320700+ entries in 0.204s
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 16:13:22; mircea_popescu: by all means. hence, " and if
there's a single icann in
the lot with enough actual gumption
to put
together a hostile
takeover package, i'll certainly consider it."
solrodar: such as by one or both of
them selling
their controlling interest
solrodar: that could be resolved by other means
than liquidation
solrodar: I
think
the real problem here is not
the solvency or otherwise of bitbet, but
the fact
that mircea_popescu and kakobrekla have had a breakdown in
trust and no longer want
to work with each other
mircea_popescu: judge is going
to rule "hey, mp must continue
to spend liberally
to
try and build a
thing out of nothing - BUT
THIS
TIME WE DECIDE HOW MUCH AND ON WHAT!!1"
thus
turning
tmsr into
the 51 state ?
mircea_popescu: phf exactly how is
this "not comply" going
to work ? cuz i dun follow really.
mircea_popescu: yes, in a different life had you grown
to be a jew and went into commercial law rather
than kaballah, you would have done fine.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform i do not
think you have sufficient brain. business is business,
there's nothing "technical point of view" about it.
phf: jurov: and when judge passes a verdict and mp does not comply or whatever
the outcome is we can say "tmsr as an instituation has failed and we can walk away" i mean, what's
the problem
there?
mircea_popescu: jurov i said, at
the
time,
that i can't in good conscience allow people
to vote largesse out of mpex. plox, read
the
thing you're
talking about.
jurov: so am i lying when i say,
that you resolved not
to subject
to any judgement?
mircea_popescu: mp did follow it, but jurov is none
to bothered with
things like logic, or not outright lying, when
there's something
the monkey on his back WANTS!!1
solrodar: yes, and
then declared he would never subject himself
to something like
that again
assbot: Logged on 14-03-2016 16:33:32; phf: i
think
this question is receiving far less attention
then
the alleged miner collusion. i would've liked
to see it approached
through a judge (perhaps moon is a harsh mistress style "would you be our judge?"), a carefully constructed paper, an investigation, rather
than bickering in logs. i
think
the question is also separate from receivership and is about ensuring
that
the rest of
tmsr maintain a shared vision
jurov: phf
there is no judge mircea_popescu wuld accept such "verdicts" from. remember when rota decided in similar way?
PeterL: mircea_popescu what about
the part of
the listing
that says shares will be paid out a minimum of 0.00001 ? If selling
the domain+code does not cover
the 17btc shortfall and
this minimum, are you and kakobrekla expected
to pay
this out of pocket?
☟︎ mircea_popescu: this usually attracts
talkers, if
they be any good, at least. exactly
the same way it worked for satoshi, and exactly
the same way it always seems
to work out, a little later you look around and
there's all
this democracy and "consumers have come
to expect" and general bullshit imported, which you don't even rightly feel able
to explain whence it came.
mircea_popescu: there's a bunch of people who, however poor may
they be irl, are still not driven by
the poverty so
to speak.
☟︎☟︎ phf: count
the whole list?
mircea_popescu: i was here before you, phf , doing exactly
the same
thing. so count
the whole list
thx.
phf: (apologies for wall of
text)
phf: rather
then ~everybody~ seemingly losing
their shit.
phf: i
think
this question is receiving far less attention
then
the alleged miner collusion. i would've liked
to see it approached
through a judge (perhaps moon is a harsh mistress style "would you be our judge?"), a carefully constructed paper, an investigation, rather
than bickering in logs. i
think
the question is also separate from receivership and is about ensuring
that
the rest of
tmsr maintain a shared vision of what has
transpired,
☟︎☟︎☟︎ phf: nubbins`:
the core of
the issue (the way i understand it) is whether or not mp can use personal funds
to pay out bets, and whether he can later ask for
those funds back from shareholders.
that seems
to contradict
the contract, so
the accusation goes, he's in breach of contract. seems simple enough.
☟︎ phf: into a controversial protocol behavior, mp called it "miners are conspiring against bitbet". you can personally call mp stupid for
that, but
there's no "crime"
there.
