Jump to content

Code Monkey

Member
  • Posts

    3,163
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
  • Feedback

    0%

Code Monkey last won the day on July 25 2023

Code Monkey had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Personal Information

  • Location
    Western Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Code Monkey's Achievements

Falconer

Falconer (7/20)

2k

Reputation

1

Community Answers

  1. Your arguments and my rebuttals: A: It's day 1 downloadable content. R: No, it's not. It's not downloadable content, it's part of the initial release of the game. A: I could have paid more money to buy something cheaper than the toys and get the same end result. R: No, I will not pay 5 cents if I already paid for the entire game. I paid for the whole game, I get the whole game, I'm not buying anything else. A: It is not required in order to enjoy the game. R: I don't care. It's part of the game, I paid for the game, I should get all parts of the game. A: Other games do it. R: And? If someone else murders someone, is it okay for you to do it? Imagine if you buy a movie and in order to watch the credits you have to tap a plastic toy on the remote control. The credits aren't required to enjoy the movie but does that sound bizarre? Do you think that should be allowed? If I pay for the movie, I want to see the credits without buying anything extra.
  2. You misunderstood, I didn't cheat on my taxes. I'm purchasing games for my business. I'm also claiming all of the games I've sold and paying taxes on that income, it goes both ways.
  3. It's not fraud. Like I said, I can tell you something I'm not selling is worth whatever I want. I could tell you a property down the street is worth $1,000,000, is it my fault if you buy it and find out if it isn't? In order for fraud to take place, it has to meet certain criteria and one criteria is that I have to gain an interest from the fraud. Wata helped increase the value of games they did not own and did not gain anything from the sale of games they did not own. Whether or not Jim Halperin benfitted is not relevant to whether Deniz and Wata are guilty. Whether or not Bronty benefitted is not relevant, he was just an advisor. Whether or not Mark Haspell benefitted is not relevant, he wasn't the owner. People here are confusing morals with crime, the 2 aren't the same. It was a shit thing to do but there isn't anything illegal about telling someone a product they have no interest in is worth more than it is. In fact, I'm not actually sure if the lawsuit even mentions fraud (maybe it does and I'll have to retract this) but I thought it was just about missing service level agreements. The only financial gain Wata saw was from an increased demand for their grading service which isn't the same as whether or not a game is worth a million dollars. He inflated his assets in order to gain more loans, that is a federal offence and is not the same as telling people a hobby is worth more than it is. This isn't even in the same section of the law book. They weren't giving financial advice, where did you read that? Someone asked them what it was worth and he gave his opinion. If I go to my local game store and ask someone behind the counter what a game is worth, are they liable for fraud if it's not true? No, that's not considered financial advice. This is not comparable to what happened. Deniz did not ask for investments in his company and promise dividends. He told me and you that a game they did not own is worth a certain amount. If you go and buy the game, that's on you, it's only fraud if Deniz was the one selling the game which he was not. There is a world of difference here in inflating an asset that you own and do not own. It's not fraud. And yes I was and I still have not bought that game even though I think I own every other game he has made. He should follow the rules. Again, there was deception and I don't think it was right but it also doesn't meet the criteria of a crime (except missing the SLA).
  4. I don't get it, pretending something is worth more than it is isn't a crime. It's also not a crime for me to lie to you about its value. I could literally draw up some charts in Microsoft Paint, fabricate some numbers, have my friends corroborate the values and do media interviews about the sky high prices. If you give me or anyone else money based on your zero research, the fault is yours, not mine. It is fully your responsibility for any investment you make based on any information you accept. I could tell you Dogecoin is going to be the next official currency of the moon peoples and you better buy it all up. If you actually do that, that's on you. People are acting like it's somehow Deniz's fault that he convinced people to buy things. Disclaimer: I have no interest in Wata and do not even collect sealed games. I just can't sit here and read about people saying it's anyone else's fault but their own for a bad investment. Side note: I don't see anyone here discussing how the $100,100 Super Mario Bros. sale wasn't even actually a sale. Deniz mentioned in his deposition weeks ago that the game was never sold, the original owner (Bronty) still retains interest in the game and they made up the sale price for hype. I thought that would have more people upset, that was a pretty shit thing to do.
