What is the longest you've seen a bitcoin deposit take to ...

Canaries In The Coal Mine? The Customer Experience At BlockFi, Celsius, Crypto.Com And Nexo Compared

Looking for another way to find out which crypto lender I can trust, I started reading through complaints on Reddit.
The assumption is that customer complaints are like the canary in the coalmine... When something is wrong in a big way, complaints are obvious warning signs. Like people complaining about Quadriga or Mt. Gox before disaster "suddenly" happened.
The problem is that every company has non-trivial complaints... Every company. So I started checking to see if the complaints get fixed. Here are the categories
Over the next few(ish) weeks, I'll write separate posts about the first 5. I'm not going to post about UX or fiat bridges because I think these problems
As for the companies reviewed? Cred gets left out because having the option to withdraw crypto at any time is a minimal requirement. Other players get left out because they
BlockFi gets included because, while its Reddit activity is weak, it does get a lot of mentions in the news - good and bad.
submitted by thegoldlust to Crypto_com [link] [comments]

Canaries In The Coal Mine? The Customer Experience At BlockFi, Celsius, Crypto.Com And Nexo Compared

Looking for another way to find out which crypto lender I can trust, I started reading through complaints on Reddit.
The assumption is that customer complaints are like the canary in the coalmine... When something is wrong in a big way, complaints are obvious warning signs. Like people complaining about Quadriga or Mt. Gox before disaster "suddenly" happened.
The problem is that every company has non-trivial complaints... Every company. So I started checking to see if the complaints get fixed. Here are the categories

Over the next few(ish) weeks, I'll write separate posts about the first 5. I'm not going to post about UX or fiat bridges because I think these problems

As for the companies reviewed? Cred gets left out because having the option to withdraw crypto at any time is a minimal requirement. Other players get left out because they

BlockFi gets included because, while its Reddit activity is weak, it does get a lot of mentions in the news - good and bad.
submitted by thegoldlust to CelsiusNetwork [link] [comments]

WizSec: Breaking open the MtGox case

WizSec: Breaking open the MtGox case submitted by nikuhodai to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

More news about Mystery Creditor Who filed CR

theres some info in this blogpost about the MC (mystery Creditor): https://forum.mtgoxlegal.com/t/vote-on-engaging-sekido-or-waiting/310
Phone call with Dan Kelman 8-12-17
Dan has been employed by the Mystery Creditor (MC). He has to check with him if he can reveal his identity. He is meeting him in Tokyo on Monday and will confirm that and will speak to me after that. MC has been around for a while, early adopters will know him, he has a large claim and is a mutual acquaintance of Roger Ver. He hired lawyers in Tokyo because he’s sick of this situation.
MC and DK are not looking to take money from CR. They just want to get it sorted. They are paying an upfront fee to the lawyer, and a small percentage on the back end. Their goal is to see fiat creditors get 100% of their claims, and then the rest divided pro-rata among BTC creditors. They are open to allowing for a delay damage payment to fiat creditors if that becomes necessary.
They are also looking at creating a slush fund to go after stolen coins. Independent investigation into BTC-e. “A few million” creditors invited to contribute. But that’s down the line some.
Team CryptoVinder.com
submitted by Dijkzev to mtgoxinsolvency [link] [comments]

Gox coins are being sold on bitstamp

Gox coins are being sold on bitstamp submitted by aquentin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Claims made by account holders who received stolen MtGox bitcoins

MagicalTux posted about this before: https://www.reddit.com/mtgoxinsolvency/comments/6s3xwg/in_case_i_understood_this_correctly/dlaz32u/
I've not seen this discussed since. If there are large amount of fraudulent claims we should try to get the trustee to petition the court to dismiss those claims. Does MagicalTux have some estimate how much these claims are worth? Or is there any new info regarding the claims?
If someone has representation in the upcoming meeting I think this would be a good issue to bring forward in there.
Quote from referenced url above by MagicalTux:
A total of some 40k BTC has been received by MtGox customers as a side effect of the theft method that resulted in Vinnik receiving some 500k+ BTC stolen from MtGox. Most withdrew those BTC immediately, but some had some balance remaining and filed claims with the trustee anyway.
So there are people who claimed stolen coins which just appeared on their accounts. These claims are now diluting other MtGox user claims. It feels very unfair that these users after withdrawing coins which didn't belong to them, would still receive even more unjustified assets from the bankruptcy.
edit: added MagicalTux quote
submitted by bulltrapbtc to mtgoxinsolvency [link] [comments]

Near $1B are currently on the move from a Silkroad related wallet

Near $1B are currently on the move from a Silkroad related wallet
It seems that the owner of a huge #SilkRoad related wallet is moving funds actively since 3 days, dividing it in chunks of 100 coins by subwallets.
The original wallet owned 111,114.62 $BTC / $BCH , which is currently valuated ~ $844M (without taking in account other #Bitcoin forks).
Last movements on these subwallets are 4 years and 5 months old (March 9th, 2014).
The chunks have been divided over time to 60,000 coins then to 30,000 / 20,000 / 10,000 / 5,000 / 500 and now 100 coins.
#Bitcoin: https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/address/1KyJr2L6CN5XhDfv9Sb5q3kjKwFCrRxTLy/transactions
#BitcoinCash: https://www.blocktrail.com/BCC/address/1KyJr2L6CN5XhDfv9Sb5q3kjKwFCrRxTLy/transactions
Does the owner intend selling it on the market soon?

Update 1
For those who asked, the original wallet (1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a) seems to be related to a SilkRoad address per this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=310600.0.
So it's most probably a wallet owned linked to DPR / SilkRoad. Note that this address is still active with 5 transactions executed in 2018 and 13 in 2017, with really small amount of BTC received/sent.
However, I ran some checks and it does not seem to be linked to the DPR seized coins wallet (1FfmbHfnpaZjKFvyi1okTjJJusN455paPH, there's only a 0.001 BTC link between the 2 addresses), so either the FBI did not sold them yet (last auction was in November 2015) or someone else (linked or not to SilkRoad) has access to it .
Finally, if it's not a SilkRoad related wallet the other options are, by descending probability order:
a) a MtGox cold wallet that has been seized or is still owned by MtGox: in fact the wallet funds moved in March 2014 right after MtGox filed for bankruptcy one month earlier in February 2014; these movements dates are really similar to the 200,000 lost coins "found" by Karpeles which moved March 7th, 2014 (1dda0f8827518ce4d1d824bf7600f75ec7e199774a090a947c58a65ab63552e3), just 2 days before the movements on the wallet we are talking about here.
b) a whale wallet since the major part of the 111,111 coins are coming from a very old deposit of 37,421 coins processed on June 21st, 2011 making this an early adopter's wallet (70d46f768b73e50440e41977eb13ab25826137a8d34486958c7d55c5931c6081)
z) CSW's wallet ... https://www.scribd.com/document/372445546/Bitcoin-Lawsuit, credits mishax1

Update 2
This amount of $1B in bitcoins that MtGox is going to return to customers looks pretty familiar, it could match the 111,114-coin wallets we are investigating here: https://btcmanager.com/mt-gox-preparing-return-1b-stolen-bitcoin-affected-users/.
But the methodology of transfer does not match in my opinion, it looks that the owner tries to hide the movements by mixing the coins.

