Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 94 results by kolev
Sorry, but highest Bitcoin (with no bad news on the horizon for the entire year) is $1,300.Do you merge consequent transactions having the same price? http://screencast.com/t/mx6BAZu8J3o
BTC may never be this cheap again... So I think it could rally from here, what you think.
Says who? "May" doesn't sound like you have confidence either. Many like you were hopeful all the way from $1,200 down to $400. Certainly, you guys don't lack irrational hopefulness! When China news gets confirmed on Monday, you will see it dropping below $400!The China rumors are still not confirmed AFAIK.
Imagine what's gonna happen when it comes up to be true. I was certain this was the next move of China as exchanges treated them as idiots doing a workaround. This is China, guys. They don't like looking like fools! Use your brains - we're gonna see $200-300 again!Re: VISA & MASTERCARD blocked Russians from accessing their money
More details is here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=525168.0
I think it's good time to educate russians about the benefits of bitcoin.
I'm calling all russian speaking to start massive campaing promoting bitcoin in comments and discussions of relevant articles in russian press. May be their dumb authorities will finally realize that bitcoin is their friend.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=525168.0
I think it's good time to educate russians about the benefits of bitcoin.
I'm calling all russian speaking to start massive campaing promoting bitcoin in comments and discussions of relevant articles in russian press. May be their dumb authorities will finally realize that bitcoin is their friend.
It's obvious that you don't understand how credit cards work. No, they didn't block heir bank accounts, they just cannot spend them using heir debit/credit cards. This hurts American and European businesses more than Russia and the Russians! Stupid Obama! Worst president ever!
Re: [PRE][ANN]BTC38 IS ABOUT TO LAUNCE ITS ENGLISH VERSION EXCHANGE
Hello all user of BTT,
BTC38 IS ABOUT TO LAUNCE ITS ENGLISH VERSION EXCHANGE.
This is btc38.com(u can call us "btc time"). Btc38.com is and the no.5 large btc market and the largest altcoin in China. I guess you have known about us already. But the BTC38 is very very very bad, and unfriendly to users out of China for the following reason.
1, No English interface. All the interface of btc38.com are Chinese. Chinese is mysterious while diffcult to understand.
2, ONLY QQ LOGIN!!! How absurd this is! You'll be able to use Facebook to login very soon.
3, No English Service. The ticket system is slow and they worker don't read English. The answer they offer are rediculous.
4, No man in Btc38 is here in the forum. No way to contact them when there is any problem or advise.
5, No facebook. No twitter. BTC38 is out of the English World.
Soon, the above will be changed.
Btc38 will launch an Englsih version of the exchange. so soon you will be able trade on btc38. Total English interface, English ticket system, English hotline. And we'll update our anouncement/news and other information on the BTT forum twitter and facebook.
Before our formal lauch, we'll have an alpha test for a few days. Please reply to join the test if you want to help us to improve our exchange.
All advise and bug report are greatly welcome. We'll have some gifts for the bugs and advises accepted.
Thanks in advance, and wish all of you happy trading on btc38.
Our facebook and twiter will be online soon. I'll update them here where they are ready.
Btc38.com
2014.03.05
Really, Facebook login?
Re: Seems like China is dominating the market again with 71% of the volume?
According to
http://bitcoinity.org/markets/list?currency=ALL&span=24h
China has 71% of the volume for the last 24 hours
huobi is responsible for 67% and btcchina for 4%
Well huobi volume of 327,309 BTC for the last 24 hours seems way too big to be trusted?
What's the deal this time?
It's way more than 71% as this doesn't include all Chinese exchanges: http://btckan.com/pricehttp://bitcoinity.org/markets/list?currency=ALL&span=24h
China has 71% of the volume for the last 24 hours
huobi is responsible for 67% and btcchina for 4%
Well huobi volume of 327,309 BTC for the last 24 hours seems way too big to be trusted?
What's the deal this time?
Strong as "ever"? You mean, over $1,100? Don't fall for the speculation! Gold had a bump thanks to World War III worries and Bitcoin followed for whatever reason plus some whales got scared that they won't be able to buy back the bitcoins they sold 1-2 weeks ago.
Potential bombshell(or not) for Bitcoin coming up as Nic Cary, CEO of Blockchain.info, reveals on Twitter:
http://newsbtc.com/2014/03/03/blockchain-info-ceo-nic-cary-big-news-dropping-tomorrow/
Why @marketmakers and @bloomberg also?
I have a feeling whatever he's revealing will rock the Bitcoin world and financial world completely...in a good way!
$1000 coming up...
This is about the launch of blockchain.com. Don't get too excited!Quote
Nic Cary @niccary ·2h
This is going to be an exciting week. Some big news dropping tomorrow @marketmakers @bloomberg @blockchain #bitcoin
This is going to be an exciting week. Some big news dropping tomorrow @marketmakers @bloomberg @blockchain #bitcoin
http://newsbtc.com/2014/03/03/blockchain-info-ceo-nic-cary-big-news-dropping-tomorrow/
Why @marketmakers and @bloomberg also?
