Truly, I learn something new every day. From the Urban Dictionary:

lzr

Meant to be used to substitute the word "loser". Not to be confused with "laser".

Example: Paul is a stupid person. However, Kimberly does not think he is a lzr.

I would think the CCEDK and Identibit partners would have the most expertise on this, since they have dealt with banks and compliance. That expertise is probably not elsewhere on this forum, but worth checking. More likely, you may need to draw in another third party partner. It's a matter of time, people. Just a matter of time until we get these pieces in place.

Quote from: monsterer on October 02, 2015, 09:13:45 pm

Quote from: bytemaster on October 02, 2015, 08:58:52 pm

Exactly, by paying the miners NOT to hash you remove them from the competition, then you PAY them to hash for you.       

So, you buy their hashing power... how is this not just paying for majority hash?

Assuming 5% profit margin:

All miners are currently paying an electric bill of  $6000 every 10 minutes and earning BTC worth $6300 for a net profit of $300.

It is commonly believed that an attacker would have to spend $6001 every 10 minutes to get 50.01% away from these miners.

Technically speaking the attacker only needs to pay the existing miners $1 more every 10 minutes and the miners could defect for a higher pay rate and the attacker gives them a long-term contract for $301 every 10 minutes for their hash power.  The long-term contract protects the miners against any volatility in BTC price as a result of the attack resulting in the attacker having total costs of $1 +  $300*PERCENT_DECLINE_IN_BTS_PRICE as a result of the attack.

Miners have a business model with ever-decreasing profit margins so their job positions have ever decreasing salaries.   Therefore there is no long-term upside to supporting BTC for miners and they would be foolish to not sell out to someone offering them a better long-term income.

Negative mining is just an approach to push pools out of business and concentrate power in the hands of large mining farms which you can then negotiate with.

A large mining farm would be foolish to do anything other than negative mining on the public pools.   Large public pools serve to allow more competition and thus lower overall margins.   

Hence if I owned 10% of all hashing power, I would use it entirely for negative mining until the pools collapsed and then switch to solo-mining.   This would maximize my long-term profits and secure my position of control.

I knew it was wasteful, but didn't realize the numbers were that tight. What's your sense of the halving ~ August 2016? Is the market going to price that in or will it ultimately make mining Bitcoin unprofitable?

We are raising $500,000 total for funds to expand lottery to Bahamas, and pay for dev work to create the first physical lottery with physical customers ran on the blockchain.

Once we raise $150,000, we are initiating the start of the plan, which is to hire 3x more staff and more locations on island.

You may want to store things in a nuclear bunker...well above the high tide line.

St Martin has a population of 77,791 people. Seems like an awful lot of tickets per person to produce 30,000,000 in revenue.

It's an online lottery, right? Just "based" in SM? Theoretically, someone in another jurisdiction could play, though I'd discourage it if it were illegal in yours.

Somehow, this thread makes me recall Rune's idea for a takeover bid.

Adsense is clueless on here. Mine currently has:

-Dow Stock Market
-Stock Shares
-Stock Price
-How to Buy Stock

I wonder if anyone clicks on these. Any real income from using Adsense on here? If not, it might be better to internally market or cross-market: put a banner ad for downloading the BitShares wallet or run a PeerTracks ad, etc.

Hire some lobbyists.