Search content
Sort by
Showing 18 of 18 results by nearmint
He might not want 2fa because it lowers conversion rate. Less people would use the forum and the forum's only strength is its community. BUT the forum would be still big enough after 2fa. It's a classic in the scene, so ppl will continue to use it. I would use it with 2fa 
I also find it very interesting that the attacker is able to aggregate the e-mail addresses from different [database] sources. Doesn't this mean he has direct access to multiple bitcoin-related databases or at least some indirect way to extract e-mail addresses from the databases?
Danke für deinen Beitrag qwk. Unter der Annahme, dass Localbitcoins juristisch legal betrieben wird, sehe ich demnach zwei Möglichkeiten:
a) Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung / Einordnung von dem betriebenem Bitcoin-Geschäft durch FIN-FSA und BaFin
b) Ein Unterschied im Geschäftskonzept (auch wenn durch mich im Falle des Userverkaufs per Banküberweisung nicht zu erkennen)
Zu b) auch folgender Artikel: http://bitcoinage.de/die-bafin-zu-bitcoin-eine-kommentierte-version/
Hier wird auch zwischen bitcoin.de und localbitcoins.com unterschieden. Scheinbar machen die den Unterschied daran fest, dass es sich bei localbitcoins.com um ein regional gegliedertes entgeltliches Web-Verzeichnis von Personen, die BTC in ihrem Wohnort zum Kauf oder Verkauf anbieten, handelt.
Wenn die unterschiedliche Bewertung auf so einen Quatsch hinausläuft, dann aber holla die Waldfee.
a) Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung / Einordnung von dem betriebenem Bitcoin-Geschäft durch FIN-FSA und BaFin
b) Ein Unterschied im Geschäftskonzept (auch wenn durch mich im Falle des Userverkaufs per Banküberweisung nicht zu erkennen)
Zu b) auch folgender Artikel: http://bitcoinage.de/die-bafin-zu-bitcoin-eine-kommentierte-version/
Hier wird auch zwischen bitcoin.de und localbitcoins.com unterschieden. Scheinbar machen die den Unterschied daran fest, dass es sich bei localbitcoins.com um ein regional gegliedertes entgeltliches Web-Verzeichnis von Personen, die BTC in ihrem Wohnort zum Kauf oder Verkauf anbieten, handelt.
Wenn die unterschiedliche Bewertung auf so einen Quatsch hinausläuft, dann aber holla die Waldfee.
Das bringt uns leider nicht weiter.
Der Geschäftssitz von Localbitcoins ist in der Europäischen Union, daher glaube ich nicht, dass die FIN-FSA in Finland denen mehr Spielraum bietet als die BaFin in Deutschland.
Der Geschäftssitz von Localbitcoins ist in der Europäischen Union, daher glaube ich nicht, dass die FIN-FSA in Finland denen mehr Spielraum bietet als die BaFin in Deutschland.
Hallo liebe Nutzer!
Bitcoin.de muss mit der Fidor Bank zusammenarbeiten, um Bitcoin-Geschäfte zu vermitteln. Ich nehme an, dass das speziell auch davon kommt, weil die Bitcoins von Verkäufern auf Accounts von bitcoin.de gespeichert werden.
Localbitcoins.com müsste demnach dann aber auch eine Banklizenz benötigen. Bei Localbitcoin kann man auch z.B. per Überweisung Bitcoins einkaufen. Eigentlich ist die Vorgehensweise genau die selbe wie bei bitcoin.de. Kann mir da mal jemand was zu sagen?
https://anycoindirect.eu/ verkauft Bitcoins direkt (also im gewerblichen Umfang) und ist in den Niederlanden registriert. Die behaupten, dass se auch keine Lizenz bräuchten, trolol. Sollte man sein gewerbliches Bitcoin-Business in den Niederlanden aufmachen?
Zitat vom Chat:
Bitcoin.de muss mit der Fidor Bank zusammenarbeiten, um Bitcoin-Geschäfte zu vermitteln. Ich nehme an, dass das speziell auch davon kommt, weil die Bitcoins von Verkäufern auf Accounts von bitcoin.de gespeichert werden.