Update 3
Investigating the $1B Bitcoins on the move from a SilkRoad related wallet: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/9bwsaf/investigating_the_1b_bitcoins_on_the_move_from_a/

Update 4
$1B Bitcoins On The Move: Owner Transfers ~$100M to Bitfinex And Binance In 10 Days

Update 5
MtGox vs SilkRoad origin and September 6th BTC price impact is now discussed here: https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/9dvaj1b_bitcoins_on_the_move_mtgox_vs_silkroad_origin/

submitted by sick_silk to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Kraken CEO with best theory yet on what happened to Gox - and just won my business with his post

submitted by devlspawn to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

When this is over, are there Capital Losses to be realized? I'm in Canada.

I was hoping someone might be able to explain when a loss is realized (if any). I will use round numbers and dates for ease of details/arguments.
Say you had 10 bitcoins that you bought at $100 and you store it with MtGox in 2013. 2014, MtGox announces that they are filing for bankruptcy protection. I submit a claim to the bankruptcy trustee for my 10 bitcoins. 2015, MtGox is still in bankruptcy proceedings and they announce that they were able to recover 20% of their storage. 2016, they change to Civil Rehabilitation and there is a good chance that assets will be redistributed to creditors. 2017 CR proceedings are over and I get 2 bitcoins back. The price in 2017 is $1000.
What I would like to know is, do I have a loss realized in 2017 for $7200? (8 bitcoins x $900). I don't think I would have a gain for the 2 bitcoins I received (even though the price went up), as I started with bitcoin originally so the asset hasn't changed. This would be the same as just holding the asset on exchange that hasn't gone bankrupt, wouldn't it? You make a deposit to an exchange, which is basically an IOU that the exchange will give back the asset if you make a withdrawal. Nothing is realized until you actually sell or lose the asset, isn't it? And is the loss of the asset at the price when the loss is realized or the price you originally bought it?
But for the 8 other bitcoins, is the loss realized when the company went into bankruptcy, or switched to CR, or is it only realized once the company is dissolved and the asset is finally redistributed? I technically always had a claim to my bitcoins all this time, even when the company wasn't in bankruptcy when I first made my deposit. Is the claim all the same, until the company finally dissolves and returns my asset?
Thanks for the help.
Edit: Clarification and Formatting
submitted by AI_Fitness to mtgoxinsolvency [link] [comments]

$1B bitcoins on the move: MtGox vs SilkRoad origin and BTC price impact discussed

$1B bitcoins on the move: MtGox vs SilkRoad origin and BTC price impact discussed
Preamble: it seems that my post was censored and removed on bitcoin... from now I will only publish my articles on btc and crosspost it. Freedom and freespeech matter to me.

This is the 4th post of a series of articles dedicated to investigate $1B worth of bitcoins (111,114 BTC/BCH/... BXX) that were dormant since 2014 and started moving actively. The BTC coins were originally located at this address (1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a).
  • The facts that part of this funds (>13%) have been transferred in the past month to Bitfinex, Binance and Bitmex exchanges is discussed here.
  • The origin of the bitcoins was originally discussed here.
  • A deep-dive into the wallet activity was discussed here.

Today I am writing a short update to discuss the origin of the funds and some events that could be related both to this wallet and yesterday's price crash.

Wallet's origin

This question has been discussed a lot by the crypto community in the past year.
Here is a summary of the most probable hypothesis for the 1933p wallet's origin:
  1. a SilkRoad user or DPRs wallet per this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=310600.0
  2. a MtGox cold wallet that has been seized or is still owned by MtGox: in fact the wallet funds moved in March 2014 right after MtGox filed for bankruptcy one month earlier in February 2014; these movements dates are really similar to the 200,000 lost coins "found" by Karpeles which moved March 7th, 2014 (1dda0f8827518ce4d1d824bf7600f75ec7e199774a090a947c58a65ab63552e3), just 2 days before the movements on the wallet we are talking about here.
  3. a whale wallet since the major part of the 111,111 coins are coming from a very old deposit of 37,421 coins processed on June 21st, 2011 making this an early adopter's wallet (70d46f768b73e50440e41977eb13ab25826137a8d34486958c7d55c5931c6081)

Wizsec, a prominent Bitcoin security expert, seems to be pretty sure that the wallet belongs to a MtGox hodler and early investor, who is not a DPR or a SilkRoad user, per his Twitter post: https://twitter.com/wizsecurity/status/1037030003068653569
Finally, Wizsec and I agree that this wallet is not CSW`'s wallet despite it is mentioned in several court documents. Wizsec spent a lot of time debunking CSW's ownership claims earlier this year: https://twitter.com/wizsecurity/status/968337084837781504

What do you think about this wallet origin?
BTC price crash

Also, I wanted to report some events that could be related to this 1933p wallet activity:

  • $100M USDT were transferred (reported by u/whalecheetah) while the 1933f wallet owner was in the process of transferring approximately the same amount to several exchanges.
(update) Here is a link provided by u/jesquit: https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/9cj208/bitcoin_surge_expected_as_100m_tether_goes_to
  • 10,000 BTC buy order was filed last night on Bitmex with 8,030 BTC transferred from a Bitfinex user wallet while the 1933p wallet owner transferred approximately the same amount of BTC to Bitfinex since August, 24th.
(update) Here is the actual BTC transaction: https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/f2465a1225531d33696380f06034499a52d707f85ee6ae1419885980011f6e25 ,
with its Bitfinex inputs:
1Kr6QSydW9bFQG1mXiPNNu6WpJGmUa9i1g (3,000)
1Kr6QSydW9bFQG1mXiPNNu6WpJGmUa9i1g (2,000)
1Kr6QSydW9bFQG1mXiPNNu6WpJGmUa9i1g (2,000)
1Kr6QSydW9bFQG1mXiPNNu6WpJGmUa9i1g (1,029.98)
and output to Bitmex:
3BMEXqGpG4FxBA1KWhRFufXfSTRgzfDBhJ (10,000).

