Couldn't they just "destroy" them, as they do for illegal stuff like drugs ? (send them to a random address and not store the private key)

The fact that they sell them instead of destroying them has a strong meaning.

Fasten your seatbelt, we are going vertical !

What I personally do : I own about 30 btc, and I let them sit on Kraken.
I keep them there for several reasons :

- I dont trust myself to keep a paper wallet safe for a long time.
- I mostly trust Kraken, in particular because they have automated audits.
- I want to be ready to sell quickly in case of a huge crash.

I used a surveymonkey poll because I also posted this poll elsewhere, and I want to centralize all results in one place.

I changed the settings of the poll so that you can see the results right after you answered it.

We all know Bitcoin is made so that you can be your own bank, and if handled properly, it's the only way for your money to be really secure.

Nevertheless, I'm sure many of us still have a significant amount of bitcoins on an exchange, for various reasons (because we trade a lot, or because we trust an exchange more than a paper wallet).

Please answer this quick poll : https://fr.surveymonkey.com/s/PPX6WK5

I will update this post to show you the poll results.
(Edit : you can also see the results of the poll right after you answer it. I added Coinbase in the list.)

This thread has the best collection of train pictures ever. Really nice specimens here.

Let me rephrase this : the government did not issue a law to ban bitcoin in Australia. The bank only made a "strategic" decision, nothing to do with law.

It's not Australian Gvt, only one big bank : http://www.coindesk.com/national-australia-bank-turns-back-bitcoin-closes-accounts

A superstructure will always exist. Complete freedom is an illusion. We can not break free from the laws of physics, from our emotions, or from the need for a coherent human society (we are social animals). The best thing we can do is make our "prison" more enjoyable, ie make a society that is fairer for everyone. But we will always be individual cells in a body called mankind. I think we need to accept that, and stop believing freedom is the holy grail, because 1. it doesn't exist 2. it would not even solve anything.

I understand that part of the elite is abusive, and we could opt-out of the system that sustain these evil elites, to stop giving them power. And anonymity in cryptocurrencies might give us this freedom. That makes sense.

But this freedom is not sufficient at all to build a better system, is it ? What happens next ? Anarchy ? Freedom alone is not a solution.

AnonyMint, thanks for this very interesting thread. I'm not sure I agree with everything you write, but you do make very valid points.


Why do you think anonymity is so important for mankind ? Is it based on the assumption that anonymity gives more freedom to individuals ?
I tend to think giving individuals more freedom is not sufficient to make a better world. I believe an essential key for a better life on earth is related to the quality of the interactions between individuals, ie the quality of the collective mechanisms. Because human is a social animal, you know

Don't you think global transparency in financial systems (thanks to a traceable public ledger) might be a good thing ? (To help fight corruption, for instance)

(by the way sorry for any grammar mistake, english is not my native language)

Source

So you think Huobi just made up a lie about his communication with those 4 big banks ?

After Huobi's statement that their banks do not know about this 15th april thing, does anyone believe that chinese banks can close exchanges accounts in 11 days without notice ? Can new rulings be enforced so abruptly and with no official communication ?

Hint : Weigo-Xiuxiu Nau = "we go choochoo now". A well-known and reliable source.

In other news, Magic The Gathering Butt Cracks : http://www.buzzfeed.com/mrloganrhoades/man-goes-to-magic-the-gathering-tournament-poses-next-to-but

Hi comboy. First of all, thanks for developing bitcoinity, I use it everyday !

I was wondering if you are planning to include Bitcoin-Central, as it seems to be a pretty serious exchange, and it now has a working API ?

Is it too late to sell ?
What do you expect the mid-term evolution will be on other exchanges ?

A la main ? C'est bien, mais est-ce vraiment "scalable" ?
Quand le nombre d'utilisateurs et le volume augmenteront, il faudra peut-être passer à une méthode automatique (indexation ad hoc des transactions), non ?


J'ai l'impression effectivement que la solution ne doit pas être si compliquée que ça. Le drop prouve avant tout le fait que le marché est très facilement affecté par des "bonnes" ou des "mauvaises" nouvelles, il y a beaucoup de réactions émotives (et certainement pas mal de manipulation).

Cette semaine, plusieurs places d'échange (MtGox, Bitstamp...) ont suspendu tous les retraits en bitcoin jusqu'à nouvel ordre, pour "débugger" leurs logiciels face au problème de la "transaction malleability", ou malléabilité des transactions.

Ce problème n'est pas un problème nouveau (il est connu depuis au moins 2011), mais n'avait jamais été une priorité pour les développeurs jusqu'à récemment. Si j'ai bien compris, cette particularité du protocole peut permettre à des petits malins de tromper une place d'échange en demandant un retrait, et en changeant l'identifiant de la transaction avant qu'elle ne soit confirmée par le réseau. De cette manière l'exchange croira que la transaction n'a pas eu lieu, donc elle recréditera le compte, et le petit malin aura doublé sa mise.
Pour plus de détails, voir : http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-bug-guide-transaction-malleability/

Ma question est la suivante : comment Bitcoin-central est-il protégé contre la "transaction malleability" ?