Localbitcoins.com müsste demnach dann aber auch eine Banklizenz benötigen. Bei Localbitcoin kann man auch z.B. per Überweisung Bitcoins einkaufen. Eigentlich ist die Vorgehensweise genau die selbe wie bei bitcoin.de. Kann mir da mal jemand was zu sagen?
https://anycoindirect.eu/ verkauft Bitcoins direkt (also im gewerblichen Umfang) und ist in den Niederlanden registriert. Die behaupten, dass se auch keine Lizenz bräuchten, trolol. Sollte man sein gewerbliches Bitcoin-Business in den Niederlanden aufmachen?
Zitat vom Chat:
Quote
Me:6:23 PM
Hi, aren't you operating illegally, since you don't have a banking license?
Bram:6:23 PM
Hello Moritz
Bram:6:24 PM
No, we don't need a banking licence because we don't hold or control funds (crypto or fiat) of our customers.
Me:6:24 PM
So if I buy something with Giropay, what happens?
Bram:6:25 PM
If you finish the payment we get a notice that you payed the order. When we get that message the coins will automatically be send to your wallet.
Me:6:27 PM
But where am I paying to o.O
Bram:6:28 PM
The money will first be colected by our payment service provider. They release the funds to us.
Me:6:29 PM
according to your statement above, you said you dont hold funds of your customers. but i'm paying to a psp and he'll release the money to you?
Bram:6:29 PM
Yes, but since we send the coins to you as soon as you finish the payment we don't hold your funds.
Bram:6:30 PM
Because we have delivered the coins the funds are ours from that moment
Me:6:31 PM
So basically you are selling your own bitcoins
Bram:6:31 PM
Yes
Me:6:31 PM
That's pretty cool
Me:6:32 PM
I'm from Germany here our BaFin says, that if I trade with bitcoins to fiat as a business it's a moneyexchange. So you don't need a license in Netherlands to operate as a moneyexchange?
Bram:6:32 PM
Not the way we operate.
Bram:6:33 PM
If we would hold and manage funds of our customers it would be nesesery in some regions.
Me:6:34 PM
still ure selling btc for eur. it's like selling usd for eur. in germany i would need a license for it i don't understand :<
Bram:6:36 PM
I don't know for sure if it will be exactly the same. BTC isn't a official currency. But in from the Netherlands we are allowed to operate the way we do.
Me:6:36 PM
okay thanks
Hi, aren't you operating illegally, since you don't have a banking license?
Bram:6:23 PM
Hello Moritz
Bram:6:24 PM
No, we don't need a banking licence because we don't hold or control funds (crypto or fiat) of our customers.
Me:6:24 PM
So if I buy something with Giropay, what happens?
Bram:6:25 PM
If you finish the payment we get a notice that you payed the order. When we get that message the coins will automatically be send to your wallet.
Me:6:27 PM
But where am I paying to o.O
Bram:6:28 PM
The money will first be colected by our payment service provider. They release the funds to us.
Me:6:29 PM
according to your statement above, you said you dont hold funds of your customers. but i'm paying to a psp and he'll release the money to you?
Bram:6:29 PM
Yes, but since we send the coins to you as soon as you finish the payment we don't hold your funds.
Bram:6:30 PM
Because we have delivered the coins the funds are ours from that moment
Me:6:31 PM
So basically you are selling your own bitcoins
Bram:6:31 PM
Yes
Me:6:31 PM
That's pretty cool
Me:6:32 PM
I'm from Germany here our BaFin says, that if I trade with bitcoins to fiat as a business it's a moneyexchange. So you don't need a license in Netherlands to operate as a moneyexchange?
Bram:6:32 PM
Not the way we operate.
Bram:6:33 PM
If we would hold and manage funds of our customers it would be nesesery in some regions.
Me:6:34 PM
still ure selling btc for eur. it's like selling usd for eur. in germany i would need a license for it i don't understand :<
Bram:6:36 PM
I don't know for sure if it will be exactly the same. BTC isn't a official currency. But in from the Netherlands we are allowed to operate the way we do.
Me:6:36 PM
okay thanks
Hi, ein 1-Mann-Unternehmen sucht einen PHP Entwickler. Wenn du Interesse an Bitcoins / digitalen Gütern hast und ein intensiver, talentierter Mensch bist, dann lass uns in der Zukunft gemeinsam die Nächte durcharbeiten.
Ein Grund sich das Ganze näher anzuschauen?
Das Projekt wirft heute schon genug Geld ab, um dir ein ordentliches Gehalt zu zahlen.
