I think smart cards do not need to support crypto currencies, only ECC key signatures, since it's the software's job to ultilize smart-card for that. Maybe you are right, that there may be nuances like HD wallet that may require more than just ECC key signing. I'll ask around the dev communities how far a way is a ECC-enabled smart-card to a non-displaying hardware wallet.

I couldn't find this through Google. Normally one would expect a list on electrum's website. More specifically, since I am on Linux and with a computer that has a smart-card reader, I look for a smart-card that can plugin to my laptop directly. Of course the smart-card has to support ECC, however it seems most do.

If there isn't a ready choice, which one is the easiest to start hacking for a solution?

I also wish to know whether or not a ECC-supporting smart-card with software is a sufficient replacement for a hardware wallet.

Thanks.

Hi repentance: I think you are in the know of how financial institution works and talk candid - the combination doesn't come easy. I am related to financial institutes in Australia and I'm a bitcoin early-adopter/supporter/consultant/journalist (google me Weiwu Zhang). I wish to get in touch with you:) You blocks private messages so I am trying my luck with a pubic post.

Since we don't have Corda whitepaper and source code or development discussion in the public, the demo is the only clue that a Corda codebase exists at all. But the linked article said very little detail about it and didn't come with a video. For example, it mentioned the ISDA Master Agreement but didn't say whether or not it is used in the Corda demo, then why mentioning the ISDA Master Agreement at all? This isn't very informative...

I edited the title of this thread. Normally I should not resurrect dead threads, but just to write to let you know that there is a wave of de-banking going on in Australia now.

It started last year, and still going on now. Talk about it in Melbourne's bitcoin meetup you can find people with their bank account closed, at which place I heard that banks staff registerred as users of Bitcoin exchanges to find from which accounts they sent their customer's withdraw, and closed these accounts in detail. Something bitcoin sellers should be aware of.



That's not true. I learned it through this drama. There is a Bona Fide Purchaser. If you buy it without notice (that it is stolen), then it's yours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_purchaser


To respond to the diligent antifraud work of @Gleb Gamow : that quote was 3 years ago and I moved to Australia in the interim. That's why it's convenient for me to show up in a bitcoin conference in New Zealand. Also it's non-trivial to move domain name in and out of China thanks to the China's sensorship requirements (business not run by me). Not that I have an obligation to respond to @Gleb Gamow but I have an interest to, because I do antifraud work myself, e.g. I warned a month before FxBTC's insolvency.

It's ANZ Bank in Australia.

Just to let any Internet searcher know the end of the story. I filed the case with Australia Ombudsman Service. They asked the bank to reach a resolution with customer themselves, with a deadline attached (tomorrow) and the bank complied, solving the case to my expectation. So there are no financial loses except the uneasiness.

So, this time, the victim, whose account is hijacked to pay for Bitcoin purchased from me, lost. I didn't lose nor win. The hacker won.

Lessons learned:

1) for the victim: watch your bank account balance.

2) for bitcoin seller: if buyer is buying piecemeal, they maybe a criminal, hoping the victim didn't notice their bank balance changing. Ask for more ID proof. I do have regulars, but they don't buy fix amount, and I know them in person.

3) do not accept bank transfer because the banks can reverse them. Although you can get them back, like I did, its not worth the effort.

Just to add that I asked about Bitcoin cases, and my bank (ING Direct) told me "It's not about bitcoin or any other goods. It's not your money (in your account). It happens a lot."

My bank ING DIRECT discovered that a customer who bought bitcoin from me last month, paid me money with a stolen account. That account's bank, ANZ in this case, demands it. My bank will empty my bank account to pay for it.

Phone call I received: "because the money is stolen, you have never been entitled to this money. This is happens. Your account will be empty in a couple of days and there is nothing I can do for you."

Since the transaction happened on localbitcoins, with purchase and delivery of goods provable, it seems to me that I am punished for someone else's fault. I already contacted localbitcoin to suspend the buyer's account. I also contacted ANZ bank's efraud team by email.

What to do? And if I call the bank to ask for paper trail, what document do I ask for that can authorize them to empty my account?

