Of course your other options are to purchase them via bank wire transfer through Intersango or MtGox, neither are particularly safe options as they're not anonymous but if anyone would rather trust them then at the very least I'd recommend running your coins through a mixing service like Bitcoinfog.
hrm. If you buy through an exchange, the exchange knows your identity and has books on how much you bought, which they will surrender to officials if correct legal documents are provided. If you need undercover coins, buy them cash or mine them. I like the idea of local cash-traders you can meet in person. It works without cooperation of banks/visa/paypal/... |
|
|
|
Bitcoins and PayPal are not a good combination, too many people end up getting ripped off on both sides of the equation.
out of curiosity: how did buyers get burned? |
|
|
|
It is easy if you live in the US - for people in the UK & Europe there are very few ways to buy Bitcoins with cash.
true. I got a couple deals via tradebitcoin.com in the past. the site isn't being maintained too heavily, but it works. anyone know of a working alternative? |
|
|
|
You cannot withdraw using the API.
thanks for clarifying. |
|
|
|
What I'd need for now is something that runs every ~1 minute and does the following: - Cancel existing orders on GLBSE
- Collect data on the number of outstanding bonds, the mtgox last price, and some parameters such as my desired position, my net worth, and price volatility.
- Calculate the marginal value for me of each bond (I still need to work out some details with this).
- Place bids on the bonds at a little below the value, and asks at a little above.
- Alert me when my position becomes too unbalanced despite its efforts, so I can balance it by trading manually on Mt Gox, making CFD deals, or in the worst case, making a forced buyback of bonds.
- Send me a daily summary of its status (number of outstanding bonds, position, account balance...)
For now it seems simple enough that it would be better to develop it on my own. Going forward I'll consider getting something more professional made. Seems doable to me, however, I probably couldn't provide more professional quality than you can produce yourself. Keep me in the back of your head if you like should you need any (non-professional) help going forward. |
|
|
|
For the less mathematically imaginative, I made a little google spreadsheet "simulation"
You can enter the current exchange rate, amount of BTC to invest and which N to invest in (the yellow fields) and see what happens for price moves.
Great, this can be handy. (you need to make a copy of the spreadsheet to be able to edit using "File -> Make a Copy...")
It seems this option is disabled for outsiders. "Download as" works but is a bit difficult because Google uses a different function name for POW than Excel/OO. If you could either change the privileges, or add another sheet with -1, it would be good. Hm, the next priviledge level would be "allow edit by anyone who has the link", which I don't want to do. What do you mean by "add another sheet with -1" ? Can someone sanity-check it?
Looks good. It's important to clarify that all USD profits given are assuming that the alternative is to keep USD. This is made somewhat confusing by the fact that the field to enter is "BTC to invest". true. there's 2 kinds of users: those who "think" in USD and invest USD and those who think/invest in BTC (and also want the gains in BTC). Don't really know how to fix this. I put a text ("this assumes you sell the bonds and exchange the BTC for USD") above the "USD Value" and "USD Gain" columns. Does this clarify enough? If you want I can give edit-control to you if you PM me your google id. |
|
|
|
From the Yubico blog: Clarifications about YubiKey system security
2012-06-07
by jas4711
[...]
The vulnerability that has been described is that it is possible to create fake OTPs by trying OTPs until one of them succeed, and that this for some reason this will work with non-negligible probability. Before we proceed, we want to note that similar attacks is possible with any OTP or even password scheme, attackers can always try authentication many times.
[...]
urm. I had the impression the attack would not require an actual network-try of the guessed OTP and you could evaluate validity locally? Did I understand wrongly or did they get it wrong? EDIT: fixed quoting |
|
|
|
Calling. The issuer has the right to buy back the bonds
I don't understand how this works with glbse. Can the issuer forcibly buy back? EDIT: Nebulous... will you just "virtually" buy back before the bond goes to negative value as in "liquidate"? |
|
|
|
For the less mathematically imaginative, I made a little google spreadsheet "simulation" You can enter the current exchange rate, amount of BTC to invest and which N to invest in (the yellow fields) and see what happens for price moves.  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Au-mVSBh0PA4dExJcHM3aUhpT2ItZ3BFazZ1UlVnRlE(you need to make a copy of the spreadsheet to be able to edit using "File -> Make a Copy...")Can someone sanity-check it? |
|
|
|
Will you provide the market maker bot as well?
That's the plan. If someone else does a maker bot, I'll still need to operate a balance bot which will execute trades placed by the maker bot. I think I could provide that using my python code ( https://github.com/molecular/traidor) what exactly would it have to do? - receive trade requests (amount, desired price, sell/buy)
- place order with mtgox
- observe order getting filled
- give back info about executed trade request
? and maybe also: - provide info about liquidity (market depth)?
- provide info about volatility?
- provide info about last trade price?
|
|
|
|
|
intriguing!
