Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

ponzi.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 306 posts

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#271

Post by sethev »

patio11 wrote: post #264
saalweachter wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is called an annuity. It is one of the more basic forms of insurance, offered widely since forever by more or less everyone.

The difference between Social Security and an annuity is that Social Security charges too little and promises payouts of too much. It cannot sustain the payouts which are promised in 2014 from revenues available to it in 2014 or the investment returns reasonably possible as a result of those revenues (and its accumulated capital). It must therefore increase the amount of revenues it receives, by a) increasing the SS…

Since Social Security is clearly not an annuity, calculations based on treating it as if it was (or should be) don't really tell us anything. In particular, where does this idea come from that current revenues have to pay for future benefits? That's not the way Social Security works or ever has worked.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#272

Post by CurtMonash »

FiloSottile wrote: post #138
CurtMonash wrote: post #131

To be technical, there are multiple inaccuracies in "Get 120% back when the next person sends". First, as per the central problem of Ponzi schemes, it is missing an "... if ever" at the end. But further, it is oversimplified, because people can submit different amounts of bitcoins. Covering up that uncertainty -- which while apparent is not as clearly disclosed as the "Ponzi" aspect -- makes it harder for people to a…

I think the completely honest thing to do would be to show another number (total sent * multiplier), explaining that if you send now, you will get the amount back when the total counter reaches that amount.

Sounds like it might work.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#273

Post by lucb1e »

FiloSottile wrote: post #199
acchow wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the rate at which it was going, payout was more or less ensured (300btc * 1.2 = 360. They quit 16 coins short) I think you misunderstand how ponzi schemes work.

I don't see the flaw in his reasoning, can you elaborate? EDIT: I will, then. If when he put money in when there was a total deposit of 300, the total owed by the system was 300 * 1,2 = 360. So it would all be payed when the total deposit of 360; he considered that at the rate it was going at the moment it would have been reached quickly (here is the gamble) but instead they closed the site 16 BTC short of that targe…

This is indeed exactly my reasoning.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#274

Post by lucb1e »

FiloSottile wrote: post #198
lucb1e wrote: post #187

Should have known! Like ten minutes before I expected 1.2x to be gathered and my payout to be done, the site reports "The experiment is over." Come on guys, just let it run. I would have accepted it if it just 'died of natural causes' and I lost all I put in (which is not much, 0.03); that was my gamble. Not that you'd pull the plug. Somehow their pulling the plug just really bothers me much more than losing it would…

Consider that there is also the change address https://blockchain.info/address/14ji9KmegNHhTchf4ftkt3J1ywmi... And, they seem to be paying again, so there's still hope. Obviously the (half) shutdown (half) stopped the inbound flood, so there was damage done.

Payout stopped last night at 1:46 UTC as far as I can tell. 13 hours later I still got nothing.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#275

Post by anonymoushn »

sethev wrote: post #271
patio11 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between Social Security and an annuity is that Social Security charges too little and promises payouts of too much. It cannot sustain the payouts which are promised in 2014 from revenues available to it in 2014 or the investment returns reasonably possible as a result of those revenues (and its accumulated capital). It must therefore increase the amount of revenues it receives, by a) increasing the SS…

Since Social Security is clearly not an annuity, calculations based on treating it as if it was (or should be) don't really tell us anything. In particular, where does this idea come from that current revenues have to pay for future benefits? That's not the way Social Security works or ever has worked.

Right, so when our population follows in the footsteps of Japan and Korea, we can just stop paying the benefit/kill all the old people/enslave all the young people.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#277

Post by dav- »

jaekwon wrote: post #208
tobz wrote: post #57

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

Jesus, man. If you want to go around throwing away money, why not give it to me? 1QHz6XPn8m8ujpMK1iCBaZfD5FTStfnk58

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#278

Post by K2h »

albiabia wrote: post #255
downandout wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, this was built to demonstrate one of the unique characteristics of Bitcoin. The ability to track transactions linked to addresses not owned by you, in this case, lets all participants see in realtime whether the owners are living up to their promises. Had Bernie Madoff used Bitcoin, his reign would have been over in a few minutes.

This transaction is where everything went wrong. I think after the shutdown they tried to start paying out the largest investors manually and missed a decimal place: 1 BTC In and 10 BTC back https://blockchain.info/address/1CeGvbrAuLJYyKxX7T2KD3358dWo... Someone made 10x their money. Ponzi.io (1ponziUjuCVdB167ZmTWH48AURW1vE64q) --> Ponzi.io Change (14ji9KmegNHhTchf4ftkt3J1ywmijGjd6M) --> Big Winner (1CeGvbrAuLJYyKxX7…

maybe thats where the site got their return.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#279

Post by gnaritas »

BlackDeath3 wrote: post #119
judk wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like Social Security, really.

I mean that fiat will continue to work as long as people believe in it. Social security, now that I think about it, does sound much like a Ponzi scheme.

> now that I think about it, does sound much like a Ponzi scheme.

Think harder, it's nothing like a Ponzi scheme, it's just like any other insurance; payout is not guaranteed.

Re: Bitcoin Ponzi scheme

#280

Post by gnaritas »

skj wrote: post #245
paul_f wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they don't. Populations in developing countries have now stabilized and in some cases, Japan, are well below replacement level.

Population growth is a fundamentally exponential process, even if that exponent is very close to 1 in some cases, or even less than 1.

> Population growth is a fundamentally exponential process

No it isn't. If everyone has one or less children, the population does not grow exponentially.

Post reply on HN