The event happens in Australia, but I think in general the western law system work the same?

From the source you quote, it seems that I am in a indefendable position if I wired the same money to someone else following their instruction, once I received it. The case of mine, simply receiving it (and not forwarding it) does not make me a chain of money laundry. The bank may argue that the fact I sent the Bitcoins is a form of forwarding the money, but since Australia's tax office rules Bitcoin as a commodity, I am thus selling goods. Nevertheless, I expected money each time and have records of sales, as this is part of localbitcoin's feature.


I attempted this by calling the bank, but that the guy on the phone says that he cannot talk with me about anything, and someone from that bank will contact me. I fancy that if they suspect me and intend to get police to talk to me they wouldn't say it in advance:) If this should happen, I should file a case with local police officer now, or at least pay a visit, so that they don't surprise my weak-minded mother by visiting us instead.


Thank you. It's important that I keep this in mind when getting bank's call.

Any suggestions on the proceeding? (Australia)

After realizing that my bank account is suspended (by not being able to login to online banking), I called the bank, in this case ING DIRECT. They informed me that a serial of transaction used to pay me for bitcoins are from a stolen account, and provided information which leads me to find the questioned transactions. Then they refused to talk to me when I call again, saying that they will contact me instead. They also informed me that they are acting on the request of the paying account's bank.

I have records of all transactions with him from localbitcoins.com, including the proof of delivery of goods (Bitcoin is categorized as goods in Australia). This proof comes from localbitcoins.com - in case you didn't know, this escrow service takes 1% commission fee and holds the goods each time until the transaction gets settled in the bank. I also have my bank (ING DIRECT)'s monthly statements which includes the transactions in question.

The question I am asking, is what to do next? Apparently I wish to prevent lose. Bitcoin selling is legit in Australia. I am registerred as a sole trader, with Australia's business licence number, and I didn't evade tax. I have reported the case to localbitcoins.

I always finalize the bank transfer trades on the 3rd day, so that the transaction becomes "irreversible". I offended many customers with this slowness but kept my way.

I wonder what to expect when bank calls me. I have a legit business, but should I be afraid that banks will try to get me agreed on something to my disadvantage?

P.S. I did try to use Google for an answer, but 100% search results are written for those whose account is compromised, not for those who received payment from such accounts.

Humour accepted:) I call myself a writer of prose and programs. The expectation here in Australia is high; they won't miss the spots. e.g. the first paragraph of my post used all of the past, present and future tense. An English speaking friend of mine, Mr Brown is the name, would mark all these out and write "Tense! See me" like a school teacher does to his pupil. I'm working hard to catch up. How comes the 15% Chinese-speaking population in big cities didn't tame them to lower their standards?

They always are looking for high-growth investments. A common type of trader is unmarried youngs. They have an unusual sentiment of "compensation", that sets their mental expectation high - they won't stop at winning a year's salary; they want to win a flat - roughly a lifetime's salary (a lot more expensive than an Australian house).

Let me explain the "compensation".

China pretty much works like a pyramid scheme. It's not a Chinese specialty - Greek does that too, except that they are in the ending phrase of a pyramid scheme. The pyramid scheme takes the profit from the youngsters and rewards the early players. In China it happened in the form of real-estate - for an average Chinese young man / woman, renting a very small apartment - single room and single bathroom with no space for a bathing tube - costs more than half of the salary for a good job. Those who bought additional property a decade ago enjoys rental income and high capital gain, many of them live in Australia as I see. For example, a friend of mine, new comer to Australia, cashed out his flat(!) in Beijing outskirt last year, with 1.5$m USD in hand, before he set out for Australia. Chinese buy house the first thing on their list, so the whole generation was enriched at the labour of their youngsters. (How dramatic it will be when the pyramid is de-based by one-child policy.)