Was this deal prepared or was the buyer a bitcoin angel?

In the light of September 6th price crash, do you think the $100M transferred to the exchanges caused it?

submitted by sick_silk to btc [link] [comments]

PSA: BitInstant's cash-to-bitcoin-address service is reliable, but they fudge the exchange rate; on top of the stated 3.99% fee (and unstated ZipZap fee), BitInstant has consistently marked up the exchange rate way above ($6 or so) the maximum that MtGox quotes around the time the transfer is made.

Charlie Shrem (bitinstant) ultimately compensated me more than what I thought I was still owed, and for that I thank him; I feel that my personal matter has been satisfied amicably.
I still believe that there are strange discrepancies in the data I've seen, which have not yet been accounted for, and I hope Charlie looks into it for the sake of his otherwise valuable company; I wouldn't want BitInstant to be blamed for the errors (or malice) of another party in the pipeline.
In any case, I would currently still feel comfortable using BitInstant.
submitted by psapsaps to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Binance Could Learn from 10 Years of Crypto

Binance's deposit problems on 2019 arise from an known, age-old, property of cryptocurrencies, generally known as "malleability".
On Feb 5, 2019, Binance was reported to credit, for a second time, some Nano user deposits that had already been credited months before. The presumed reason is that they were upgrading nodes and replaying the block chain, and didn't turn off the deposit engine for this replay. When the new blocks were replayed, they somehow generated new block identifiers on Binance's internal servers (that is, these blocks were not relayed to Binance from outside Binance).
These new block identifiers (for old blocks) triggered the deposit processor to create new internal deposits for user accounts, causing these accounts to get unduly credited with extra funds.
This general crypto issue has been known for ages and it is surprising that Binance was susceptible to it. For example, the standard bitcoin transaction ID can be changed in a variety of ways without invalidating the transaction. This is called transaction ID malleability. If an exchange considers transactions with new transaction IDs as new deposits, they are susceptible to double deposits.
The reason exchanges don't get caught by transaction malleability is that they judge new deposits by the transaction details and not the transaction ID, which can be changed. They also don't credit a user until the transaction has been confirmed a few times. While going down, MtGox famously blamed their problems on bitcoin transaction malleability (even though no one could ever verify these claims).
Even though exchanges have adopted workarounds, the general property is potentially problematic enough that bitcoin introduced a new type of transaction identifier with the segwit fork to address this general issue of malleability.
The nano protocol doesn't include the concept of confirmations, so counting confirmations to validate deposits can't apply. However, this dissimilarity doesn't mean that the basic problem of transaction malleability isn't known. And it underscores that the general practice of checking transaction details is much better than relying on protocol identifiers (like block or transaction IDs).
My understanding is that nano 17.1 fixed the underlying source of malleability that caught Binance, but in upgrading to the fix Binance's deposit processor was running the old protocol and processed a few second deposits.
submitted by coinoleum to nanocurrency [link] [comments]

340 BTC

October, 2011 was when I first heard about Bitcoin. A friend excitedly told me about it, that the price had crashed, that it could be 'mined', and that it could be purchased on exchanges. He didn't own any, but he found it interesting, and so did I. I was instantly interested in acquiring some coins. That the price had 'crashed' meant a buying opportunity, and I further saw it as evidence that the system was somehow free, and had a life of its own. I did not purchase any right away, regretfully, since the coins were about $3 each. I did do some initial research, calculating mining profitability, and looking into the process for buying coins on MtGox. I also read about the thefts and hacks. I found it intuitive these incidents were matters of endpoint-security, and not reflective of a systemic weakness. Yet I would have much to learn if I was to avoid becoming a victim. I continued to casually follow Bitcoin developments, and occasionally checked the price.
Eight months later I came across a Timothy B. Lee article in Forbes that detailed the Bitcoin Richlist. It was my catalyst. It was time for a technical deep dive, time to understand what gave people the confidence to entrust millions of dollars of value to the system. Of everything I read that day, it wasn't the proof-of-work that seemed revolutionary, but simply the fact that a lost private key meant the coins would be irrecoverable. That signified Bitcoin put true and total control of money into the hands of users, and for that it was different and worthwhile. I decided to invest. All that was left was working out the mechanics of the transaction. And security. I was determined to not fall victim to a hack. An offline, paper wallet seemed like the easy choice. The price was in the $6 - $7 range.
My first purchase went though MoneyGram and Coinapult, with MtGox as my receiving wallet. I put in $150, and got out $130 worth of coins. The price had surged in the few days since I decided to buy, to slightly under $10 per coin. I transferred the coins off of MtGox and onto my paper wallet, and it all felt very real! I wanted to buy more, and settled on CoinFloor to avoid the hefty fees I paid the first time. CoinFloor also allowed for instant fiat funding via a deposit at a bank teller window. Depositing $900 directly into a bank account was not without risk, but CoinFloor came through and the money was credited within 5 minutes. It all went flawlessly, and soon with my 100 coins spread out over a few different paper wallets, I could rest easy, without fear of a hack.
Edit - I meant BitFloor, not CoinFloor
I occasionally checked the price, tested out Satoshi Dice, and read a little more on the technical underpinnings, but other than that, I mostly forgot about my Bitcoin investment for the next 6 months. Then, in early 2013, I read about a few seed rounds in Bitcoin startups, and I saw pictures of a Bitcoin booth at the CES is Las Vegas. Somehow that booth, with the Bitcoin logo, made it all seem even more legitimate. The price had climbed into the $14 - $15 range, and I wanted more coin. CoinFloor had been hacked and was out of commission. This time I would use the Dwolla to MtGox method of funding. I found myself seriously regretting not having done Gox's verification the previous summer, as the price quickly climbed while I waited. When my verification finally cleared, the price had shot up to $19, and I transferred in several thousand dollars and bought another ~150 coins. Over the next few months I kept buying until the price crossed $100 per coin. In total, I had put in about $10,000 for 340 coins. I worked part-time, with an annual income of about $25,000, so that $10,000 felt substantial.
The rise to $266 was exhilarating, as was the following surge to $1242. I mostly held, but sometimes tried to time the market with a small position (always 10% of holdings or less). I sold some coins the first time Bitcoin passed the $400 mark to recoup my initial investment, and I arbitraged when it was profitable. I lost a then-painful amount of fiat on MtGox, but not any coins. I held tight during the long bear market, with absolute confidence that the price would find a non-zero bottom, and it would only be up from there. The ecosystem was growing, the technology was maturing, and investment money was pouring in, and yet the price continued to decline. I would have loved to buy more, but doing so would have been truly irresponsible from a diversification perspective.
I have largely stayed away alt-coins, but I did mine-and-dump those I found annoying, and mined and held the one that I found interesting - Ethereum. I reluctantly pushed some BTC into Ethereum early this year, which turned out to be a good move. In total, over the past 5 years, I have returned about 200x on my initial investment, in the current form of about 250 BTC, about 700 ETH and approximately $300k of other liquid assets. The result is almost identical to a pure buy-and-hold from the beginning, but I felt the need to hedge as valuations changed over time. I feel no pressure to sell more coins, though I probably would convert a few in the $20k-$40k range, prices which I have long seen as likely, if not inevitable.
I am in my early 30's. Ask Me Anything! Though I might only have time to answer a few…
submitted by ThrowAway_OfCourses to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

