www.bitcoin.name

r/Bitcoin recap - August 2018

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the twentieth monthly Bitcoin news recap.
For the Daily Discussion Thread please go here.
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in August 2018
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

EOS Update September 6, 2018. Market Crash, And What Might Follow

I think it’s fair to call this a crash. Around 20% down for most alt coins and Bitcoin down 12-13%. Why is this happening? No one knows for sure of course. Some are pointing to Goldman Sachs ditching plans to open crypto trading desk. But it seems like they are forgetting that GS is instead opening for crypto custody. In other bearish news we have some MtGox Bitcoin being moved to an exchange and Silk Road Bitcoin being dumped on the market. This could be the reasons for the dump, or it could be what many believes, orchestrated clustering of bad news to “Justify” market manipulation. Who wants the market to go down? Either institutions or very rich individuals that are looking for a better entry, and or let’s not forget what and who we are up against here – the banks and politicians. I believe that many underestimate their power. We are not playing around here. Crypto was starting to free people and the peasants (us) started realising how the free market incentivised us to improve, socialise, share ideas, be enthusiastic. No no no, can’t have any of that. That is not the emotions and traits banks and governments wants us to carry around. They want us supressed and depressed. Oh…oops, sorry, that’s the text I prepared for the meeting later..down at the docks.
more..
https://trybe.one/eos-update-september-6-2018-market-crash-and-what-might-follow/
submitted by Block-Sanders to eos [link] [comments]

Here is the entire letter from Brock Pierce that the WSJ referenced earlier today. (FWIW, I believe him.)

It was great to see some of you during the Bitcoin2014 conference. Because of the press coverage and Bitcoin Foundation member response to my election, I wanted to take the opportunity to make you all aware of the facts about my background.
Approximately 14 years ago, I was falsely accused of sexual assault in civil lawsuits filed against multiple defendants in California by a man named Mike Egan and some of his friends. They apparently saw an opportunity to extort money from several entrepreneurs, including me. I was never served with the lawsuits and didn’t even know they existed. When I later became aware, I immediately went to court in California and aggressively cleared my name. Each of the lawsuits was dismissed by the Courts with the full consent of Mr. Egan and the other plaintiffs, none of whom seemed eager to further perjure themselves in open court in the face of someone standing up to them.
These civil actions arose from my association, at the age of 17, with a tech startup called Digital Entertainment Network, which was founded by a man who was later charged with certain federal offenses that dated back to many years before I joined the company.
Let me emphasize this: Despite a full investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office, the FBI and the State of California into the allegations, I was never charged with anything whatsoever by anyone and was cleared of any wrongdoing.
The only reason my name has surfaced again in this context is because the same man who convinced his friends that they might be able to extort money from me back then is now trying the same thing against Director Bryan Singer, on the eve of the debut of “X-Men: Days of Future Past,” and three other successful Hollywood figures. This lawsuit has nothing to do with me. I am not a defendant.
The sad truth is that Mike Egan’s family appears to have a history of abusing the legal system to try to advance its financial interests, even bringing suits against family members. And, according to recent articles in Buzzfeed, The Wrap and The Hollywood Reporter, Egan and his mother already have been caught in lies that are likely to unravel the pending cases against Mr. Singer and the others.
Bitcoin is controversial in some quarters. That’s why I believe we need people on the board who are not afraid of being publicly attacked and who have no skeletons in their closets. I have been subjected to continuous public scrutiny since my childhood. I have nothing to hide and nothing to fear.
Ironically, I have put my heart, my time and my effort into saving MtGox and becoming a member of the Foundation Board in an effort to help bitcoin project an image of integrity and to allow those who wish to participate in the Bitcoin ecosystem to do so without fear of losing their investment. In fact, I ran for election in response to the tarnish that came as a result of MtGox’s failure.
It’s absurd for the press and some members of the Foundation to try to put me in the same category as board members who, in one case, lost hundreds of millions of dollars of the very currency we want to thrive, and in the second case, has been charged with aiding and abetting money laundering.
I am sorry that 10 of 1,500 members chose to resign, but I am at a loss to explain why they would do so now and not after Mr. Karpeles allowed MtGox to implode or Mr. Shrem was indicted. I am saddened and angered by this.
Yet stepping down from the board in response to hateful and uninformed chatter on bitcoin forums or because of these resignations is not rational, prudent or warranted. It would set a bad precedent for the Foundation, rewarding those who make scurrilous accusations and engage in character assassination, often anonymously.
A resignation also could be perceived as an admission of guilt and I am guilty of nothing and have never been convicted, or even charged, with a crime.
A resignation could impair efforts by my partners and me to rehabilitate MtGox and prove that the industry is self-healing and needs no government regulation. Our intentions are to fully compensate customers who lost money, helping to restore faith in bitcoin. We are eager to expand participation in the market once we launch a new exchange. It would be a shame if the 127,000 MtGox creditors and the rest of the community were to suffer a setback because of this rumor-mongering.
I might also add that some of the individuals inciting this vitriol have a motive: They want to torpedo the Gox transaction because they oppose rehabilitation efforts or they are mounting their own plan.
I have been duly elected. If anyone on the Foundation board has recently been subjected to community approval, it is Bobby Lee and me.
I have devoted most of my adult life to pioneering, building and believing in digital currencies. Over the last decade and a half, I have built many successful businesses, many of them based on digital currencies. I have raised millions of dollars from investors, many of whom have invested with me multiple times. I have supported the community passionately and steadfastly.
During this time, I have been vetted by some of the most scrupulous investors, including Goldman Sachs, Oak Investment Partners, Clearstone Partners, Intel Capital, and dozens of other major individuals and institutions. No investor to my knowledge has ever refused to invest in me because of my background.
I hope this helps clarify the situation and I thank you for your support.
Sincerely, Brock Pierce
submitted by twobitidiot to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A quick word about bulk cross trades (and about the Mtgox trustee crashing the market)