It is only unfair, for the younger generation, who struggle to get a house to get married. China's recent development, like the skyscrapers in every block in Shanghai, are their work after all. Many young players in the market are in their denial. They believe that they should share the good fortune like their parents, only if they are given the opportunity - for some time this opportunity was the stock market, because real estate is too expensive and not growing fast enough. Human are risk-seeking when they protect their "rightful own" benefit, so they gamble.  It doesn't make much difference how much do you have, as long as you don't have the million dollar for a place to house your wife. Hence the "compensation" is to win a house. Pity though, all these has nothing to do with decentralization and Bitcoin purchase transactions remain non-existant in China.

What I don't know, is if the risk-seeking stock market players and the current spike has a cause-and-effect relationship. That has to be supported by data. But if it is, Bitcoin market is going to be more frenzy than China's stock market, for there are no old players who look at fundamental and fear. It's a young-man-only market (and no young woman, because they are the party who demands the flat).

My editor called my attention to the recent surge on bitcoin price. I am a bit out of touch since I moved away from China last year, but I'll share a few points of view - could be useful because I see things from a different angle.

There are surprisingly sparse information about this surge on the Chinese internet - a disconnected part of the Internet that the Chinese think is the Internet. I hope I could be of more use to my editor by my source of information from QQ groups, but my QQ account is suspended after I logged in from Australia a few times and the formality necessary to regain it looks painful to me. So I won't be able to write a news report - but there is something to be see from nothingness that I can speculate freely in forums. Observation about things that should happen (but didn't) reveals much information.

What didn't happen is the precursor good news. Foreign news like Nasdaq doesn't move sentiments here. BTCC's reënabling of bank deposite seems to be the only good news that can touch the ignorant nerves of Chinese gamblers. BTCC didn't make a fuzz about it - almost doing it quietly. For a tiny industry set back by government scrutiny, BTCC has no reason to make a fuzz about it before the government, play the fool and gets whipped ("see? I know what the emperor will do!"). The big question is "Do BTCC know something we don't, but didn't tell lest playing the all-knowing jester?" The opposite could be true as well - BTCC simply decide to do the act since the Lord has lost his interest - Zhou Xiaochuan (PBOC) has a lot to worry about and President Xi won't mind these small things. I explained before: "If Bitcoin remains small, it will be allowed to live". Now bitcoin is so weak, it's probably fine to test the Lord. Since BTCC won't tell, the truth is irrelevant to market price.

The other possible cause, MMM-China, I dismiss as unlikely. They still need to rewrite their propaganda in everyday Chinese. Besides, MMM-China attacks bankers, trying to inspire sympathy, while the Chinese don't hate bankers - bankers don't rule China; they obay the Party (what else do you expect in Communism China?). Before MMM-China corrects the two problems, they can't win the heart of average Chinese. How ignorant, foreign cons and evangelists, I see from time to time, think that they can replicate their success in China as-is.

So what do I learn from the lack of information?

The future market is influnced by market sentiment and Chinese government reaction. The market sentiment we can't calculate - but I'll be succinct in stating the Chinese gamblers usually have a good appetite. The government reaction, on the other hand, is a lot easier to predict. It's going to be between inaction and "No", depends on whether a clear "no" degrades the government image to that of a micromanagement boss. Since it's all about image, or face value, or crowd control, it is inappropriate for the government to interfere if the people, the common crowd, are not yet influnced. There is a good indicator of "people gets influnced" - media coverage. So, we got a good precursor: no public media coverage of the Bitcoin frenzy, no government ban. Set Google keyword alert to be a public media coverage by a provincial level or well-known media and (market sentiment aside) it's safe to hold your coins until then (and a bit of time after, since the government works at its own pace).

I am not that ignorant to be pride of my ignorance of the latest developments in China - if you know some info, share it or message me, and I may change my take on things (and thank you as well).

