously, it may impact on BitCoin's credibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are also debates about whether the people who profited are morally obligated to send their profits to the people who lost money. Are the people who profited considered to have stolen from the people who lost? The same could be asked of state lotteries and other forms of betting. Not sure there's much difference from a moral standpoint.
I think the key difference there is that when you participate in a lottery you know - or can obtain - the odds of a payout up-front. Ponzi schemes by definition hide the fact that there's any risk of non-payment, that's why it's fraud, and illegal, and immoral.
Ponzi schemes in general, yes. But, I was referring to this one, wherein it was out in the open.
>when you participate in a lottery you know - or can obtain - the odds of a payout up-front
Technically, yes. But, the odds in some games are so astronomical that knowing them is basically a non-factor. That is, people play completely hoping to get lucky, but not really expecting to win. I think the same applies with a Ponzi scheme like this one, wherein it's known that the music could stop playing anytime and the participants are simply hoping to get lucky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't their acrued "debt" actually 20% of what has been paid in? That's about 48 bitcoins as of now. (Or perhaps that's what you meant?)
Hm, you might actually be right. I am not sure what the balance actually represents.
If they are operating as they say, the balance should always be less than 1.2 times the amount put in by the first entry on that list (or so, they could be combining payments or what not).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you actually have 0.01938 more than you started with, 0.01938 of someone elses coins who didn't get them back and you feel that he skimmed you?
I think you're missing my point. I'm not saying I feel skimmed. I'm just stating what happened. What I'm saying is that he skimmed from my last deposit. I'm hoping he did use it so others got their coin back.