Should prequel to that trilogy be titled "Matrix Inverted"?

This may be the most sensible post in this thread yet...

On the other hand, at this point customers cannot trust anything about the company that is not backed by solid evidence. Photos and testimonials from other customers, unfortunately, are not solid evidence of anything.   Photos can be misleading even without being outright lies, and "customer testimonials" may come from the company, or from customers who felt necessary to lie in order to improve their chances.   Didn't the company just state that it was "punishing" a poster for his criticisms by moving his claim to the end of the queue?

The company claims that it wants to restore its reputation, but, as @Biomech well noted,  insulting and threatening customers only damages it more.  No matter how quickly the backlog will be cleared, the customers will still have suffered large losses, and the company will still be guilty of thoses losses.  They have all the right to be angry, and write negative reviews, while the company has no right to be cocky.  But posing as victims of their victims is a standard ruse of scammers...

The refusal to produce tracking numbers (with a bizarre excuse of fear of "trouble makers") is another image buster. If the backlog is being cleared, why not publish the list of all the orders, with tracking numbers, and their status?

Indeed, we are on the 27th so the poll should be updated now.

(On July 25, bitstamp ranged from 592.97$ to 609.65$.  I was too optimistic, again: guessed 622.50$...)

Your bitcoin keys will be safer if stored in a Trezor than in your PC or smartphone, for sure.  However the risk will still be significant.

Even with Trezor, stealing your bitcoins may still be easier than stealing money from your bank account or credit card, and it will certainly be much safer for the thief.  Thus we can be sure that legions of black-hat hackers and criminals will turn their attention to methods of stealing bitcoins from Trezor users.

Even if your Trezor works as it is supposed to, you will still be vulnerable to attacks like address phishing (the hacker tricks you into sending payment to the wrong address) and man-in-the-middle (a compromised PC software displays the correct destination address on the screen, but puts the thief's address in the transaction that it gives Trezor to sign.  While an alert user can notice the substitution by checking the Trezor's display, there will inevitably be users who check only the PC screen, out of laziness or because they are not aware of the risk.)

If you use your Trezor anywhere outside your home,  whatever you do to unlock it (passwords, PIN, voiceprints, secret handshakes...) can be recorded and used by someone who later steals the device.  Even in your home, a burglar, janitor, or trusted visitor may plant a camera or other recording equipment, without you noticing.  (Paranoid physical security measures may actually increase that risk: google the death of banker Edmund Safra for an example.)

Then there is the possibility that the device does not work as intended.  It may have a bug (like the classical buffer overrun) that is discovered by a hacker and can be exploited by a malicious software in the PC to extract the private keys.  Perhaps the designers left a secret backdoor, in case some Russian mobster or the CIA pays them a visit with a Trezor whose keys they really want to get.  If Trezor uses custom chips, perhaps someone switched the tapes on the way to the foundry, or substituted the chips on the way back.  Perhaps someone replaced your Trezor by a compromised one, in transport or anytime after you got it.  (Ask any magician how it can be done under your nose.)  

Even one successful bitcoin theft could net millions of dollars.  Therefore, we cannot ignore some possible theft method (like substituting chips at the factory, or posing as the cable repairman) just because it would require thousands of dollars of investment, or several months of work.

Indeed, the Trezor gadget may have been invented and sold specifically for the purpose of stealing your coins.  (This is only a thoretical risk, of course: from their website we can see that the creators are two young honest-looking bitcoin entrepreneurs, and I could not find in CoinDesk or other bitcoin avocacy sites any mention of young honest-looking bitcoin entrepreneus who turned out to be thieves or scammers.)

if your Trezor device is malicious, buggy, modified, or fake, obviously all bets are off, and there is no point in enumerating all the ways it could steal your bitcoins.