Some of you already know me from my previous reddit post. Today I am going to talk to you about an aspect of the crypto market that I discovered a few months ago and which continues to blow my mind on a daily basis. A market that only a few people really are familiar with, because it simply did not exist 6 months ago: Cross trades for amounts over 10k BTC (>$100m). I will explain how a buyer and a seller try to exchange OTC large quantities of crypto aginst fiat, or crypto vs crypto (e,g BTC/ETH) for large amount, in a single transaction. I thought no single individual except Satoshi possibly had more than 100k btc until I saw it with my eyes. It took me time to realize it was true. It's ironical I drafted this post way before the Mtgox Trustee decided to screw us up by unleashing its stack on the market in the most unappropriate way. As I highlighted in my previous post, bitcoin is still a very thin market and trading on exchange and not OTC is a sure way to crash the market. If you are an early bitcoin adopter and held all these years, you certainly care about the price. If you want to let the market unaffected by your exit, cross trades are the way to operate. This post might be boring to some of you, it does not intend to be funny, but to clarify how this market is operated right now, and how it should be organized.
How I got involved.
Following my reddit post, I was contacted on telegram at year end. Private chat with 2mn self distruct. A simple message: "I have a seller for 40k BTC willing to sell at 5% discount" My philosophy in life is always to give a chance to people. Even though I thought this was 99% likely to be a scam, that I had not sleept for 2 days following the inflow of messages that had buried my reddit inbox, I gave a chance to this guy; and the nightmare begun.
The problem with cross trades today.
You must be familiar with the concept of "Six degrees of separation" Anyone in the word is 6 phone calls away from any other guy. Might be Donald Trump. But it might also be Satoshi after all. Anyone knows someone who knows a bitcoin whale. In this context, if someone tells you he knows a seller, and you naïvely start looking for a buyer, what will inevitably happen is the following: You will be right in the middle of a chain of 7 introducing agents that connects a distruful seller to a distrustful buyer. 7 people who think they are entitled to a cut on the trade just for the privilege of providing the name and phone number of the next guys in the chain. All of them will picture themselves as the new Jordan Belfort, and explain to you rationaly why he diserves a bigger cut than you. Meanwhile, the deal does not progress, negociations between introducing agents go on and on endlessly, the 5% discount is completely eaten up by their greed and when eventually an informal agreement is found with everyone, the fluctuations of bitcoin has gotten either the seller or the buyer dead cold. And that's when an end party does not turn up to be ghost bid or offer in the first place, potentially wasting the time of everone involved in the transaction. Some people in the chain would also patronize you. They would claim they have settled such deals in the past and know better than you. They would even try to intimidate you to squeeze you or get you out of the chain. One guy threatened to report my company to the FINMA for alledgedly misrepresenting a trade. I have spent over a year setting up my business in the most professional way, hiring full time crypto trader, in-house lawyer, compliance officer, analyst, relationship managers. Paid hundred thousands of Swiss Francs & BTC in salaries, expenses and legal opinions to be able to legally and transparently operate according to the regulations in Switzerland, and just like this, one guy thinks he can shut me down to increase his cut ? come on. That's what a cross trade generally looks like today. The wild wild west. An emerging market full of non-professional introducing agents eager for a get-rich-quick 1% introducing fee on a crypto wealth that was created out of a long and painful hodling by the seller.
Distrustful Buyer and Distrustful Seller. One big issue with cross trades is who should show his cards first. Typically the buyer would not want to disclose his identity before the seller shows a proof of life of his wallet. I will spare you the kind of scams whereby a would-be seller replies to the request with a virus-infected video of his wallet. Similarly, legit sellers would not want to disclose their id easily before seeing a proof of funds. This problem quickly becomes a dead end when communication is not direct and information gets lost in translation within the chain of introducing agents. To solve this issue we have elaborated a neutral procedure for both parties, but I have to say I am generally on the side of the seller here. First, it is common for sellers to spread their crypto wealth behind several address for security or confidentiality reason, so showing a proof of BTC ownership for 50k BTC at once is not easy. No seller would consolidate their assets in bulk before negociations have moved to an advanced stage just to please a potential buyer they are not even sure is legit. Message signature to show proof of bitcoin wealth, as well as micro transaction from several addresses become quickly a cumbersome process. Besides, many sellers who are historic holders sometimes went in BTC early on a ideology basis, for the sake of privacy and anonymity. They have a hard time easily compromising the confidentiality they have clung to for years. This is a cutural issue that buyers fail to understand, especially so as buyers for this size generally are financial institutions, late to the game, coming from a world where confidentiality towards governement was given up centuries ago.
Buyers are impatient, they are used to quick deals on financial markets, settled bank to bank. Sometimes I can feel they have a old generation mindset. A legit buyer came to me looking to buy 40k BTC, just because his (well known) company, which is involved in commodity trading, could afford to pay for it. He was talking to me in CAPS LOCK on SMS, quickly started to insult everyone in the chain, asking to talk in direct to the seller, bargaining my fee despite me showing a full 5% discount. When you do not know a market and its specificities, you don't see the opportunities. After weeks of work on that trade, being treated of miserable broker by this guy who was so full of himself was hard to swallow on my end. I am active in the finance industry at an institutional level for more than 15years, just because on that trade I offer liquidity in bitcoin does not make me less legit than if I was brokering on other another market.
5% discount really ? Most of the deals I have seen over the last 3 months involved the seller showing a discount from 5% to 8%. It does make sense when you think about it. Liquidity in fiat is scarce for such amount. Cashing out could take weeks. Even through OTC desks like cumberlandmining, selling btc for tranches over $1m widens the spread as you wipe out their order book. The privilege of selling so many bitcoins in just a single transaction, makes it worth it to accept getting rid of them at a 5% discount.
Another reason why a discount is a common thing is because of the amazing BTC price increase over the last years. What is 5% when you have increased your asset by 20000% in 5 Years in $ terms. Still 5% discount is an effort from the seller and at least should pay for the privilege to show your cards in second not first.
Traditionally the discount comes from the seller, however beginning of February this year, when Bitcoin crashed from its top of $20k a piece to $6-8k an interesting dynamic happened. A buyer came to me and he was fine paying a premium on the price since he was in a rush to close the deal at this attractive price. This is a real market. Premium/discount should vary dynamically depending not only on market prices but also on the eagerness of either party to close the transaction. I might be hated within the industry for saying this but if you are a seller, do not get intimidated. Do not get talked into showing a discount as if it were natural. Anything above 5% discount is abusive to me.