My horrible BitInstant/ZipZap/MoneyGram/7-Eleven experience

Here's my experience using BitInstant to get a VouchX code at 1:00am.
TL;DR: Undisclosed fees; lots of personal details; what should have taken 5 minutes took 45; apathetic 7-Eleven clerk couldn't take ownership of issues with his company's own shitty kiosk; BitInstant sends me the money in a form not quite as insecure as banknotes taped to a postcard.
It was a late Thursday night, dipping into early Friday. BitMe had a low bid price for BTC. With BitMe, I'd usually deposit at a Chase branch, but I expected the price to rise too much by the time I could make it to a branch and the BitMe guy could confirm my deposit. I anticipated a lot of people putting their Friday paychecks into Bitcoin, so I was in a rush to buy. For this reason, I decided to pay the premium of BitInstant.
The first disappointment with BitInstant was that in order to deposit at a MoneyGram terminal, I'd have to pay an additional $3.95 to another middleman called "ZipZap." The BitInstant site doesn't mention this extra fee on the main page, where the 3.99% commission amount is quoted. The earliest point in time that I could learn the amount of the $3.95 extra fee was after I filled in order information (including my name and date of birth) on BitInstant, was taken to ZipZap, filled in my phone number, selected a MoneyGram location, and then finally downloaded the payment slip.
ZipZap sent me an e-mail, but their mail servers weren't configured correctly, so I never got it. My e-mail server logs show:
Mar 8 03:20:16 ophelia postfix/smtpd[17694]: connect from smtp.zipzapinc.com[] Mar 8 03:20:16 ophelia postfix/smtpd[17694]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from ... smtp.zipzapinc.com[]: 504 5.5.2 : ... Helo command rejected: need fully-qualified hostname; from= ... to= proto=ESMTP helo= Mar 8 03:20:16 ophelia postfix/smtpd[17694]: disconnect from smtp.zipzapinc.com[] 
ZipZap's web page says something to the effect of "anonymous payment." Later, at the MoneyGram location, I had to provide my name, phone number, and mailing address. (The address was never needed by BitInstant or ZipZap.)
I chose 7-Eleven store #18256 at 924 E. Empire Ave., Spokane, WA 99207 as the MoneyGram location, because 7-Eleven was the only local chain of MoneyGram locations open at that hour. Their MoneyGram solution was a Vcom kiosk. These multifunction kiosks, in addition to providing ATM and check services also act as MoneyGram terminals.
The first irk in the process was that the machine asked me to call a certain phone number for MoneyGram customer service, and no courtesy phone was provided on the machine. The store clerk didn't have a phone for me to use either. I wasted $1.26 on a 7 minute phone call from my by-the-minute phone (with plans optimized for texting, not voice). In 7 minutes, my name, address, phone number, "receive code" (a unique code for ZipZap), and payment amount was taken; it could have taken me no longer than 2 minutes for me to carefully enter and double-check this information on the terminal itself. I understand there is a market for customer service that delivers warm fuzzies, but this wasted my time and money and subjected me to a guy not from my continent who was difficult to hear over the connection.
Now it was time to deposit the money. The machine instructed me to insert one bill at a time, so I did. I was paying $385 in 20 banknotes. The machine would accept one banknote, give a message "not enough cash inserted," wait about 15 seconds, then show me the balance of how much money remains to be inserted. Well, of course not enough money was inserted, I don't have a $385 banknote and you told me to insert one at a time! I counted later to find that the machine processes banknotes at a rate of once every 20 seconds, so I spent over six minutes hand-feeding money into this machine, in front of a bored clerk at a slow 7-Eleven. I felt really bad for that guy, since he had store work to do and pretty much had to babysit me to make sure I wasn't going to walk off with anything.
Finally, the last note! Okay, it's doing .. something, and ... "this transaction could not be completed at this time." [Paraphrased, but no specific reason was given.] The machine then took a couple minutes to return my money, this time in the form of 16 banknotes. At least all my money was accounted for, but what gives?
The clerk tried to convince me that the machine doesn't work, and suggested I try calling whoever I'm trying to pay at 8:00am, start of business. I explained to him that this payment is time sensitive, that's why I'm doing this in the middle of the night.
Finally, it dawned on me that I never gave my "account number," a unique identifying code for the ZipZap transaction, to the MoneyGram phone agent. But he did ask for my phone number twice! I must have misheard him. Drat. I let the clerk know what my mistake was, but he tried his hardest to convince me that the machine didn't work as intended and suggested I try another 7-Eleven that was about an hour and a half on foot for me. I declined and told him I'd use the payphone to reach MoneyGram this time.
Back from another 5-10 call, I come into the store to find a note taped over the machine's screen, "out of order." The clerk is at this point telling me with matter-of-fact authority in his voice that the machine won't do what I want, and that it's out of service for everything but ATM and MoneyGram transactions. (Even after I tried several times to explain, he wouldn't accept that I was in fact trying to do a MoneyGram transaction.) Even though I explained to him that this is a time-sensitive payment--that is why I'm up at 2:00 in the morning taking care of this business--and it will be a 45 minute walk home for nothing, he insists that I am not allowed to use the machine. He even explicitly told me that he has work to do and it's taken him too long keeping an eye on me. I plead with him and sympathize about how horribly slow these machines are, how it's not his fault, and finally get through to him to let me try one more time, the final persuasive argument being that the machine gave me my money in $100 notes this time, so it won't take so long. (I didn't let him know that only two notes were $100s, while the rest were in $20s and $1s, but it was still fewer notes.) He doesn't even have the courtesy to say "yes," "okay," "sure," or "just one more time;" he just peels off his because-I-can "out of order" sign off the machine and goes about his business without saying a word.
Seriously? What's the point of this fancy self-serve kiosk if I need to call some guy in the Indian subcontinent to set up the transaction? How many millions of dollars were poured into the design, implementation, and rollout of these good-for-nothing machines that take ages to accept your cash? And then to have some apathetic, underpaid store clerk tell me he's got better things to do than take responsibility for how slowly his company's proprietary, fancy e-commerce kiosks work? Remember, he intentionally mislead me earlier by telling me another 7-Eleven store has a similar machine that might work, and (as it turns out) flat-out lied in telling me the machine is simply out of order. Oh, and I'm paying $3.95 to ZipZap for this, most of which probably goes to the MoneyGram commission.
Wondering how many middle-men there were between my money and my Bitcoin, by the way? BitMe, AurumXchange (for VouchX), BitInstant, ZipZap, MoneyGram, CardTronics (current owners of the brilliant Vcom franchise of time-saving kiosks), and 7-Eleven. Holy wow, maybe $3.95 + 3.99% was a steal.
All said, I spent about 45 minutes in that store. For what should have been 5 minutes worth of business. Beyond the pale.
On the second attempt, my money went through, I got a receipt, and when I got home I got a neat code I could paste into BitMe to get some instant USD in there. But let's not forget the final blunder: BitInstant delivered a code worth $365 good-as-cash to me by regular, unencrypted e-mail. Stupid.
Now I'm fighting bidding bots on BitMe.
submitted by piranha to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