☟︎ phf: nubbins`: i
think it's a pointless
to discuss (and
takes away from
the core of
the issue) whether or not miners are conspiring against bitbet. ascii's been known
to say
that lizard hitler personally disconnected his node, nobody cared
to pipe in
then, because it's an established local way of
talking and
thinking (не веришь прими за сказку). miners are a cartel,
they can collectively decide what
the protocol behavior should be
☟︎ phf: invalidates not just mp, but others who participated in construction of
tmsr.
phf: nubbins`: it's a shame
that you chose
this approach for your denouncement. some people are here (myself, maybe ascii) not
to make money, but
to fuck around with novel ways of doing
things. it would've been nifty if, as a "lord" if you will, you picked up
the game and made your accusations formal, maybe solicited a judge from
the wot, made it interesting somehow! you don't have
to obviously, but
the approach
that you chose was basic and
☟︎☟︎ mircea_popescu: this new learning amuses me, go protect
the earth from earthquakes with banana peels or whatever it is you do for great glory.
mircea_popescu: and
this is mp's fault, because unlike everyone else he at least you know,
try
to run
the daycare for half a decade ?
assbot: Logged on 14-03-2016 15:56:32; ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: why would anyone step into receivership. a fee of anything less
than
the bill is lulzy small and will
tar
the receiver. doing it for free is chumpishly cleaning up mircea_popescu's mess.
mircea_popescu:
http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=14-03-2016#1432210 << so basically we have a community full of people who confuse "voice of sanity" and "people on
tilt" liberally, and by and large is willing
to "discuss" everything from
this arm's length position of "whatever, as long as we're spending other people's money here's what we
think", but by and large can't do anything AT ALL ?
☝︎ mircea_popescu: if you ever
throw a party somewhere
that isn't in a swamp i wanna come.
assbot: Logged on 14-03-2016 14:51:36; phf: "it is impermissible and foreign
to
the spirit of marxism-leninism
to elevate one person,
to
transform him into a superman possessing supernatural characteristics akin
to
those of a god."
solrodar: so I have proven a certain amount of
technical skill, but
this role would also need proven good judgement
solrodar: I did
the
trb call graphing work last year
solrodar: I am considering it, but doubt I have
the necessary reputation here
mircea_popescu: you don't, however, have a manner
to walk out of
this WITH bitbet, no matter what discussions may pass. it does not belong
to you, irrespective what you may
think.
assbot: Logged on 14-03-2016 14:39:06; kakobrekla: it would be
trivial for me
to generate a list (and for him
to confirm its legit) of bettors
that need
to be refunded, he can
then
take a haircut for
the expenses
that brought bb down (nothing i can do bout it) and case closed
assbot: Logged on 14-03-2016 14:04:26; asciilifeform:
thestringpuller: i did also. and we had a sorta diploma work
thesis at
the school i went
to, and mine was re: feasibility of solving go via neural net...
solrodar: snorera:
there is no reporting, it's a fiduciary arrangement,
they can't actually control what
the receiver does
mircea_popescu: well yeah, creditors generally. it can't just go, "hey, shareholder's interest is
they get all moneyz so
there. problem solved."
solrodar: mircea_popescu: if you mean creditors,
they have
to respect
their claims but
they're ultimately working for
the shareholders, right
snorera: id be reporting
to mp and kako
snorera: feel freee
to recieve as you like
solrodar: but receiver is obligated
to act in shareholders interests
solrodar: once receiver is appointed, previous shareholders and management have no say in how
the business is run
solrodar: receiver
takes over
the business and
then either sells it or liquidates it with
the intention of maximizing
the return
to
the previous shareholders
mircea_popescu: ben_vulpes> i will be astonished if bitbet actually goes into receivership. >> and i will be astonished if one day you get off ass, actually do something. but
then again,
that's our respective problem.
☟︎ snorera: reciever just has
to work out whjat
the fuck is happening
phf: ben_vulpes: hehe,
the 5 stages of grief :)
snorera: if
there isnt i certauinly dont get one
davout: i have an interests in more
things
that can fit in 24 hours
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: let's just
think about 'mods' for a moment.
davout: s.mpoe
taking a serious beating
today :/
snorera: i meant its likely
the reciever woould
try
to maintain, but i can see yuo as it
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: why would anyone step into receivership. a fee of anything less
than
the bill is lulzy small and will
tar
the receiver. doing it for free is chumpishly cleaning up mircea_popescu's mess.
☟︎ davout: protocol says miners can include it or not, at
their own option
assbot: Logged on 14-03-2016 15:27:14; asciilifeform: mircea_popescu was moving coin
that was legitly movable, as per
the (rotten) protocol, sans fee.
ben_vulpes: how could i be so
thick and naive! asciilifeform points out
that
the coffers might not even contain anything.
assbot: Logged on 13-03-2016 21:22:28; ben_vulpes: ascii_field: game
theoretically permawedges obviously.
snorera: he's got 4 chinese girls in
the shed
snorera: single handedly increasing
th popul;ation