Similarly, a buyer bargaining endlessly to trade at a 2% discount is a joke. Volatitlity is the very nature of crypto. Arguably, saving 2% on a $400m trades saves some decent money. But if you fix the price at 4pm, bitcoin can trade 2% away at 4.01 pm anyway. If you are really willing to buy such a large amount of crypto, at least try to understand the market. Also, be commited. If during the negociations, the typical price movements get you cold I might blacklist you as a time waster. Remember that your counterparty, the seller, has probably been holding for years, and during this time he had the market moved against him by more than 80% from the top. In this context, the seller will disregard your bid and won't take you seriously if you start bargaining for 2% discount.
The economic rational of cross-trades and the philosophical issue My personal opinion is that direct cross trades should be settled at market though a predetermined fixing date & time agreed contractually, based on a reference website price like blockchain.info or coinmarketcap for greater transparency. The escrow or financial intermediary in between should not take more than 1% flat of the trade to be split 50-50 by both parties. Then it becomes rational to trade in block for everyone, as it is actually cheaper and quicker than trading in tranches of $1m btc equivalent on Genesis. 0.5% for each leg on trades of 50k btc, that's what my company does when I have selling and buying interest I can match. It is a price no one can compete with. Now, because it is a young market and so many introducing agents are typically involved in connecting buyers and sellers, the anarchy prevails. But I can tell you already from experience what will happen soon: Goldman will enter the market, they will open their crypto desk and they will try to crush everyone. Buyers will rush to trade there because hey, it's Goldman Sachs, and sellers who actually hate the banking industry will have no choice but to hand over their BTC to an investment bank if they want to sell in bulk. Sad, but true.
Cross trades would make Satoshi cry out from his grave in its current form: Crypto was created to exchange peer to peer, without midlemen of financial intermediation. Bulk cross trades right now involve several layers of intermediraies. Besides, it is currently a mecanisme that transfers the wealth from miners and early adopters to the hands of financial institutions. Most of the buyers I have seen in all these trades were financial institutions or banks. It's not a surprise for this amount. There were some individuals amoung the buyers: late comers rich sheiks or rich families from Emerging Markets. But generally speaking it was the financial world buying bitcoin. Shockingly, I can even reveal a central bank was involved in a very large block trade. When all the banks will have acquired bitcoin, the same thing will happen to this market as what happened to gold. The price will be manipulated. Having gold in collateral, banks like JP Morgan were able to neutralize the price by shorting the futures safely. For each ounce of physical gold now, you have 400 ounces of paper gold in existence. Physical gold is only $8 trillion market cap, so it can be manipulated easily. Unfortunnately, the same might happen to bitcoin when the transfer from individuals to financial institutions is complete. I do not judge what's happening right now, I just feel a little sad about it. I have banks willing to buy in my book. I have hedge funds. I try to execute in the most professional way. And if I close a trade after working so hard, I am happy. The buyer and seller are happy because the trade was cheap and fast, and somehow I have modestly contributed a little more, at my level, to global adoption. I know you guys do not like this theme but some banks entering the crypto scene is a way for us to introduce our trojan horse: Adoption is closer than it ever was before. At the end of the day, Goldman might open a crypto desk, they will certainly get the buyers, but I doubt they will get the sellers so easily. A lot of sellers are still ideologically oriented and biased negatively towards banks, and fortunately they still prefer to deal with crypto intermediaries like my company than with a bank.
KYC...KYC is mandatory. So let me get this straight: If you intend to make a 40k BTC deal (>$400m) without showing a passport, think again. It won't work. If you are not willing to show it to a Swiss regulated entity, bound by banking secrecy laws, then you will never show it to anyone, and you will never do the trade. Besides, if you are not ready to give me information about you, and I can't draft your kyc for my records, I cannot include you in my book and show your interest to other counterparties. It means that even if you are legit and can proof ownership over 40k BTC, I will not show your offer to a potential buyer because I cannot certify you are AML compliant. Same thing for buyers: You are an asset manager and you claim you have a buyer for $400m, but you have no power of attorney nor are willing to disclose the kyc and Id of your buyer, then I am not interested. I only deal in direct. I would share revenue with you and would consider you as an introducing agent obviously, but I want to deal in direct with the end party. If I don't know the end client, how will I be able to show any legitimacy to a potential seller ? In any case, kyc is the first mandatory step for a X-trade. I would keep the info confidential, but I badly need it. I am audited, and anyway nowadays it has become impossible to transit fiat in the banking system without establishing and documenting an extensive profile and full paper trail for any client. As a financial intermediary subject to Swiss Anti-Money Laundering Act, we shall be provided with extensive KYC information relating to the buyer and the seller. It protects everyone in the trade, not just us.
*kyc for seller.
The kyc for the seller is the most difficult to write. I will refer you to my reddit post where I explain in detail what's needed. If we meet physically, and you collaborate on every aspect of your story, the documentation for your kyc can be done in half a day and the drafting would take another couple of days. What takes longer is the account opening. If you sell 40k BTC, you do need an account that will not freeze the money after execution. This is something I can provide, but account opening can take up to 4 weeks in Switzerland, even with a crypto friendly bank like the ones I work with. You have to start the account opening process early before we start negociations with prospective buyers. Besides we will need an extract from your wallet to run services like elliptic.co, chainanalysis.com or scorechain.com
*kyc for buyer
As I said, buyers for this kind of amounts are generally financial institutions. If you are a bank or a hedge fund I need: Shareholding structure Regulatory status from your financial supervision authority Trade registry extract with authorized signatories list Bylaws Board resolution to show the intention to buy X btc, and formally authorizing the signatories of the contract to represent the bank in this context ID, CV,and proof of Address of the representative appointed by the board resolution. Proof of funds.
If you are an individual: Copy of the passport CV, name, surname, date of birth, address, country of residence, professional activity proof of residence, and explain to me how in the world you are able to buy half a billion USD of bitcoin in one shot. If you want to buy for $10m "only" ;) it is the same, I need to understand your background and source of wealth. Also tell me where the funds will be wired from (Bank, country, city of provenance) ., so I can liaise with your bank officer.
*kyc for the introducing agent. just because you introduce me to a bitcoin whale or to a large buyer won't save you from a kyc sorry guys. pm me to see what's needed.
