Nice. Why are the public keys required? Shouldn't anything that fails the multisig check work, or does OP_MULTISIG error out if it doesn't have them? (e.g. NULL != FALSE)

Hey all,

I noticed this transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/136becd0892fa38c5aca8104db8b90b3a0e6b40912b7d1462aed583c067054cd

It kind of looks like the output script is saying, as long as you provide a valid multisig for any address you can spend it (the wiki says OP_MULTISIG drops one item from the stack, so I'm guessing the OP_NOT just gets ignored. If not, does it mean anything that isn't a multisig is usable??)

Is this transaction spendable? Does OP_MULTISIG even work when it isn't a multisig address?

Although I agree with you 100% on the dubious nature of Gox's story, I have to argue one point. Many people can, and do, understand the malleability just fine. It is a real thing and was documented a long time ago.

But no, it most likely didn't cause the downfall of Gox.

The research looks quite solid. They looked for the right things, and if their data is complete I agree with the conclusions.

There are 3 possible weaknesses to this study in relation to Mt. Gox:

1. The data started in January 2013, so it's possible Gox was hit much harder in previous years. Although that would also mean the amount of time they spent oblivious to the problem increases.

2. It's possible there was more information on the network that the researches weren't able to log. For example if an attacker had control of many nodes very close (physically) to Mt. Gox, and were somehow able to send out their modified transactions faster and "better", then it's possible the authentic transactions were killed before being recorded by the researchers.

3. As the researchers admit, we can't see how Gox actually reacted to the modified transactions. Gox resent transactions using different inputs (or addresses, even) so it's very hard to detect a resend. If they were to release their records of all withdrawal requests we could compare them to the blockchain and find any discrepancies, but they haven't done that (and it's possible they don't have complete records anyway).

Anyway, good job on the study!

It'd be silly not to buy now. Nothing has happened that spells doom for bitcoin, why lose faith?

The title of the article makes some bold claims, but doesn't really follow up with anything.

I'm sure the idea of Silk Road came from an early adopter who was familiar with the technology that was being developed. Someone from that original circle later spending some coins on it hardly connects DPR to Satoshi!

Do you have a Chinese citizen doing the exchange and wire for you? Are they able to provide tax information for exchanging large amounts? Or have you found another way to move money out of the country?

How do you get your money out of China?

It's happening again. Clark Moody's site is still streaming all the trades, it looks to be 10-15 minutes behind (Gox lag, maybe)

The transaction references a previous transaction that has not been confirmed yet.
The previous transaction hasn't been confirmed because it too references a transaction that hasn't been confirmed.
That transaction appears to have not yet confirmed because the fee is too small, and it is taking a long time to go through.

It could be an honest mistake, but the fact that the previous transactions are all referencing the same address means there is a small chance it could have been done on purpose. I'm not sure if the sender would be able to do a double spend, but if so this would be a clever way to buy some time.

All you can do is wait for this transaction to clear:
https://blockchain.info/tx-index/97387217/1

Maybe this is a job for Amazon's Mechanical Turk?

Pay 3 cents per post... It'll only cost us $630,000 to finish it up!

How do you get CNY out of China?

Are you saying you've never used your ID somewhere that could be compromised?

Hotel, car rental, bank, landlord, credit card...

The price changes so much over the course of a day, it's hard to know what to charge.

My suggestion is, think of what the buyer would do if they couldn't buy the coins from you and had to get them somewhere else.

Would they have to wire money to an exchange? How much would they spend on fees? How much is the convenience/time worth?

If they could get them from someone else locally, how much does that person charge?

Most people just use whatever price they are going for on Bitstamp or Coinbase, which is hard to argue with. For a deal that takes time, though, you might go with the 24h average.

Well, if you need to keep your identity that secret, you're never going to be able to use an exchange to convert between BTC and fiat. You're stuck with localbitcoins 

For people who have nothing to hide and don't care if the government has their name on a list somewhere, it should be fine.

This has been discussed quite a bit before.

BTC-E has always had lower prices, because it's hard to get money in. Gox has, for the past couple of months, had high prices because it's hard to get money out.

Everyone has a different experience. If you think whatever % you can get sounds good, even if it takes a few months to get your money, then go for it. Of course the price of bitcoins might double in that time, and then you would have been better off just waiting and selling back to wherever you bought them.

It is simply a certificate that says the object you hold is authentic, and not a fake or misrepresented.

The certificate can be issued by anyone who is knowledgeable enough to tell you if the item is real or not. And then the strength of the certificate would depend on who issues it.

I don't know why time is more important than proving it is an authentic coin, straight from Mike and not loaded by someone else. You know what year is on the coin, and you can see in the blockchain when the bitcoins were sent to that address. What else matters?

It's a good idea for an add-on service, which I think people are already working on: an independent database that keeps track of "dirty" coins.

Similar to the address labels on Blockchain.info, I guess. I like this idea better because it lets people choose to participate.

For example, the DPR coins might be attractive to someone who wants them as a memento of Bitcoin history, but to someone else they might be unwanted as a symbol of government intervention. Letting people see that those coins have that history, if they choose to look it up, and then letting them decide for themselves if that affects their value one way or the other sounds like a much better solution than simply telling someone their coins are stolen.

Why?


What did you lose?

Remember how BTC-E has always had low prices? There's a reason for that: hard to get money in.

And you know how now BTCCHINA has really high prices? There's a reason for that, too: hard to get money out.

If it was easy to do, people would already be doing it and we wouldn't see as large a gap as we do. China is a Communist country, and they have a strong hold on their currency. Just doing some quick Googling, Chinese residents can only send $50,000 per year overseas.

So, let's say you put up $45,000 to buy 150 coins. Send them to China, sell for $340 each, split the $6,000 profit with your Chinese partner, and have them wire back $48,000 (while also possibly paying taxes and bank fees, etc).

Oh, and don't forget to add in your trip to China 

So you might make $3,000 for the year. You could exceed the limit by having your Chinese contact's friends and relatives send you transfers in their names, but it seems like that would require even more trust.  And if the price of bitcoins goes way up and the price difference stays the same, you'll hit your limit earlier and make less profit.

It's a nice idea in theory, but I don't think it will pan out as well as it looks. Please let us know if you do try it, though!