  5. I played through Breath Of The Wild when it came out and followed along in the official guide I have for it. I went page by page through the guide to make sure I had everything, even crossing off 900 of those Korok seeds from the included map. I got to one section with some swords and clothing with a description that they can be accessed by tapping the appropriate Amiibo but I couldn't find anywhere about how to get them without the Amiibo. I phoned Nintendo to ask them how I'm supposed to do it because I paid full price for the game and there were sections in the game I purchased which I could not access. They told me it was impossible, I had to buy hundreds of dollars worth of plastic toys in addition to purchasing the game in order to get all of the game's content. I felt frustration with the fire of a thousand suns and vowed I would not pay for the next Zelda game that comes out in order to recover my portion of the game I did not receive. When Tears Of The Kingdom came out, I refused to pay for it and instead taught myself how to hack my Switch and installed a pirate copy I downloaded from a torrent. The game played perfectly and I got hours of enjoyment from it for free while Nintendo lost my $80 purchase price for the game because they tried to force me to buy plastic toys. Releasing new content after the game's release is one thing, locking me out of items in the base game is totally different. I paid for those items and still have not received them.
  6. How does that relate to me? I don't collect PlayStation.
  7. The more people discuss Mega Man, the more my prototypes are worth. To the moon!
  8. It looks like the foil sticker from NBA Basketball.
  9. I would like to pay in cryptocurrency because I would stock up on it while it's low. I could have bought Bitcoin for $20,000 last year and then paid my employees this year with that Bitcoin. If they wanted $100,000 per year, I could pay them $33,000 worth because I got it for 1/3 what it's worth now. I'd be getting things super cheaply. Are you thinking the primary purpose of cryptocurrencies are to hold them and make money? That's not the purpose of any of them, they all actually have decentralized software purposes unique to each blockchain. Have you read any of the white papers? They each explain their purposes and the problems each one is solving, some are quite interesting.
  10. Your landlord example doesn't make sense. If Bitcoin doubled (it actually tripled), then the monthly payment of Bitcoin would be worth more for the landlord, not less. When they convert it back to dollars, they get more. My 1 Bitcoin per month lease agreement would be worth more to them. For the rest, you're still thinking about it incorrectly. Think of it this way, when you start learning a new language, you first start converting everything to the language with which you're familiar and then you process it in your native language. You form a reply, then translate it to the new language and speak it. This is not a sustainable model, if you eventually want to do this efficiently, you need to stop translating from one language to the other and just start processing things in the other language natively. The reason I write this is because you need to stop thinking of a world where Bitcoin is worth X amount of dollars. The only way cryptocurrency would work to support an economy is to use it natively............price your bananas at X Bitcoin, pay your employees Y Bitcoin and offer loans at Z Bitcoin.......natively. Not as a function of the value of USD. Can you do this right now? No, it's too volatile. Is Bitcoin something that can mature like USD has? Yes, it can and I'm trying to help it. My point is, stop thinking of it as a value compared to USD. Think of it as its own value by itself. Of course there are nefarious coin makers, just like there are nefarious commodity makers. Anyone that sees they can make a quick dollar by making something and selling it, they will try to do so. The solution to this is simply not buying their commodity because it's an inferior product and instead focusing on the higher quality commodities. These trash coins that are pumped and dumped are simply just forks of tokens on the Ethereum network or another layer-1 blockchain and they have little to nothing to offer as a solution. The source code is on Github and Ethereum will host your coin so I could literally make one in just a few minutes and release it. Should you buy it? No, just like you shouldn't buy bread that I throw together in 5 minutes with no idea what I'm doing. But I'm allowed to make and sell the bread (assuming FDA