the procedure and the solution After failing consistently to close block trades for over a month, I realized something was wrong- Buyers and sellers of bulk trades all have their own procedure, which has been generally drafted to their advantage, in detriment to the other party. One seller would insist for instance to install bitcoin core on the buyer's computer; the buyer couldn't care less.
There are two ways to solve the problem: 1.the first solution is what actors like Jonathan De Rin and his group, Nordic partneSatoshi trading have adopted. They would force their way up the chain of intermediaries to try to take control over all introducing agents, connect the buyer and seller in direct, and re-structure the deal holistically rather being confined in the russian doll problematics of layers of introducers. It is agressive, requires a lot of nogociation and bargaining, but could work. The problem with this approach is that it only solves part of the solution: when buyer and sellers are eventually connected they can decide to squeeze everyone in the chain. you generally need an escrow account to settle the transaction. setting up an escrow for a crypto transaction is not so easy and takes time. Unlike the buyer, the seller often has no connection to the finance industry so he would have to rely on the buyer for the escrow set up: At that point the seller would be giving his counterparty more power, or he would need to involve a lawer who would take an additional cut. Besides, an escrow account belongs to both the buyer and the seller. Both of them are the beneficial owners. Let's be honnest, because of price fluctuations, the deal can fail at any time before execution. So once you have set up two escrows for nothing the bank will be nervous and will never want to do business with you again. Setting up a escrow costs about 0,25% of the amount of the trade. But as usual some banks and lawyers will try to benefit from the situation and try to ask for way above than 1% for the set up ( Abusive, once again)
2.our solution is different. We do not act as traditional intermediary. We are the direct counterparty to the buyer and the seller. It changes everything: We build a book of interests so we are ready to pull the trigger when another leg arrives to the party. Buyers and sellers don't need to be connected directly. A seller could be selling against 3 different buyers in a real OTC way. When the funds arrive on our corporate account/wallet we become the beneficial owner of the funds. This model is backed by strong legal opinion drafted by Pr. Bahar from Bär karrer, an expert in Switzerland, it was validated by VQF our SRO, and approved by the Finma. Sellers and buyers get comfort from the fact we are regulated. If the deal fails we return the fiat. similarly if a buyers vanishes, we return the crypto to the seller. Funds transit and clear properly through a Swiss Private Bank. We give a dedicated IBAN for each buyer, even though all your funds are belong to us, during the deal. it's all agreed by contract. From a contractual viewpoint, we would simultaneously sign a purchase agreement with the seller and a sale agreement with the buyer, both contracts being subject to the delivery of the cryptocurrencies, respectively the official currencies (ie. If one party fails to deliver in the predetermined deadline, the deal would fail and any paid amount reimbursed) It's a mystery to me why Genesis or other OTC desks focus only on tranches between 50 and 100btc and do not facilitate large trades. My fee is the same, whether you trade 100btc through my company or 10k btc, I do not increase the spread. 1% for each block trade, 0.5% for each party. Quite cheap. Dealing as a direct counterparty to the seller and buyer gives us the power to close the trade swiftly, because when the end party asks "show me your funds, if you want me to believe you", we can go ahead and show proof of life of wallet or proof of funds. our limitation is we cannot park cash for more than 60 days because of Swiss laws on public deposit for non-bank. Fortunately such trade settle in less than 60days. If you fly to Geneva to do your kyc, chances are the other party will be in the next desk, doing the same. And we might probably be able to settle the next day.
here is our procedure:
  1. KYC checks and NDA signed with business introducers;
  2. Business introducers disclose the identities of the buyer and the seller;
  3. We perform a full KYC check on both buyer and seller, including a physical meeting with both parties preferably at our office in Geneva (or travel expenses at the charge of the party to be met);
  4. The seller provides us with (i) a wallet extract so the balance in BTC can be checked and address can be scanned through dedicated forensics services, (ii) a proof of ownership of the wallet (message signature or micro transaction), and (iii) any KYC/AML information required in relation to the origin of the BTC;
  5. The buyer provides us with a proof of funds and any KYC/AML information required in relation to the origin of the funds;
  6. Once the buyer and the seller are cleared, we discuss with both side to fix the price for the BTC and any other specific conditions;
  7. Simultaneously, we makes sure that (i) the seller has a bank account where the proceeds of the transaction can be transferred and (ii) the buyer has a wallet where the purchased BTC can be transferred;
  8. Purchase and sale agreement stating the number of BTC and the applicable price as well as fees are entered into between our company and the buyer, respectively the seller;
  9. Business Introducer Agreements are entered into between our company and the parties introducing the buyer and the seller;
  10. Transfer of the BTC to our company's wallet;
  11. Once the BTC are received, transfer of the payment to our companie’s bank account;
  12. Once the payment is received, transfer of the BTC to the buyer and the payment to the seller, less 1% of each leg if the deal involves business introducers, 0.5% if the deal is in direct.
Regarding the involvement of business introducers, we suggest them to sign a “Business Introducer Agreement” in relation to the leg of the deal they introduce to us. Specific conditions such as a premium or a discount negotiated by the business introducer will be reflected in the Purchase and/or the Sale Agreement between our company and the buyer respectively the seller so all the parties have a clear and transparent view of the deal. In this context, the business introducers’ cut will be adapted accordingly, our company will not claim any of the special discount/premium negotiated. we do not want to be greedy. We just want to make some trades and as said earlier, we prefer to deal in direct with end buyeseller.
Bulk trade of Altcoins. At the moment BTC/Fiat is the main market for block trades. However, I had a specific request for BTC/ETH for a very large amount and also IOTA/BTC. If you are looking to buy IOTA in bulk, please contact me on pm. As long as atomic swaps have not avanced to the next level, cross trades of Altcoins might be needed, and they should be operated through transit wallets, in a similar way as what I described above.
bottom line Again, it's a crazy long post. Sorry if I sounded doctrinal. I have spent countless hours on deals that went nowhere, and had a lot on my chest. Bitcoin is a fascinating market. Now that some deals are closing, and central banks are getting involved in crypto very discretly, I thought a clarification post was needed. If you are a large crypto holder, interested in such transactions, then please contact me on telegram or signal @swisspb. I will try to make it work for you. If you are Mtgox trustee, I know you dont care about where bitcoin is headed. you just want to get rid of it asap. Please consider cross trades, for the sake of all the people you are representing in this trade. They have suffered goxing 1.0 and don't want to be involved in goxing 2.0 just because you do not know how to execute!
Cheers, @ swisspb on telegram
submitted by Swissprivatebanker to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Key failures of MtGox - the road ahead