PSA: More examples of Bitinstant's suspicious exchage rates

I know there was a similar post by u/psapsaps 3 days ago about this issue. I decided to take a chance and try it out anyway becase its the easiest and quickest way for me to obtain btc right now.
My first purchase was of $100 usd, + the $3.95 for zip zap they dont even warn you about.
purchase was executed around 2:30pm utc on 4/16. I got a confirmation email at 2:33 utc
mt.gox was at $65 +-$3
considering bitinstant fee of 3.99%, my deposit was of $96.01
i received 1.20595 at 3:52 pm utc at the rate of $79.61 , so theres that. Where were my bitcoins from 2:30 pm utc to 3:52 utc?
Well i decided it was worth another try just for the sake of getting more information.
today 4/18 at 1:05 pm utc i got a confirmation form zip zap that my second purchase (this time of $200) had been succesfully processed. Bitinstant emailed 3 minutes before that at 1:02 pm to confirm that my order had executed for 192.02.
at 1:07pm utc i receive 2.01639364 btc at the rate of $95.22
mt.gox had been at $92 +-$1 during the surpricingly short amout of time it took for my cash deposited at 1:00 pm utc to turn into bitcoins in my wallet at 1:07 pm utc.. but whats up with the exchage rate?
I just wanted to share my experiance with reddit about bitinstant so that everyone can make a more informed opinion about their service. If anyone has any information to prove that im an idiot, please share. i hope this is all an error on my own or on bitinstant part.
edit: At this url... well this:
"As regards bitcoin price: We will honour the price from the time your order was placed - but we will usually do so by sending you the difference manually with a fee refund after dealing with delayed orders.
Since price has recently dropped, it may in fact be in a lot of customer's interests to allow their orders to execute at current prices and this is what we would recommend."
-April 11, 2013 | Gareth Nelson
edit: added pm markers for utc time, I am in US central time
submitted by bitdetective to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Re: inquiries about MtGox disbursements and proposed revival

Here’s why we’re in this situation.
The trustee forced the user-victims to give, without compensation, a free call option to the Gox shareholders to buy 200k BTC at $2500 at any time prior to the distribution. Thus, a perverse incentive to delay distributions was born. The result:
What can be done? (in theory)
With regard to the proposal to revive MtGox, I just don’t see the ROI for an investor to take this on. It’s a massive and extremely difficult undertaking with a highly improbable outcome. Why shouldn’t the investor just hodl and chill, or buy a fully functioning, profitable exchange without a massive brand problem? Why shouldn’t Kraken just dump $245m in to marketing instead? And, why would it be necessary if the shareholders would just commit to donating their gains to the victims?
The trustee has already said that fiat payouts will be optionally payable to Kraken accounts, and that if bitcoin payouts are approved by the court, they will be payable only to Kraken accounts. If any of the Gox shareholders end up with an unexpected windfall that they wish to distribute to the user-victims, Kraken would happily facilitate. Kraken already has most of the accounts as a result of our facilitation of claims collection, the $1m worth of free trading each claimant received, and our providing support to victims and trustee over the last 4 years. People are not sitting on the sidelines waiting for a MtGox revival – they’ve been off trading elsewhere and you’d have a hard sell bringing them back. IMO, it's a pipe dream.
I'm glad to see the formation of mtgoxlegal.com and hope that together the creditors can drive some progress toward the only morally acceptable outcome, which is that the user-victims receive 100% of whatever remains after bankruptcy fees.
submitted by jespow to mtgoxinsolvency [link] [comments]

I want to adopt Litecoin, feel like I missed the boat with Bitcoin. How do I purchase? (Canada)

I wanted to sink some money into Bitcoin but I feel like I have missed the boat and I do not want to sink thousands into it. Can someone here help me acquire Litecoins, and give me a brief overview of them and their lookout. Also, as a Canadian how can I purchase them?
submitted by ajp90 to litecoin [link] [comments]

With BitFloor out for the count, Dwolla instituting new AML policies and restrictions, and Bitinstant still racked with fees, is there any good way for an average person to buy Bitcoins?

submitted by johnlocke357 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why you should support the Bitfinex 36% haircut + token scheme instead of legal system liquidation procedure

Note: I'm not a lawyer, I'm just a trader.
Bitfinex has announced a 36% haircut to customer deposits after being hacked for 120,000 BTC. Zane, Director of Communication at Finex, has said in recent interview/Q&A that they plan to be back online approximately by Monday and will release in three stages:
(As an aside, I think that trading should be enabled the same time as withdrawals, so people can shift around their assets into the desired one, and withdraw how they choose.)
Some of you may be thinking that you are entitled to all your funds, because your BTC were not hacked or because you were holding ETH or USD or ETC or LTC. Well, that doesn't really matter, because the reality is that Bitfinex lost $70 million, and that hole is a fat set of liabilities to customers that is supposed to be redeemable on demand, but that they can't make good on immediately. You had funds with them, which in Bitfinex's custody makes them Bitfinex assets (in accounting terms) and corresponding liabilities to you customers. This means in a legal resolution, you will just become a creditor among many other creditors, and you won't be first in line to be paid in the court process.
This means that if you chase them into bankruptcy then they wont be able to pay you in full anyway, and to make matters worse, it adds the extra cost of going through years of legal procedures and paying tons of paper-pushers along the way. You will be lucky to get even 50% after all that headache, not to mention the lost value of what you could have made from investing and trading with that money over the 3-5 year court process.
The 36% haircut is tough to get hit with, but there's no better outcome than this to happen other than Finex getting outside funding to make the haircut smaller (or non existent). Their token which is filling the hole might help soften the blow even more, and might turn out even better if it is tradeable and jumps in value. Either way, going through the long drawn out painful administration process a la MtGox is unnecessary, and this solution Bitfinex has come up with will make us to avoid that whole mess.
Those of you who think taking legal action will get you 100% of your money, you're wrong. Any forcing of them to make good on large sums will push them through that costly process where you just get a slow-motion haircut. The logical thing for you to do is let them do the 36% haircut, take your 64% of funds, then sue afterward for the 36%. Injunctions or any moves to force them into the process before implementing the haircut+token plan will not get more than 64% of your funds back. It's irrational in all victims' cases to reject this scheme given the circumstances.
TL;DR 36% haircut + Token is the faster, cheaper way of doing what would happen anyway in a "legal" bankruptcy process.
submitted by theswapman to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Encryption is No Longer an Option - Ways to Restore Your Natural Right to Privacy