I have a feeling whatever he's revealing will rock the Bitcoin world and financial world completely...in a good way!
$1000 coming up...
Re: Why is the price climbing again? (3.3.2014 UTC around 16:00)
Wow... why is the price climbing some much again... on all exchanges (european+asian checked)?
Do you think it might be due to ukraine possible war? Or the bank problems in ukraine?
Panic buys are not any better than panic sells. It's obvious that Bitcoin is not good as a transactional currency with these crazy swings.Do you think it might be due to ukraine possible war? Or the bank problems in ukraine?
Re: How viable is Bitcoin with Satoshi + MtGox theif holding 2 Million BTC?
The fact that one exchange holds close to 1 million or 1/21 of all BTC is scary in itself.
But hey, don't let people tell you that Bitcoin is centralized.
Bitcoin should stick to its promise - decentralization. P2P + Ripple for fiat onramp/offramp is the only solid solution. This will remove speculators from the picture as they won't be able to conduct High-Frequency Trading and will keep large investors off the market, too, as it won't be so easy for them to acquire large amounts of bitcoins.But hey, don't let people tell you that Bitcoin is centralized.
Worst troll ever.
which is your main account your posting with an alt account
got something to hide
To be fair, I do not think there is any reason to believe that Yellen is any less competent then Bernanke or Greenspan. The global financial system is headed for another major disruption, regardless of what Yellen does.
Worst troll ever.
which is your main account your posting with an alt account
got something to hide
Re: Janet Yellen must step down and Return Ben Bernake to office
this is ridiculous she is so new at the job and she has already made a completely ridiculous public statement
she must resign, you cannot be so incompetent and expect to hold your job,
she should have had restraint and refrained from saying anything at all if she was unsure what to say
She's just an old lady trying to be hip.she must resign, you cannot be so incompetent and expect to hold your job,
she should have had restraint and refrained from saying anything at all if she was unsure what to say
Many on here think that only the people who currently have money or bitcoin with gox will be directly affected by a gox bankruptcy. That may not be the case. According to Jesse Powell, the CEO of Kraken, 800,000 bitcoin were stolen in June 2011. Instead of informing the public, gox decided to essentially run a ponzi scheme from that date forward through which it attempted to reach solvency by generating fees through transactions and possible arbitrage.
The bankruptcy trustee could determine that everything that occurred since that June 2011 date should be unwound, and that anyone who withdrew money or bitcoin from that will need to return those net profits to bankruptcy estate.
Don't believe me? Do you think the people who were smart enough, or lucky enough, to pull money out of their Bernie Madoff accounts got to keep those profits? No, the bankruptcy trustee sued every single one of those people and required them to put back into the bankruptcy estate all of their net profits that they made. And it meant nothing that they were completely unaware of the fraud.
So if you are one of those people who had money or bitcoin on gox and made a profit on the transaction, which is now sitting in your wallet or your bank account, don't be too sure you want gox to die.
Yes, this is possible. The law allows going back as far as 3 years!The bankruptcy trustee could determine that everything that occurred since that June 2011 date should be unwound, and that anyone who withdrew money or bitcoin from that will need to return those net profits to bankruptcy estate.
Don't believe me? Do you think the people who were smart enough, or lucky enough, to pull money out of their Bernie Madoff accounts got to keep those profits? No, the bankruptcy trustee sued every single one of those people and required them to put back into the bankruptcy estate all of their net profits that they made. And it meant nothing that they were completely unaware of the fraud.
So if you are one of those people who had money or bitcoin on gox and made a profit on the transaction, which is now sitting in your wallet or your bank account, don't be too sure you want gox to die.
We all dont know all the facts yet, but lets see what people think, based on the information that has come out so far, was it deliberate fraud or not ?
Every person has a different dollar equivalent of honestly. I think many of us having access to 750K BTC would feel very tempted, so, that's why I think incompetence charge is what he hopes for, but to me this is most probably theft.Re: How did they calculate that 744,408 BTC are missing from Mt. Gox?
Like the subject says: how did they calculate that 744,408 BTC are missing?
I've searched unsuccessfully for an analysis / answer to this question (and apologize if it's obvious somewhere else - please just point me to it). I also realize this is somewhat of an academic exercise since there isn't much official information (although there obviously is information being shared privately via back channels, as evident by the joint statement issued by other exchanges).
Looking at the "Crisis Strategy Document" (http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft), which is 'more or less true', on page 2 it explicitly says "744,408 BTC are missing". However the assets and liabilities table on page 5 doesn't seem to make sense. It lists the following liabilities:
624,408 BTC(Customers)
+120 000 ( MtGox)
-80 208 BTC From banned or suspicious accounts
(Of note might be the fact that those last 2 numbers don't have a comma separator, while ALL the other numbers in the entire document do. Perhaps these were added by someone after that fact that got confused?)
Note if you explicitly do the math, 624,408+120,000-80,208 = 664,200. You only get the 744,408 number if you ignore the 3rd item.