The volatility of Bitcoin is, I think, universally accepted as "not a good thing" by the community at large who believe in Bitcoin.
Over the last week it has become painfully obvious to most that the centralization of our market in MtGox is a critical mistake to the health and future of the Bitcoin economy. That is not to say that MtGox won't be and shouldn't be relevant, but that failures on their side have too large an impact.
In other words, we lack options and diversity.
In reviewing what I know and have experienced while trading on their platform I've generally found the following to be key failures, lapses, or issues that will impair Bitcoin's ability to be used as a transaction medium and not merely a speculation vehicle.
Systems Architecture
API/Trading Bots
Accounts/Deposits/Withdrawals
Trading Features
Business
I've been discussing these issues with various technology investors and we all agree that the western hemisphere needs a powerful, independent platform of its own.
For instance, a new exchange founded in one of the many tax-havens outside of the U.S. would help avoid future governmental interference and independence for Bitcoin while helping stabilize the overall market.
Our general plan is:
If you believe there are other failures with MtGox and the other exchanges that we've failed to identify, let us know! We want Bitcoin stable and moving.
submitted by bittrademaven to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Cocaine and Hookers: Flushing out the bad money - Reasons for the boom, and why the Drop is good for Bitcoin

It's been a turbulent ride these last few weeks, we've seen prices reach a peak of $266, and problems at MtGox crash a market that was sure to rise and rise were it not for technical constraints.
I personally expected us to see it plateau at around $100, but as I write this we are seeing bitcoin drop to its lowest point in awhile - $56. Today is Tuedsay, which means most BTC holders with accounts at MtGox would have gotten online during work hours yesterday. We all expected a rise. So why the drop?
To answer this question, first I urge you to do some background reading.
British Traders Have Discovered BitCoin - BusinessInsider
The business insider article above, printed last April, cites that up to 90% of London traders were actively involved in the bitcoin market "looking for a quick 2000%". This means that accounts associated with Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs in London and New York had amassed a great deal of bitcoin wealth (buying in as they did at around $4.88).
The Telegraph Article "Financial crisis caused by too many bankers taking cocaine, says former drugs tsar" recently published in the Telegraph offers us a rare insight into what has gone so wrong in the world of finance.
Crisis Caused By Bankers Taking Too Much Cocaine Says Former UK Drugs Tsar - The Telegraph
David Nutt, the former UK Government drugs tsar, who was sacked after claiming that horse riding was as safe as taking ecstasy (lulz) said that too many bankers who took the drug were “overconfident” and so “took more risks” and said that not only did it lead to the current crisis in this country, but also the 1995 collapse of Barings bank.
He said cocaine was perfect for their "culture of excitement and drive and more and more and more", adding: “Bankers use cocaine and got us into this terrible mess. It is a 'more' drug."
So, let's rewind 12 months…At the time there were very few 'legit' online places to spend bitcoin: the Silk Road and Satoshi Circle were about the only place these traders could spend their accumulated BTC wealth. This was a marriage made in heaven - not only did bitcoin give these greedy traders the means to make 'quick 2000%'s' at the expense of those die-hard bitcoin supporters in it for the long haul, but it also provided a means for them to fuel their lavish excesses via the Silk Road, offering, as it does, a safer and cheaper alternative to buying street drugs.
You can imagine them corralled around a computer, fuelled by the white stuff, powered by arrogance and greed, thinking their experience in the Stock Markets of the world would be enough to easily outsmart the neck beards that had had the audacity to enter 'their' world with the revolutionary concept we call decentralised currency. They would have course have had little regard for the beauty of the system that Satoshi invented, or it's utility for ending the senseless debasement of the lives ordinary folk, that has resulted from their mess. Hedonists seeking only highs from hookers and coke very rarely stop to look around at the problems in the world and wonder whether it could be fixed.
Certainly, the majority of those traders wouldn't have perceived bitcoin as an existential threat to their way of life, and yet that is exactly what it represents. Rest assured that you can be certain that after all the media coverage of the last few weeks, if they didm't know before, they definitely know now just what a threat bitcoin poses. The wealth they have accumulated through excess and greed is under the hammer, their jobs and lifestyles are on borrowed time, and that's why we will see the price continue to drop, as they cash out - taking losses as they do - as those we lovingly refer to as The Spartans hold strong, refusing to move (for they have already won). And so, as the weak hands leave the bitcoin market one by one, they will be heading to the lifeboats on what they must surely know is a sinking ship…
These are the final death throes of a dying, corrupt and hyptocritcal regime.
Be certain their 'bail out' will not affect the long term stability of bitcoin. On the contrary, this will only strengthen us going forward, separating the wheat from the chaff so to speak.
I wish these people the best, we are all entitled to make mistakes. Life is about learning from them and being humble enough to say "I was wrong" when you know you were. Talking of which, I believe we all owe a debt of gratitude to MtGox for the flack we threw at them during this insane period, for had the market not crashed, we may very well see prices in the $1000s right now, fuelled by those people looking to make a "quick 2000%" at the expense of others.
For those traders of the "Don't be evil" persuasion who will soon be looking for a new job, may I point you to : http://www.coinsetter.com/ who are moving quickly in setting up a forex trading platform where your skills will be a good fit. As for the rest, I would recommend an extended stint in rehab.
submitted by smeggletoot to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Media and PR