It seems very difficult to check whether your device is legitimate and unmodified, and that the software that it is running is the same that is posted on github. This is the same basic shortcoming of all-electronic voting machines, like the Brazilian one.  The latter has many "security" features, like verifiable cryptographic checksums of the executable code, "tamper-proof" seals, and redundant output reports; and, moreover, at every election some units are picked at random for a public test in parallel with the real voting.  Yet, as experts will tell you, all these measures are worthless because they can be easily bypassed by hackers who can target them from inside the organization.

We are on page 7777 and an hour ago there was a sharp spike at OKCoin down to 3666 Yuan.  Doubly ominous.

It is still ~5:30 am in China.  Expect some action 2 hours from now.  Maybe, of course.

"When is your new revolutionary cryptocoin coming out?"

To a certain point, it is.

But at least one crime has been committed.  Parties should take the matter to the police, otherwise the criminal(s) will be encoraged to commit more crimes.

The victims of the Cryptorush collapse should file a complaint of theft/fraud with the police, show whatever proof they have that they sent money and/or bitcoins to the site, and attach what they know about the identity of the site owners.  Then hire a lawyer and sue the owners for damages.  It does not matter why the coins were lost, or whether the site has funds to pay; the owners are responsible for returning them.

However, if the victims do not have proof of their deposits -- sorry guys, count your loss as a lesson and be smarter next time.

The OP claimed that Mr. Vujanov was one of the Cryptorush owners and demanded "his" 15'000 USD back.  Mr. Vujanov denies having been associated with Cryptorush except as advertiser, and sees the OP's request as a blackmail attempt.  If Mr. Vujanov is indeed unconnected, he has nothing to fear.  If the OP persists in accusing him on this forum, he should file a complaint with the police against the OP for libel.  If he believes that it was blackmail, he should file a complaint about that.

Conversely if the OP is convinced of Mr. Vujanov's responsability, he should include Mr. Vujanov in his theft/fraud claim (but know the consequences of making a false accusation).

Even if the police cannot do anything, filing a claim will show that the claimant is serious about his accusations.

Like this?

"Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do." 

OK, that is more reasonable. 

You mean: "I want someone to give me 60'000$ so that I can buy a new car, and in return I will give that person some virtual coins that cost me 20$ in 2011."

You know what, I actually wish that you can pull that off.   If you need candidates, I can suggest some contributors to this thread that would be perfect for that role. 

"If I were to ask you whether this is a question, would you answer No?"

Why would they be angry? Sending bitcoins to pay for a pre-order is the traditional way to offer sacrifice to the Bitcoin Gods.

They get angry only if the sacrifice is frustrated, by the priest actually delivering in time the item that was paid for.

Since last year, China always had the largest volume by far.  Your app ignores Huobi (had about 14000 BTC volume yesterday), OKCoin (26000 BTC), and other large Chinese exchanges.  It is about as useful as a stock market survey site that ignores NYSE, NASDAQ and FTSE.

This user seems to be copy-pasting old posts of other people in several threads

No problem with that.  But see the other thread...

I have another idea for a way to make money with bitcoin.  (The previous one was posted to a Butterfly Labs thread.) 

Announce a somewhat-beyond-state-of-the-art miner product for, say, 5000$ apiece.  Collect payments for pre-orders. Stall for six months or more, until some other company starts shipping an equipment with the same performance for 2000$ apiece.  Buy those, stick your logo over their logo, and ship to clients.  Keep the other 3000$.

Do you think that this idea could work?

Trying to understand:  AMT is now promising to fill back orders with rebranded Chinese miners, is that what people are claiming?

As I said, I will use bitcoin if I find that it is better (considering cost, speed, convenience, safety, etc.) for payments than other alternatives.  Ditto for an eventual "Brazilcoin" or any other method that may come up.

All things considered, bitcoin does not pass that test for me. 

Har har har.

If that Ecuadorcoin is indeed Brock Pierce's Realcoin, as my triple-layer tinfoil hat tells me, bitcoin may not last another year...