The first item I assume is just an easy tally of all the user account totals and seems reasonable based upon the estimate of 1.1 M accounts with 550,000 verified customers. (although note how that number is exactly half of the previous one, likely indicating this was a ballpark estimate. This is also a reasonable extrapolation from the 60,000 accounts they said they had in June 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18858.0;all)
The third item is obviously subtracting out the totals of 'bad' accounts. The second item is the confusing one to me. Why would 'MtGox' owe 'MtGox' another 120,000 BTC? Anyone have any ideas? One hypothesis I'd suggest is that this is actually the 'cold storage' estimate and it was accidentally put into the liability column when it should have been in the assets column.
While I'm at it, the income statement calculations on page 8 seem odd too (unredacted version available at http://i.imgur.com/u9aP9Hg.png).
First as a baseline, in April 2012, "Mt. Gox was receiving between $5 million and $20 million in incoming transfers each day, while paying out somewhere between $300,000 and $1 million" (http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/11/mtgox/all/). Worst case, that's a net of $4M per day. While I'm sure that didn't keep up long and is likely somewhat of an exaggeration, even 10% of that would still result in a significant net income over a year.
Bitcoincharts (http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg360ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv) shows that for the past year, a total of ~16M BTC traded last year (average of 45K BTC per day). At a normal fee of 0.53%, that's 85K BTC in fees (236 BTC / day average). If they converted those fees everyday automatically into USD, that would amount to $17.7M from fees ($50K / day average). However I doubt they actually do that. Most of it is probably kept as BTC.
Compare that to the second column of the income statement sheet, which shows net sales of $10.7M for the current year and $1.3M for the previous year that includes April 2012, which doesn't match up very well with the data above. Am I missing something? My suspicion is that they tried to keep a lot of company assets in BTC after the issues with DHS and Coinlab in May 2013 in order to 'keep them off the books' so to speak. Alternatively they just have no clue what their actual finances are or were grossly faking a lot of trade volume data.
Any thoughts from people more financially savvy then I am?
How can he say 80K bitcoins are no liability, because he decides that somebody is "suspicious" or got "banned"?!I've searched unsuccessfully for an analysis / answer to this question (and apologize if it's obvious somewhere else - please just point me to it). I also realize this is somewhat of an academic exercise since there isn't much official information (although there obviously is information being shared privately via back channels, as evident by the joint statement issued by other exchanges).
Looking at the "Crisis Strategy Document" (http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft), which is 'more or less true', on page 2 it explicitly says "744,408 BTC are missing". However the assets and liabilities table on page 5 doesn't seem to make sense. It lists the following liabilities:
624,408 BTC(Customers)
+120 000 ( MtGox)
-80 208 BTC From banned or suspicious accounts
(Of note might be the fact that those last 2 numbers don't have a comma separator, while ALL the other numbers in the entire document do. Perhaps these were added by someone after that fact that got confused?)
Note if you explicitly do the math, 624,408+120,000-80,208 = 664,200. You only get the 744,408 number if you ignore the 3rd item.
The first item I assume is just an easy tally of all the user account totals and seems reasonable based upon the estimate of 1.1 M accounts with 550,000 verified customers. (although note how that number is exactly half of the previous one, likely indicating this was a ballpark estimate. This is also a reasonable extrapolation from the 60,000 accounts they said they had in June 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18858.0;all)
The third item is obviously subtracting out the totals of 'bad' accounts. The second item is the confusing one to me. Why would 'MtGox' owe 'MtGox' another 120,000 BTC? Anyone have any ideas? One hypothesis I'd suggest is that this is actually the 'cold storage' estimate and it was accidentally put into the liability column when it should have been in the assets column.
While I'm at it, the income statement calculations on page 8 seem odd too (unredacted version available at http://i.imgur.com/u9aP9Hg.png).
First as a baseline, in April 2012, "Mt. Gox was receiving between $5 million and $20 million in incoming transfers each day, while paying out somewhere between $300,000 and $1 million" (http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/11/mtgox/all/). Worst case, that's a net of $4M per day. While I'm sure that didn't keep up long and is likely somewhat of an exaggeration, even 10% of that would still result in a significant net income over a year.
Bitcoincharts (http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg360ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv) shows that for the past year, a total of ~16M BTC traded last year (average of 45K BTC per day). At a normal fee of 0.53%, that's 85K BTC in fees (236 BTC / day average). If they converted those fees everyday automatically into USD, that would amount to $17.7M from fees ($50K / day average). However I doubt they actually do that. Most of it is probably kept as BTC.
Compare that to the second column of the income statement sheet, which shows net sales of $10.7M for the current year and $1.3M for the previous year that includes April 2012, which doesn't match up very well with the data above. Am I missing something? My suspicion is that they tried to keep a lot of company assets in BTC after the issues with DHS and Coinlab in May 2013 in order to 'keep them off the books' so to speak. Alternatively they just have no clue what their actual finances are or were grossly faking a lot of trade volume data.
Any thoughts from people more financially savvy then I am?