Hier das Stellenausschreiben auf Stackoverflow Careers:
Ein Grund sich das Ganze näher anzuschauen?
Das Projekt wirft heute schon genug Geld ab, um dir ein ordentliches Gehalt zu zahlen.
Hier das Stellenausschreiben auf Stackoverflow Careers:
Quote
Hallo,
ich finde die Fragestellung auch interessant und poste daher nach so langer Zeit nochmal in diesem Topic.
Ich vermute der Unterschied zwischen Bitcoins und Klammlosen ist, dass Bitcoins ein so großes Phänomen sind, dass sie bereits als "Units of Account" in DE anerkannt sind u.a. auch, damit Bitcoineinnahmen vom deutschen Staat versteuert werden können.
Weiterhin ist das problematisch, dass Bitcoin die klare Absicht verfolgt als Währung anerkannt zu werden.... und das wurde eben speziell durch das dezentralisierte System möglich, da liegt der Angelpunkt. In jedem Fall sind Bitcoins eher als Sachwert anzusehen als Klammlose.
Natürlich könnte man jetzt etwas in einem Land starten, die noch gar nichts zu Bitcoin gesagt haben. Aber da läuft man auch große Gefahr, dass es nachträglich als ähnlich einer Währung / geldwert angesehen wird, und dann wirst du nachträglich strafrechtlich belangt. Glücksspiel ist eine Straftat, keine Ordnungswidrigkeit
ich finde die Fragestellung auch interessant und poste daher nach so langer Zeit nochmal in diesem Topic.
Quote
Ein Deutscher, kein Gewerbe. Und wie der Name der Domain schon vermuten lässt, handelt es sich um eine online Spielbank. Allerdings eben mit Klammlosen. Diese sind den Bitcoins doch sehr ähnlich. Sie haben nämlich keinen Wert, der Wert definiert sich nur durch Angebot und Nachfrage. Einziger Unterschied ist, dass Lose nicht dezentral sind.
Ich vermute der Unterschied zwischen Bitcoins und Klammlosen ist, dass Bitcoins ein so großes Phänomen sind, dass sie bereits als "Units of Account" in DE anerkannt sind u.a. auch, damit Bitcoineinnahmen vom deutschen Staat versteuert werden können.
Weiterhin ist das problematisch, dass Bitcoin die klare Absicht verfolgt als Währung anerkannt zu werden.... und das wurde eben speziell durch das dezentralisierte System möglich, da liegt der Angelpunkt. In jedem Fall sind Bitcoins eher als Sachwert anzusehen als Klammlose.
Natürlich könnte man jetzt etwas in einem Land starten, die noch gar nichts zu Bitcoin gesagt haben. Aber da läuft man auch große Gefahr, dass es nachträglich als ähnlich einer Währung / geldwert angesehen wird, und dann wirst du nachträglich strafrechtlich belangt. Glücksspiel ist eine Straftat, keine Ordnungswidrigkeit
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Strategy-game to win minimum of 0.1 BTC - (not luck/lottery etc.)
Hello people, the game will be shut down for now.
We'll first do our own code, since it's illegal to use their code.
Sorry for wasting your time.
The four people who actually paid their registration fees will be double refunded. This way you actually got "something" out of this
so if you paid 0.002, we'll pay you back 0.004. Thanks for the trust guys.
Please check your registered email accounts, we're right now sending out an email asking to what wallet address you want the 0.004 BTC
^nm
We'll first do our own code, since it's illegal to use their code.
Sorry for wasting your time.
The four people who actually paid their registration fees will be double refunded. This way you actually got "something" out of this
so if you paid 0.002, we'll pay you back 0.004. Thanks for the trust guys.
Please check your registered email accounts, we're right now sending out an email asking to what wallet address you want the 0.004 BTC
^nm
I think it's scary that more than 40% of all BTC are in wallets owning more than 1000 BTC. I guess some of those wallets have been lost, but if some of these owners decide to sell, BTC value will drop hard
Re: Transaction Fees: How do I know the "transaction size" of a Bitcoin Payment?
Thanks again for the time you took to answer my questions!!
Unfortunately, I don't quite understand this last part of your reply yet. Is defining inputs = ALL previously received outputs to a certain wallet?) From what I understand, if we have to calculate the sum of all inputs (=all btc ownership values that were transferred to the wallet?) minus the sum of all outputs (=all btc ownership values that were transferred away from the wallet), then the transaction fee can only be calculated after the transaction has taken place. But that can't be right :-), so I guess it will get more clear to me, once I've finished the whitepaper.