Meni, I admire you: you got 2 things in one package that seldom come together: brains and balls. (the brains to think up such a scheme and the balls to actually offer it)
I just don't see yet how you can implement this... will read again and think...
|
|
|
|
If pirate's business doesn't last beyond december, and miners turn unprofitable with the reward drop, will there be any worthwhile investments left on GLBSE?
why would miners turn unprofitable? especially established fpga miners have no reason at all to get out unless their income falls below the operational cost (mainly power cost), in which case we have other problems than our bitcoin investment returns. |
|
|
|
I guess to the small time miner, its kinda like buying...
you mean because his not "pulling out" fiat for his power bill and to cover his initial investment? probably true. The miners have to cover monthly cost and initial investment. In case they have enough fiat to cover, they can choose to not do it and instead "buy" bitcoins (by not selling them). It used to be the case that power cost was pretty close to the mining income (if directly converted to fiat). With fpga mining the bulk of the cost has shifted from the operational cost to the investment for the rig. The "modern" miner clearly had the fiat to invest into the fpga hardware beforehand (so he's no poor sucker aiming for the quick buck he needs so badly), so he might be inclined to just "write that investment off" and keep the bulk of the coins. No need to sell all the coins for the power bill which is reasonable with fpga. It used to be (I'm talking about all the quick-buck-hype-miners that joined a year ago during or shortly after the hype spike) that miners were either forced to sell their coins because they had to cover power bills and are living on the edge anyway (they got into bitcoin mining because they don't have money in the first place) or (to a large extend, I remember the forum mood) didn't even think of bitcoin as money, put zero trust in its future value and sold voluntarily. These "quick buck miners" preferred at the time what they thought of as "real money" (USD). Ironically - in hindsight - if they kept the fiat and bought back in now, they did the right thing. I doubt most of them followed through on the second part, though. We're talking about just a single measure here: what percentage of mined coins is being sold directly for fiat? I'm guessing: Aug 2011: 80% Jun 2012: 20% |
|
|
|
No one can short BTC anymore. That is, without doubt, the biggest likely reason for a BTC rally.
Then any rally from here out is probably not going to end well once shorting is brought back. Exactly. As soon as people start shorting again, those extra (arguably artificial) sells are going to push the price down. well, I've used bitcoinica to go even longer than I already was (buy more BTC on leverage) before. You know, there's also people that have BTC to play with, but not much fiat, but they don't want to sell BTC because they're bulls. What I'm saying is: when the shorts are back... so are the longs. Of course it might be the shorts are heavier. thoughts? |
|
|
|
No one can short BTC anymore. That is, without doubt, the biggest likely reason for a BTC rally.
lol, back when bitcoinica was still operational, a common explanation for a rally was: "short squeeze". this rally is based on good fundamentals and positive sentiment in addition to a USD in trouble and more belief in another round of QE. Flight to safety. It's nice to see bitcoin is in the "safe" column of investors books nowadays. |
|
|
|
5.50  it soooooooooooooooooooooo wanted to break through $5.50!!!!!!!!! someone doesn't and put and ask wall at 5.5. when I saw it couple of hours ago, it was 5500. It's being eaten as we speak. 3850 now. hmnjomnjomnjom, delicious ask wall  |
|
|
|
the most important thing is that we can't trust anyone when dealing with new member on the forum so try to deal with trusted member or old member
what if there's a dispute between, say, you and me. Who has better leverage? I think forum rep is overrated. If you really want some good reputation, establish a #bitcoin-otc identity and make some good transaction. With otc, the trust is built by making good transactions, not by posting a lot of crap on the forum. |
|
|
|
problem downloading "pirate linux.iso"  looks like this for about 30 minutes now not good  EDIT: a day later now, I reloaded that status page. Download now complete good  |
|
|
|
I've been proposing the following: Withdrawal to bitcoin address is the exchange function/API call that is most prone to theft.
Other withdrawal methods have at least some level of traceability and/or reversibility.
Therefore, I propose the following solution:
1) create a completely separate right for both the web and the API for withdrawal to bitcoin address, separate from all the other withdrawal methods.
2) allow the owner of the account to have a whitelist of bitcoin addresses to which it is allowed to withdraw from both the web AND the API.
3) require two-factor authentication for adding or removing addresses to and from the whitelist.
This simple feature means that even in the event of an attacker gaining access to the user's web dashboard or the user's API keys,
the attacker will not be able to withdraw bitcoins to addresses of his choice.
Simple fix to a significant security risk.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=84585.msg937236#msg937236Please, exchanges, implement this SOON. You cannot implement it soon enough. +1. Nefario it would be great if you could get this put on glbse. you can already activate 2-factor withdrawal on glbse... oh, via API, hmm, didn't check that. Is it possible to withdraw without 2-factor-auth using the api even if it's activated for withdrawals? |
|
|
|
hmm, mtgox: $5.449, nice
Another 0.05$ up and technically we have "reverse head and shoulders" pattern, which is one the most potent and high probability bullish patterns in TA. This basically works like a red flag on all the TA believing bulls. Meaning a quick move to 6-7$ range, maybe higher. For whatever it worth. now that we have seen 5.50, can you help me see the reverse head and shoulders pattern? what timeframe should I be looking at? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