Bit redditors are complaining that Amir Taaki is a childish rep of bitcoin and needs someone more corporate, like Erik Voorhees or Trace Mayer however stop complaining on reddit and do your part.
The bit coin needs good PR and good publicity and more importantly positive Media Representation especially in Western Media.
Understand the trends.
Since bitcoin prices have skyrocketed from $30 upwards. Media agencies such as BBC, CNN have stopped reporting factual events in bitcoin such as the bitcoinica and mtgox hacks earlier to taking an editorial stance for or against it. Most outlets and newspapers have not done their research properly which shows how rushed and sensationalised journalism has become.
Tech and Business news have started to output their views also on bitcoin also highlighting inaccurate events and publicizing weaknesses such as Hacks, Bubbles and laughable bearish views. The Tech news outlets have been pretty favourable and business outlets pragmatically harsher.
Its simple.
News Agencies and Newspapers have hierarchies and therefore their editorial output is determined in a meeting even if the journalist is doing an independent piece as it still have to be editorially approved.
So quite simply if Media proprietors, newspaper and magazine editors and journalists and news anchors actually had bitcoins in their wallets, like the tech journalists have, hence why they are favourable to it, they would naturally promote bitcoins similar to how Goldman Sachs promotes the assets or derivatives they are long on. Most here are long on bitcoin so you need to make sure that Media proprietors, editors and journalists have bitcoins. This includes News Agencies, Newspapers and Magazines and Tech and business news outlets also. In addition to politicians and regulators. Find out everyone connected and send them bitcoins to get them connected. Clearly aimed at early adopters since the new guys cant send out bitcoins that they had to pay large amounts for. It may sounds ridiculous to send relatively affluent people in society bitcoins however the long term aim fully justifies this and I hope most of you read this over again if you do not understand this. These people promote their bias and interest directly and indirectly and still can appear neutral and professional. Get these guys to do our Marketing and PR without paying a PR agency millions of dollars. Just send them a few coins.
Remember Wordpress, Reddit, Mega, 9Flats, Expensify,
Of course a legitimate currency has to be used for illegitimate human vices such as Drugs, Sex, porn prostitution and Gambling.
But Food & Drink, Clothing and Shelter need to be purchased with bitcoin for it to fully function.
So contact or even flood them on email or twitter.
BBC, CNN, Reuters, AP, AFP, AlJazeera, CBS, ABC, Fox, NBC, New York Times, USA Today and Gannett, LA times and Tribune, MediaNews Group, Daily News, Sun-Times, Hearst Corp, Washington Post, Associated Newspapers, News International, GMG, TMG and Press Holdings, Bloomberg, FT and Economist, Tech like Verge, Arstechnica, Wired, TC, BGR, GigaOM, VB, Mashable, Media proprietors, CEO, Chairman, CIO, CTO, CFO, Editors, and Journalists, Also your politicians Senators, Reps and MPs, and Regulators like FinCen and others in US/EU. and finance commentators, strategists and economists - since they put out their views regularly to sheep that follow their every word even if they lie.
No point commenting this guy and that girl gave a negative view or that newspaper or blog is biased. Do something.
Go.
Bloomberg correspondent Sara Eisen, Convergex Group Chief market Strategist Nick Colas , Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer, Societe Generale Senior Forex Strategist Sebastien Galy, Bob Rice, general managing partner with Tangent Capital Partners LLC, UBS stockbroker Art Cashin, Reuters claim Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs traders visiting mtgox Mastercard are watching, Steve Hanke, http://economics.wustl.edu/people/stephen_williamson, Scott Sumner, Tyler Cowen, George Selgin, Paul Krugman, Benjamin M. Friedman, http://econ.williams.edu/people/knk1, Lawrence H. White, Russ Roberts. Paypal is watching, Media Proprietors will call short now but then... Let their greed enable us.
The greed is unbelievable. http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/05/why-do-vcs-care-about-bitcoin/
submitted by catoeisen to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A few words on Mike Hearn's recent blog post