By the way,.. starting to read Satoshi's whitepaper..the first question that pops to my mind is in regards to the Timestamp Server.
Won't the transaction size increase, depending on how many Timestamps have been added to the chain? Wouldn't this mean at one point, every transaction will be subject to higher and higher transaction fees, simply because the timestamp chain is getting larger and larger?
Is the following true?
1. Miners' nodes are needed to confirm transactions
2. At one point, all Bitcoins are mined
3. So at some point, miners need to make money just by confirming transactions, because they can't mine Bitcoins anymore.
4. The process of confirming transactions increases in difficulty depending on amount of transfers of the bitcoin-ownership (therefore the difficulty just increases, it's not self-regulated), as opposed to the difficulty to mine Bitcoin, which increases in difficulty depending on how much total CPU power is trying to mine the Coins at a given point (self-regulated: less cpu power mining >easier mining for the remaining clients)
Unfortunately, I don't quite understand this last part of your reply yet. Is defining inputs = ALL previously received outputs to a certain wallet?) From what I understand, if we have to calculate the sum of all inputs (=all btc ownership values that were transferred to the wallet?) minus the sum of all outputs (=all btc ownership values that were transferred away from the wallet), then the transaction fee can only be calculated after the transaction has taken place. But that can't be right :-), so I guess it will get more clear to me, once I've finished the whitepaper.
Quote
The transaction defines inputs. These are previously received outputs that have not yet been spent. Each input is fully spent adding its entire value to the transaction to be reassigned in the outputs of the transaction.
The transaction defines outputs. Each newly created output assigns some of the total input value to an address.
If the sum of the value of the outputs is larger than the sum of the value of the inputs, then the transaction is invalid and will be rejected by the entire network. Properly working wallets will never create such a transaction.
If the sum of the value of the outputs is equal to the sum of the value of the inputs, then the transaction has no transaction fee.
If the sum of the value of the outputs is less than the sum of the value of the inputs, then the difference between the sum of the value of the inputs and the sum of the value of the outputs is the transaction fee.
The transaction defines outputs. Each newly created output assigns some of the total input value to an address.
If the sum of the value of the outputs is larger than the sum of the value of the inputs, then the transaction is invalid and will be rejected by the entire network. Properly working wallets will never create such a transaction.
If the sum of the value of the outputs is equal to the sum of the value of the inputs, then the transaction has no transaction fee.
If the sum of the value of the outputs is less than the sum of the value of the inputs, then the difference between the sum of the value of the inputs and the sum of the value of the outputs is the transaction fee.
By the way,.. starting to read Satoshi's whitepaper..the first question that pops to my mind is in regards to the Timestamp Server.
Won't the transaction size increase, depending on how many Timestamps have been added to the chain? Wouldn't this mean at one point, every transaction will be subject to higher and higher transaction fees, simply because the timestamp chain is getting larger and larger?
Quote
Each timestamp includes the previous timestamp in
its hash, forming a chain, with each additional timestamp reinforcing the ones before it
its hash, forming a chain, with each additional timestamp reinforcing the ones before it
Is the following true?
1. Miners' nodes are needed to confirm transactions
2. At one point, all Bitcoins are mined
3. So at some point, miners need to make money just by confirming transactions, because they can't mine Bitcoins anymore.
4. The process of confirming transactions increases in difficulty depending on amount of transfers of the bitcoin-ownership (therefore the difficulty just increases, it's not self-regulated), as opposed to the difficulty to mine Bitcoin, which increases in difficulty depending on how much total CPU power is trying to mine the Coins at a given point (self-regulated: less cpu power mining >easier mining for the remaining clients)
Re: Transaction Fees: How do I know the "transaction size" of a Bitcoin Payment?
Hello DanielHamilton,
thanks for your answer!
I don't understand your logic.
If 0.01 BTC is worth 4, and outputs that are lower than 0.01 BTC, might incur a transaction fee. then you cannot make micropayments of less than 4 with Bitcoin without having a transaction fee of at least 0.0001 BTC (worth about 0.04)
I just wanted to get confirmed, that this "lower than 0.01 BTC incurs a fee of at least 0.0001" is correct, cause that means Bitcoins is not very well suitable for payments up to 4.