approval, I probably shouldn't have used a food analogy). The point is, some people write their own layer-1 blockchains that support coins with unique underlying platforms, specifically coded to solve a problem. It takes (sometimes) a team of people to create and intimate knowledge of web3 technologies in order to create. Then you have people that fork other repositories and host their tokens on top of existing blockchains, these are layer-2 and layer-3 technologies, you can ignore those. Stick with the quality product and know what you're buying, it's simple. Just one solution that cryptocurrency provides is global currency transfer. Do you know how long it takes to send USD to someone in Vietnam? Probably a week and it will cost quite a lot. You can do the exact same thing with Bitcoin instantly for a fraction of the price. The last point is a funny one, you really think people don't buy and sell foreign currencies? My girlfriend buys USD when the Canadian dollar is strong and sells it when we're low, lots of people do that. I'm sure there are people in this thread that do that all the time, it's incredibly common, people base their careers on foreign currency trading.
  11. There are many inaccuracies here and I love a good debate. In your scenario, you're comparing a dollar's stability against itself but when you refer to Bitcoin, you're comparing its stability against a dollar, you can't do that. A dollar is stable against a dollar, yes, but is it stable against the Yen? USD? The Euro? No, it bounces all over the place, it's incredibly unstable, Yes, a haircut that costs $20 last week will still cost $20 next week but a haircut that cost 1 Bitcoin last week will also cost 1 Bitcoin next week. It's the coin's stability against other currencies that fluctuates, just like the dollar. The Canadian dollar is accepted in most of the world? No it isn't, not at all. And if you're referring to the collective dollars of all individual countries, that's not a legitimate argument. This is single currency against single currency, not the whole world's economy. If you want to go to Australia, they will not accept CAD, you need to convert it. Same with Bitcoin, you need to convert it. I asked for differences besides this one. When the money supply first started, it was just a paper representation promising you had that much gold in the bank somewhere. If robbers stole your gold from the bank, that note was worthless. The idea of insuring the money came after the gold backing was removed and as cryptocurrency evolves, I'm sure that will be addressed. It's a currency in its infancy, it will evolve. I would accept a rental contract in Bitcoin, it keeps going up anyway. I would allow my employer to pay me in Bitcoin as well, one static price for the year, regardless of its value against the dollar. My paycheque doesn't currently fluctuate against the Euro, it's one single amount of dollars. It could also be one single amount of Bitcoin, I'd be fine with that. All of my support for cryptocurrency is under the understanding that it will evolve to become what other currencies are today. It will somehow be insured by something, some how and it will also eventually fluctuate less day to day. When people made the switch from gold to paper currency, it was highly volatile and it fluctuated even more across each state since each state had their own currency. Eventually it became more mature and I think Bitcoin or its replacement can do the same. Right now, we're using an antiquated system that is not sustainable long term. Each dollar the government gets, it borrows at interest. So they borrow $1000 and have to pay back more than they borrowed, but how do they do that? There is no other source of income, if they want more dollars, they need to borrow more. So they need to borrow more to cover the interest but this new loan also has its own interest. This is exactly the definition of inflation, in order to make this work, the value of the existing dollars has to decrease in order to try and cover the interest of borrowing. The government doesn't just create money for free and if we switched to some other form of updated digital currency, it would solve all of these problems.
  12. I was about to come here today and resurrect this thread. 2 years ago I took all of my various coins (besides Bitcoin) and compiled them into Solana which I believed was going to go big. The total value of that wallet was $200 and I was able to recently see 10x gains on that to $2000. I converted half of that to Filecoin (FIL) and the other half to EOS which have since seen gains of 2x, totaling $4000. Even if these 2 coins only reach their previous highs, they will still 20x again from today and everything is expected to beat the previous highs if you look at the correct coins. I'm aiming for at least $50,000 USD within 1 year and I'm hoping for $100,000 total from this $200 wallet. If it works, next halving I'll gamble with the Bitcoin.
×
×
  • Create New...