Mike Hearn's recent bitcoin criticism makes very valid points in terms of scalability and monopoly. However, I'd like to urge people to not jump to conclusions, and point out that Mike is loudly expressing his opinionated point of view. We should take his criticism seriously and work on improving the scalability and democratic governance of bitcoin - whether on the main or on the XT fork, depending on how core will now behave.
Even if bitcoin's price drops as predicted by Mike (which is largely a self-fulfilling prophecy, as he was a core developer - but I think we'll soon see a recover), this doesn't negate all the work we've been doing on blockchain technologies which construct consensus mechanisms upon which the redecentralized future of the Internet will be built. Several of Mike's concerns are actually addressed in newer cryptocurrencies. Decred has better bottom-up governance. His own XT has larger block size limits. Bitcoin itself is talking extensively about scalability, not just increasing the block size limit but also more fundamental and difficult, yet less politically charged, changes. Litecoin, monero, and ethereum all employ egalitarian proof of work, making Chinese or other monopolies quite harder to achieve. Bitcoin is a large experiment, and even if bitcoin itself as a currency fails, others will take its place. However, let's not rush to conclusions and let's remember that bitcoin has showed surprising resilience to problems, from long blockchain forks and core bugs to the mtgox case.
It's indisputable that blockchains will be the new primitives of cryptographic and security functions. Upon them we can base political change for a more democratized monetary, legal, and governance system. The research and teaching we've been doing, the software we've been writing, the papers we've been reading all provide useful contributions whatever cryptocurrency may dominate. Furthermore, don't forget the quote from the monero paper illustrating how a healthy market of multiple competing currencies is best for all; we don't need a single prevailing currency, and fragmentation must not be feared.
When I met Mike in Zürich, he had just left Google and I had just started working there. Luck has it that I sat at the same desk where he used to sit. Mike left Google to build blockchain technologies, and a year later I left too, with the same goal. I appreciate Mike's involvement in lighthouse, XT, scalability, bitcoinj and the Android wallet. His involvement in the bitcoin community was huge and I think we should all appreciate what he did without dismissing his work as many tend to do now that he's distancing himself from the project. Despite the fun googler bitcoin meetups we've had with Mike in Zürich, I want to make sure everyone is aware of his current involvement with 30 large centralized banks including ING, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and JP Morgan through his key professional position at R3. It is clear that there is conflict of interest between his blockchain work with these banks, where decentralization is undesired, and the democratized blockchain for the people in modern cryptocurrencies. His blogs and publications must be read critically and keeping this in mind, even if he denies conflict of interest. Scientific and engineering criticism must be done based on science and code, not on people credentials. The things he's pointing out on his blog are not new and they are issues to be resolved. His status as a past core developer is irrelevant in assessing the validity of his statements.
Bitcoin is never short of drama and politics. But the real technical issues must be addressed technically at their core.
Mike - thank you for your work on bitcoin. You are greatly appreciated. The community will now take over.
submitted by dionyziz to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The Mt.Gox Story (Bitcoin Exchange) 137.891 BITCOIN de MtGox ALARMA de NUEVO👉 Mejor PLAN de ... Meanwhile at Mt.Gox MtGox Bitcoins to BTC Bitcoins in 50 seconds The Bitcoin Group #175 - Bitcoin Regulation - Mt. Gox Sells - Binance Hacked? - Blockchain Voting