. So for transaction size, it's always better to receive bitcoin in a larger one-time transaction rather than many more transactions. Because if you want to send the bitcoin away again and the bitcoin, that you are trying to send, came from multiple transactions, the transaction size will get bigger...
thanks for your answer!
Quote
I don't understand your logic.
If 0.01 BTC is worth 4, and outputs that are lower than 0.01 BTC, might incur a transaction fee. then you cannot make micropayments of less than 4 with Bitcoin without having a transaction fee of at least 0.0001 BTC (worth about 0.04)
I just wanted to get confirmed, that this "lower than 0.01 BTC incurs a fee of at least 0.0001" is correct, cause that means Bitcoins is not very well suitable for payments up to 4.
Quote
No. Transaction size is also increased by receiving multiple small values of bitcoins that must then be spent together as inputs to a transaction.
Thanks for this valuable information . So for transaction size, it's always better to receive bitcoin in a larger one-time transaction rather than many more transactions. Because if you want to send the bitcoin away again and the bitcoin, that you are trying to send, came from multiple transactions, the transaction size will get bigger...Quote
The transaction is still immediate, but the confirmation may take a while (possibly several days). Under some circumstances where the transaction looks like spam or a DDOS attack on the network, many peers may refuse to relay the transaction. In this case your recipient will not see the transaction, and neither will the miners.
This means that it is possible to send Bitcoin to someone else, without him ever noticing that he has received Bitcoins. That means it is actually possible to lose Bitcoins in the sending process, even though the correct Bitcoin address has been named.. right? I find that very strange. If I'm using a program such as MultiBit, will it tell me when I should pay a transaction fee? Will it recommend me to pay a transaction fee for small amounts? Or how is this done. And how is this done in automatic scripts? Does one usually define that payments lower than 0.01 BTC are subject to transaction fee of 0.0001? And how do you define in a transaction what part of the transaction is designated as transaction fee and what part of the transaction is for the actual receiver?Re: *NEWS ALERT* Mt. Gox Trading Halts As Bitcoin Businesses
This document might explain some things: http://de.scribd.com/doc/209050732/MtGox-Situation-Crisis-Strategy-Draft
They must have had exactly no checking/accounting practices in place, if they failed to notice thousands of BTC missing for years.
Quote
At this point 744,408 BTC are missing due to malleability-related theft which went unnoticed for several years.
[...]Quote
Switch off the MtGox exchange temporarily (1 month) while announcing a restructuring and re-branding
They must have had exactly no checking/accounting practices in place, if they failed to notice thousands of BTC missing for years.
Transaction Fees: How do I know the "transaction size" of a Bitcoin Payment?
According to my source quoted below, Bitcoin Payments may be subject to transaction fees.
Here are my questions:
1. How can I know the size of a transaction in bytes? How is the transaction size calculated? Is the only way to increase the transaction size by adding more recipients of coin? I.e. sending coins to multiple wallets in a single transaction?
2. According to the article, outputs that are lower than 0.01 BTC, might incur a transaction fee. -> let's assume 0.01 BTC is worth 4; then I cannot make Micropayments of less than 1 with Bitcoin without having a payment fee??? Is this correct?
3. According to the article, a payment fee would simply be a motivation for bitcoin miners to include my transaction in the next generated block. Does this mean I can "choose to pay the fee"? And if I don't the transaction might not be "immediate", because of lack of motivation for the bitcoin miner?
Please help me to grasp this more clearly Thanks!
Source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees
Here are my questions:
1. How can I know the size of a transaction in bytes? How is the transaction size calculated? Is the only way to increase the transaction size by adding more recipients of coin? I.e. sending coins to multiple wallets in a single transaction?
2. According to the article, outputs that are lower than 0.01 BTC, might incur a transaction fee. -> let's assume 0.01 BTC is worth 4; then I cannot make Micropayments of less than 1 with Bitcoin without having a payment fee??? Is this correct?
3. According to the article, a payment fee would simply be a motivation for bitcoin miners to include my transaction in the next generated block. Does this mean I can "choose to pay the fee"? And if I don't the transaction might not be "immediate", because of lack of motivation for the bitcoin miner?
Please help me to grasp this more clearly
Thanks!Quote
A transaction may be safely sent without fees if these conditions are met:
It is smaller than 1,000 bytes.
All outputs are 0.01 BTC or larger.