Encryption is No Longer an Option
“If the State’s going to move against you, it’s going to move against you. Now, that doesn’t mean you need to be reckless of course. I’m awful careful you guys, and even my degree of care and control ultimately won’t be enough if they get mad enough. There will always be something…I’ve done what I hope is the best any man can do. So…I hope when they finally do get me, it’s obvious that they just made it up. I don’t go out of my way to make it easy.” – Cody Wilson
For all Anarchists our love for freedom unites us and guides us. I recently had a conversation with a mutual friend that Cody and I have in common and he stated something very insightful:
CryptoAnarchy is like the Lord of the Rings. You have to cooperate with people that you don’t know where they are or what they’re up to. That is, you just know that we are all figuring out at the same time on how to take down Sauron.
Anarchy is guided by the natural instinct for self-preservation. You can trust that others are also actively working in keeping us all free.
For us all to move into more synergistic cooperation we need more motivation. Nothing is more motivating than our movement away from an impending harmful evil. The persecution that Cody Wilson has gone through since he started his activism is testament to the evil that awaits the entire world if we do not fight against the impending digital global prison. Just note how easy it was to find Cody. Government indoctrinated brownshirts and surveillance are everywhere.
As Jeff recently said in London, “CryptoAnarchy is about the cryptography.” Cryptocurrency is only possible due to the privacy offered by cryptography. A true cryptocurrency is completely fungible, anonymous, and private. Blockchains without on-chain privacy set by default, are dangerous and offer nothing other than accurate surveillance.
That is, the moment you destroy a coin’s fungibility you corrupt its incentive structure. This is because you would then have two classes of the same coin within a transparent blockchain; these are coins that are “tainted” or “untainted” according to government. This differentiation created by blockchain surveillance leads “tainted” coins to be priced differently from “untainted” coins. Once this happens you destroy the functionality of a currency as a medium of exchange.
Imagine the headache of retailers in having to tell clients that they only accept “untainted” bitcoins. The result of not having a fungible medium of exchange is that you destroy the incentive structure of the network effect of a coin. You simply end up with a useless and unwanted network where value is supposed to be exchanged. If the units within the medium of exchange do not themselves contain the same value in the market, the utility of the network effect is destroyed.
The economic ramifications of non-fungible SurveillanceCoins are so bad that they make fiat currencies of central banks look good. In spite of their centralized proof of government violence, fiat currencies are more fungible and private than a coin based on a transparent blockchain.
For much time within crypto we would call the majority of blockchains as “pseudo-anonymous” because we knew the importance of fungibility. At that time blockchain analysis had not caught up to our technology. Now companies like Elliptic and Chainalysis have made the vast majority of blockchains in the market transparent.
Sadly, most blockchain communities have not upgraded their privacy to be on chain by default- making them transparent. However, some more intelligent communities- like Monero- are at the same time growing because they understand the importance of fungibility.
Please understand that we at TDV are ahead of the pack in understanding where all of this is going. The vast majority of people won’t tell you these harsh truths about the Blockchain space, but it is our moral imperative to inform you as best as possible.
As time goes on, we will continue to champion actual fungible CryptoCurrencies and we will continue to make clear distinctions between a SurveillanceCoin and an actual CryptoCurrency.
It is important that we take a step back from CryptoCurrencies and focus on just cryptography. You can never be too careful. Throughout our groups we have had various requests as to how to better use different wallets.
Yes, we will cover all of that in our upcoming surprise for our community, but what is most important is that you protect yourself at the network layer, your identity, and your communication.
CryptoAnarchy began way before Bitcoin. If you want to know what will be happening to CryptoCurrencies and CryptoAnarchy in the near future, you need to read Timothy C. May’s 1992 prophetic Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.
On reading this, you cannot afford to be idle regarding your privacy. This is not the time for you to easily give up what is most personal about you; your thoughts and identity. Your privacy is sacred. You need to protect your privacy as much as possible at all times. Don’t give into the defeatist notions of future technology being capable of deanonymizing any cryptography you currently use. Your goal is to be private right now in the present moment.
You are up against a global digital tyranny- that is already here!
...Cazes was not a US citizen and the Alphabay servers and Cazes were not caught on US soil. Just because crimes involving narcotic deals took place in America, weirdly enough, the US seemingly has the right above anyone to seize Cazes’ property, and charge him and his accomplices in US trials...
Use Secure Hardware That Protects You
Be paranoid. Stay paranoid. The more paranoid you are the better. Currently the five eyes are moving to strip away all of your privacy. They are on the direct path to force all companies to hand over back doors to software and hardware encryption.
This is a new breach on individual rights. The backdoors in hardware have existed since the 90’s via Trusted Computing and Digital Rights Management (DRM). The difference is that now companies will be fined and forced by governments (all governments) to open up backdoors for the surveillance of all- in both software and hardware. Australia is leading the charge since they are the only ones within the five eyes without a Bill of Rights.
If you really want to be secure, then you need to start with your hardware. Almost all laptops and hardware chips are engineered with unsafe software. These chips can transmit voice, your networking, pictures, and even video signals. Many of these chips are used to install spyware, malware and viruses.
The market has provided us with two easy plug-and-play hardware solutions.
Purism is a CryptoAnarchist company dedicated in offering us the safest computers in the market. Purism’s line of Librem Laptops is manufactured with software and hardware built from the ground up, where you can be at ease knowing there are no back doors built within it. They work with hardware component suppliers and the Free software community in making hardware that respects and protects your security. Every chip is individually selected with emphasis on respecting freedom. (Purism Librem laptops have built in Kill-Switches for your microphone/camera and wireless/Bluetooth)
All of the necessary components that you would have to bundle up together- by yourself- from a community vetted place like Prism-Break are already installed and ready to go within Librem laptops. Even if you were to install all of the necessary open-source encrypted alternatives, you still would not be able to 100% trust your current computer’s hardware.
Purism Librem laptops come with their own PureOS (operating system). Purism also offers compatibility with Qubes OS in a flash-drive (similar to Tails) to give you even another layer of protection on top of PureOS. Qubes OS is what Edward Snowden uses. PureOs is a derivative of Debian GNU/Linux. Qubes is free and open-source software (FOSS).
Purism is currently having a pre-sale for their first phone the Librem 5.
Another popular safe hardware computer market alternative is ORWL. ORWL is a desktop PC. ORWL comes with a physical encryption key that looks like a keychain. If anyone ever tries to physically tamper with the ORWL computer, sensors will automatically detect the intrusion and erase everything. ORWL comes with the operating system options of Qubes OS, Ubuntu, or Windows.
ORWL does not receive payment for their products in Crypto. Purism on the other hand accepts payment in BitcoinCore, BitcoinCash, Litecoin, Ethereum, Decred, Dogecoin, and Monero.
ORWL is a good alternative for more computer savvy people. If you are not the most competent person with computers, Purism is the way to go. With Purism everything is ready to go.