The news follows the recent attempt by the New York-based private equity firm Fortress to buy Mt Gox claims for $755 per coin last December. In February, however, Fortress upped the ante 71% more ... In the nearly six months since Mt.Gox imploded, two major things have happened to the bitcoin community in Japan. The first is that Japan’s population became aware of bitcoin in a very big way, as coverage of the failed exchange and the $500 million loss became headline news in a country that had previously seen cryptocurrency as just another tech fad. A years-old $75 million lawsuit against Mt Gox by US company CoinLab is delaying payouts to creditors, the Japanese bankruptcy trustee revealed today. According to reports, the New York-based private equity firm Fortress is offering Mt Gox creditor claims at $778 per coin. The offer is 13.5% lower than what Fortress offered in July and Mt Gox ... The submission deadline for the Mt Gox civil rehabilitation plan has been extended once again, this time to December 15. The deadline has been pushed back

[index] [16819] [22223] [21251] [9000] [38777] [9198] [49502] [981] [35885] [46601]

The Mt.Gox Story (Bitcoin Exchange)

Bitcoin exchanges post Mt Gox - a new era - Duration: 46:08. CoinSummit 6,123 views. 46:08. Tech Talk: Bitcoin Exchange MtGox Closes After $500m Cyber Theft - Duration: 3:34. IBTimes UK 4,674 ... Mt. GOX To DUMP 150,000 BITCOIN. October 15th will be the decision day. Will this lead to a Market CRASH or BIG OPPORTUNITY? ALSO, 50% of Americans Retire i... "Bitcoin can't crash because... MTGOX servers wouldn't be able to handle a crash" — webdev84, 8 days before Mt.Gox pulled the plug for 12 hours during the Bitcoin Crash of April 2013, dropping ... 3. Transferring 23.23 USD from MtGox to BTC-e via Bitinstant (1.49% fee). 4. Receiving 22.89 USD on BTC-e Bitcoin exchange. 5. Buying new Bitcoins for a price of 11.40 USD/BTC getting 2.0037 BTC ... 💸 15 de octubre: La fecha límite para que MtGox retorne 150 mil BTC a sus acreedores - MtGox era un exchange japonés que fue hackeado en 2014 y perdió 850 mi...

#