A few words about myself:

I made a few good guesses in the past, including predicting Chinese government ban to bitcoin and the Chinese frenzy that leads to 1000USD, gained a bit fame. Then I migrated to Australia - not due to the uneventful Bitcoin development in China (which I predicted) but due to the dim future for a liberal mind under the regime of the new emperor. The bitcoin speculation won me some money, which eased my way to Australia, but didn't make it easy for me to blend in. For example, one of the reason Google here turns me down is that I lack International view - a rephrase of my interesting Chinese way of looking at things. Not many care about bitcoin here down under. In an effort to intermingle with Aussie startups I designed an Android public transit app - youtube link here) - it works everywhere in the world, so if that's what you need, help by testing it

Maybe you can try to save GNUCash ledger onto MySQL database instead of text file and see if precision improves. It can happen that the devs stored numeric as string to simplify adaptation (toSQL), in which case there be no improvement on precision.

ledger-cli makes it difficult to assign the task to an accountant. all successful investors ends up hiring an accountant - since you invest in Bitcoin, chances are you will be successful and will hire an accoutant, and end up either switching away from ledger-cli or so rich that you hire an accountant who were trained in Unix too:)

Lawful discussion aside, 1000USD per head is too few, that is 0.1% of a million. 10% is more justified, that is 100,000USD, so that two heads fetches a house. You also need to be explicit about "MUCH MORE" because contract killing nowadays barely  work even on explicit promises. Your best bet is that the pay is so high, that some began to consider it, then the money returns to you from whoever wants to live - a happy ending that on one has to die:)

I use XXX as a place holder for mBTC, the reason why I don't use BTC, but mBTC, is because gnucash can't handle more than 4-digits after decimal point: it automatically change the number, hinders a user to balance in a split transaction. It won't work even if you configure precision to more than 4-digits after decimal.

I know I just replied a post 120 days old, but this is how long it took me to determine to book-keeping my BTC transactions.

Just to let you know the facebook group is discussing the result of communication with Patrick and the following possible actions. Join the group to find out.

Another two months has passed, it is clear that Intersango is not refunding users as it promised. There were no deadline given, so it is a simple trick to postpone actions.
\
I started a group:. The group's name is Legal Pursuit of Intersango
https://www.facebook.com/groups/322173374574448/

I already started acting with other fraud targets. We have an active host of our action in the U.K. (he is a fraud target too) who have contact the lawers and made plan for following actions. Please join the group.

by tomorrow I will post a current status, including possible following legal actions and possible outcomes.

Since Intersango does not follow KYC, if you do not stand out and join the legal pursuit, you are not known as a target and may miss the chance of legally reclaim your investments.

The "More" part is the Freedom of doing everything without much regard to law. (A true librarian wouldn't call it a freedom.) The red line is not to touch Lord's regime and not to get negative media attention. Media is growing power these days.

It's easier to explain by quoting.   Gavin Elster in the movie "Vertigo":

"The things that spell San Francisco to me are disappearing fast. . . . I should have liked to live here then. Color, excitement, power, freedom. . . ."

The "More" part of Chinese freedom is the kind of freedom mentioned there. It's a time of heros, scoundrels and barons. People can be wealthy and as powerful as not to touch or damage Lord's regime, the state is not in their way. Unlike the western view, this game, despite being relentless merciless, is not even unfair, because everyone can be a baron and do have a chance. 90% of the wealthest started empty handed: Quote http://thinkingchinese.com/index.php?page_id=284

People can dream. Society structure in regarding to wealth is fluid. You can be what you want, if what you want is wealth (the only true want). The path to wealthy is open.

Small examples: Special businesses doesn't require special registration and regulation. There is a man who buildt his small mound on top of apartment buildings (he enjoys the view of mountain) and stopped at media pressure but not law pressure. Police dooesn't want to bother you or can be bribed, but unlike western imagination, the more usual case is "they don't want to bother you", not that "they can be bribed". Postive examples I mentioned above. I also have many provoking examples: you can drink on the street, eat in subway, block airport access in rage of delayed plane without worrying police taking you.

I keep referring the central government as the lord because:

If you are rich and powerful, the Lord can still take you down, doom your reputation and confesticate your business in an overnight, but you know the Lord won't do it without a good reason. The central is so efficient, that you better think it as a unified person with integrity, that he doesn't retaliate without reason and purpose, and he doesn't act on too small offenses or lack of briibe, he knows if you are loyal by the look, and he acts relentlessly - you can even love him for his integrity.