Its priority is large enough (see the Technical Info section below)
Otherwise, the reference implementation will round up the transaction size to the next thousand bytes and add a fee of 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC) per thousand bytes[1]. As an example, a fee of 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC) would be added to a 746 byte transaction, and a fee of 0.2 mBTC (0.0002 BTC) would be added to a 1001 byte transaction. Users may increase the default 0.0001 BTC/kB fee setting, but cannot control transaction fees for each transaction. Bitcoin-Qt does prompt the user to accept the fee before the transaction is sent (they may cancel the transaction if they are not willing to pay the fee).
Note that a typical transaction is 500 bytes, so the typical transaction fee for low-priority transactions is 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC), regardless of the number of bitcoins sent.
It is smaller than 1,000 bytes.
All outputs are 0.01 BTC or larger.
Its priority is large enough (see the Technical Info section below)
Otherwise, the reference implementation will round up the transaction size to the next thousand bytes and add a fee of 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC) per thousand bytes[1]. As an example, a fee of 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC) would be added to a 746 byte transaction, and a fee of 0.2 mBTC (0.0002 BTC) would be added to a 1001 byte transaction. Users may increase the default 0.0001 BTC/kB fee setting, but cannot control transaction fees for each transaction. Bitcoin-Qt does prompt the user to accept the fee before the transaction is sent (they may cancel the transaction if they are not willing to pay the fee).
Note that a typical transaction is 500 bytes, so the typical transaction fee for low-priority transactions is 0.1 mBTC (0.0001 BTC), regardless of the number of bitcoins sent.
Source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees
Hi guys,
for my project, I would like to pay my partners using Bitcoin in an automized way. But I would like to avoid the up and downs of bitcoin to fiat-trading.
Is it possible to purchase bitcoins for fiat in an automated way, so that I can exchange my fiat for bitcoin and send those bitcoins to my partners in one move? If there would be even a 1 hour window, because the bitcoins have to be purchased manually for fiat from my side, the Bitcoins might be worth less when they finally arrive in the hands of my partners; so I'd like an automized solution.
I'd want to be able to transfer the bitcoins to them at the same fiat value that I purchased them for (=at the same point of time).
Any way to do that?
Thanks for your input!
for my project, I would like to pay my partners using Bitcoin in an automized way. But I would like to avoid the up and downs of bitcoin to fiat-trading.
Is it possible to purchase bitcoins for fiat in an automated way, so that I can exchange my fiat for bitcoin and send those bitcoins to my partners in one move? If there would be even a 1 hour window, because the bitcoins have to be purchased manually for fiat from my side, the Bitcoins might be worth less when they finally arrive in the hands of my partners; so I'd like an automized solution.
I'd want to be able to transfer the bitcoins to them at the same fiat value that I purchased them for (=at the same point of time).
Any way to do that?
Thanks for your input!
Thanks for your rapid reply, yogi!
Then here's another question:
I've read that some people on MtGox are waiting on payouts for months now.*
But that particular "payout problem" seems to have been only about US fiat payouts. Why or how were people continuing to trade, when there was a payout problem for such a long time? You know: If people are waiting for millions and millions of cash, why/how does trading continue on the platform that is responsible?
*example source: http://bitcoinmagazine.com/7064/with-current-processes-mt-gox-usd-withdrawals-could-take-22-months/
Then here's another question:
I've read that some people on MtGox are waiting on payouts for months now.*
But that particular "payout problem" seems to have been only about US fiat payouts. Why or how were people continuing to trade, when there was a payout problem for such a long time? You know: If people are waiting for millions and millions of cash, why/how does trading continue on the platform that is responsible?
*example source: http://bitcoinmagazine.com/7064/with-current-processes-mt-gox-usd-withdrawals-could-take-22-months/
Hi guys, sorry, I'm completely new to Bitcoin.
Tell me, if I would invest in Bitcoins @Mt.Gox now, I wouldn't be able to receive the Bitcoins, due to the "payouts being frozen" correct?
So I would kind of speculate in the option that Mt.Gox will release my newly acquired Bitcoins at some point rather than going bankrupt, correct?
Tell me, if I would invest in Bitcoins @Mt.Gox now, I wouldn't be able to receive the Bitcoins, due to the "payouts being frozen" correct?
So I would kind of speculate in the option that Mt.Gox will release my newly acquired Bitcoins at some point rather than going bankrupt, correct?