Once you get good hardware don’t use this new computer for anything other than crypto stuff. That is, don’t use it with anything that requires your slave identity. Don’t access social media with your name, don’t access bank accounts, don’t access crypto exchanges, don’t access old email accounts, definitely don’t access anything that requires KYC and AML, and don’t access any identifying log-in that is related to any of your previous internet identities. Create new identities from scratch for this new computer.
Watch this video and learn about the basics on operational security (OPSEC). Take everything written here, and spoken at the conference in the video above, as barely the preliminary basic requirements of OPSEC. You should definitely continue your own research upon getting your new secure hardware computer.
(It would be best if you purchased this computer using crypto- Monero preferably- and have it mailed to a mailing address not associated with any of your addresses; think along the lines of JJ Luna).
Encrypt Your Communication
“This generation being born now... is the last free generation.You are born and either immediately or within say a year you are known globally. Your identity in one form or another –coming as a result of your idiotic parents plastering your name and photos all over Facebook or as a result of insurance applications or passport applications– is known to all major world powers.” – Julian Assange
The vast majority of our community uses Facebook. Unfortunately its network effect is something we all rely on to some degree. Fortunately for us a friend of our community created FaceMask. Through FaceMask we can still use Facebook in complete privacy- away from Zuckerberg's prying eyes. In the near future we will implement FaceMask into our TDV groups as optional privacy for our posts. We will provide our subscribers with the keys necessary to encrypt and decrypt the messages and posts. Again, this is optional. For now please go to the link above and familiarize yourself with Facemask and its technology.
Don’t use Google. If you are using Google start transitioning out of it. If you are using Gmail, start moving towards encrypted services like ProtonMail or TutaNota. They both offer a free option, try them both out and choose your favorite. Use two factor authentication on everything that requires you to log-in that allows for the use of two factor authentication. Most people use Google Authenticator and Authy. I personally prefer the open source options of FreeOTP & andOTP. Use the one that you find best suited for you. Using one is paramount for security nowadays.
If you are one that uses Google Docs with your team, move instead to CryptPad. The more you use CryptPad the more addicting it becomes; your collaborated work is encrypted and private. You no longer will have to worry about knowing that Google is capturing all of your collaborated work. You can also start using CryptPad for free.
If you are using Skype for conference calls, switch to Jitsi. Jitsi is even easier to use than Skype. If you use their MeetJitsi feature you can just access the encrypted conferencing via any browser by agreeing with your other party on the same predetermined passphrase.
Don’t use regular text messaging. Rather, use Signal, Wickr, Keybase, or Telegram.
Use a VPN
A VPN (virtual private network) encrypts all of your traffic via a private network of servers scattered throughout the world. This process anonymizes your IP address. Make sure you don’t use your identity when using a VPN- that would just give away your identity as being connected with the VPN servers you are using.
Many VPN providers register your activity and can hand it over to government if they so demand it. They break their promises to their clients all the time. Let’s minimize risk by staying away from the most draconian of jurisdictions.
To lessen this issue, do not ever use a VPN that is based out of any of the 5 eyes:
-United Kingdom
-United States
-New Zealand
Furthermore, avoid VPNs based out of the following nine countries, that combined with the first 5 make up the 14 eyes:
-The Netherlands
No VPN is a complete safeguard. In spite of this, it is still best to use one. We recommend you ONLY use it (turn it on) when doing crypto-related things and only crypto-related things on your regular computer. For your new encrypted hardware computer have it on at all times. If you use it to access an actual bank account, or another personal account (including crypto accounts that require your personal information; read coinbase, or any other exchange) — then, again, the use of the VPN use becomes trite.
Here are six VPN options outside of the 14 eyes that we recommend you research further and use at your own discretion:
NordVPN (Panama)
CyberGhost (Romania)
HideMe (Malaysia)
Astrill (Seychelles)
TrustZone (Seychelles)
iVPN (Gibralter)
Like all things in the market now, some VPNs take Crypto as payment—others do not. It is best if you bought your VPN with crypto not not your credit card, debit card, or paypal.
TOR (The Onion Router)
The Onion Router is software that you use as a browser. It protects you by bouncing your communications around a distributed network- throughout the world- of relays runned by volunteers. This prevents evesdroppers from learning your IP address, spying on you, and disclosing your physical location. TOR also allows you to access sites that are blocked.
You can use TOR and a VPN simultaneously. If you are new to all of this, it is best that you just learn how to use the features of your new computer coupled with your preferred VPN. The use of TOR is a little more complicated and you will have to configure it according the specifications of your preferred VPN. As you begin this process, as long as you are using your VPN correctly you should be fine.
Fincen and crypto-exchanges
ShapeShift is now stuck having to require its users to deanonymize their transactions in order to meet KYC and AML requirements; it pretty clear that they got ShapeShift under the Bank Secrecy Act. Stay away from Shapeshift (sorry @erikvorhees).
“Very disappointed that @ShapeShift_io is implementing KYC. Just goes to show that any centralized entity will be pushed in that direction, which is why LN, atomic swaps and Decentralized Exchanges are the only way to resist a surveillance economics.” - Andreas Antonopoulos
As the news of ShapeShift broke out, the market was quick to answer with alternatives. Among the private centric alternatives to ShapeShift we find Godex, ChangeHero, XMR.TO, and Bisq.
ChangeHero and Godex are pretty much the same business concept as ShapeShift. The only difference is that they do not require you to become transparent. XMR.TO allows you to make BTC payments by using Monero.
That is, by using Monero together with XMR.TO you can pay any BTC address in the world while protecting your privacy.
Bisq is the Best Option
The most important to focus on is Bisq. Bisq is a complete decentralized exchange. Bisq is instantly accessible- there is no need for registration or approval from a central authority. The system is decentralized peer-to-peer and trading cannot be stopped or censored.
Bisq is safe. Unlike MtGox and the rest of centralized exchanges, Bisq never holds your funds. Bisq provides a system of decentralized arbitration with security deposits that protect traders. The privacy is set where no one except trading partners exchange personal identifying information. All personal data is stored locally.
All communication on Bisq is end-to-end encrypted routed over Tor. Upon downloading and running Bisq TOR runs on Bisq automatically. Every aspect of the development of Bisq is open source.
Bisq is easy to use. If you are accustomed to centralized exchanges, you might find Bisq a little different. If you want anonymity and privacy, this is the best crypto exchange we have. Tell your friends about Bisq. Just download Bisq and take it for a test drive, you will feel fresh freedom of entering into peaceful voluntary exchange with your fellow man. Do it, it’s good for the soul.
On Cody
I would like to personally thank all of our subscribers for generously donating to Defense Distributed on our last issue. At the moment of us putting out our last newsletter, DefDist had raised less than 100k USD. After our Newsletter got out, his donations went past 300k USD.
Thank you very much for helping out our friends in their continual fight for freedom!
Please pray for Cody, his friends, and his family.
I once asked Cody what his background was- because idk his mannerisms have always been interesting to me. He answered; “I am Romani- I am a Gypsy.”
Thank you for helping out our Gypsy friend and his band of rebels! They will very much be using your generous donations now that things got much more serious.
If you haven’t donated, please consider donating. Blessings!
By Rafael LaVerde
Excerpt taken from The Dollar Vigilante September 2018 Issue
submitted by 2012ronpaul2012 to C_S_T [link] [comments]

How the hell do you buy bitcoins? It's been a fail for me and i've been trying for weeks..

Okay, so I've tried Dwolla to MtGox and I put my money on dwolla to make a purchase through Mtgox and it said I had to be a member for 30 days or I had to have previous transactions. can't really wait that long...
so I tried Bitinstant... giving cash to someone at cvs and after I had a 10 minute long phone call with the machine+operator I went to the cashier and they said they never saw my purchase so I can't pay for it...
I just started looking into bitfloor and I have no idea how to properly send my bitcoins to a certain address..
Should I try a different location for the moneygram (bitinstant)?
or should I use bitfloor? I really need help! Thanks!
submitted by FelineRabies to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Only 11am ET and Coinbase already hit buy limit

Just tried to buy some bitcoin with Coinbase and they had already hit their limit for the day. Also, the quoted price was 33.50USD, way over what Blockchain is showing.
What is going on!! Must be crazy demand at the moment...
submitted by obiefernandez to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Price CRASH! Ethereum Analysis! MT Gox Settlement!? Risk Management Tutorial! Bitcoin TA Mt Gox Bitcoin Manipulation Explained OTC: Over the Counter Bitcoin Trading Mt. Gox: Solving the Mystery of Bitcoin’s Biggest Disaster I Fortune 12+ hour time lapse Bitcoin on Mt.Gox and BitStamp showing $900 ATH spike and flash crash

It's estimated Satoshi owns 5.5% of Bitcoin, The Winklevoss twins own 1%, MTGOX owns .75% and the PlusToken Ponzi owned 1%. Addresses ≥1000 BTC hold over 40% of all Bitcoin. The SillyWhalePenalty penalizes them up to 75% and MultiSig can't claim prevents most exchanges from claiming. GOXmeNOT removes ~140k BTC of MTGOX and 96k from PlusToken from claiming. We'reAllSatoshi removes everyone ... The bitcoin protocol requires 100 network blocks to pass after a new coin has been created to see any transaction which contains it as valid. If you check the source bitcoin addresses on your transaction on blockchain.info and click 'output' next to it, you can see if its a new coin and which block it was created in. Now if you find the latest ... Attempted compilation of Mtgox deposit and withdrawal addresses. I would like to identify as many Mtgox deposit/withdrawal addresses as possible. I agree that this is most probably useless for most practical purposes, although someone could eventually find some use for it (lost coins?). We already have the blockchain.info tags for unsubstantiated claims, so I encourage listing here only the ... Tibanne has entered its own bankruptcy, and their trustee is apparently pursuing a claim for 82,500 bitcoins. Because Tibanne has filed an appeal against the court’s decision to side with the MT Gox trustee, and because Coinlab could potentially do the same, any redistribution is likely to take some time depending on how long the appeal court takes. Trades on Mt. Gox's executed from balances on deposit with the exchange which in turn made trading on the market instantaneous, compared to most other Bitcoin markets of 2010 where a subsequent settlement occurred manually between the trading partners. The disadvantage of this was that a third party had to be trusted with keeping the money safe.

[index] [31622] [33538] [35411] [41716] [14682] [20746] [26971] [33960] [11114] [15097]

Bitcoin Price CRASH! Ethereum Analysis! MT Gox Settlement!? Risk Management Tutorial! Bitcoin TA

BITCOIN JUST CRASHED HARD! YOU NEED TO KNOW RISK MANAGEMENT. In todays video i give a brief risk management tutorial for when you are leverage trading bitcoin on bybit or duedex. Duedex has a risk ... Withdraw Bitcoins from Blockchain to Your Bank Account, withdraw bitcoins from mtgox to Bank Account, withdraw bitcoins from bitstamp To Bank Account, withdraw bitcoins from btc-e to Bank Account ... MtGox Bitcoins to BTC Bitcoins in 50 seconds BITCOIN PRICE , BITCOIN FUTURE in doubt http://youtu.be/eO-yrpQpIT8 What is NAMECOIN BITCOIN'S First Fork http:/... Transcript: Hello, I'm Roger Ver, long time Bitcoin proponent. About 7 months ago, purely as a favor to Mtgox, I made a video stating that their fiat withdrawal problems were not being caused by a ... 🔴 Bill Gates Live Microsoft, Bitcoin Crash, Anti-Bearish Coalition, Investments Microsoft US 5,108 watching Live now Inside a Secret Chinese Bitcoin Mine - Duration: 9:17.