my question is when i make the deposit how does bitfloor/localtill know the payment of 300 dollars came from my account, and not from someone else thats depositing 300 dollars elsewhere? because there is no where on the deposit slip that shows it came from my account.
Was it exactly $300.00 or was it something like $302.17. Because this week, nobody else will be asked to deposit exactly $302.17. Therefore, if there is a deposit for $302.17, this it was probably yours and will be credited to your BitFloor account. Just make sure to deposit the exact amount on the slip. |
|
|
|
Monetary base for Bitcoins is $10.9 million BTC.
That's the wrong currency symbol though. Should be: Monetary base for Bitcoins is ฿10.9 million BTC (Or Ƀ10.9 million BTC, if you prefer Ƀ symbol, which is not used for any other currency like how the ฿ symbol is used for at least one other currency). |
|
|
|
b) Banks shut from Friday to Monday so not much money coming in
That is only for ECB banks and a few other countries. Nearly all banks in the U.S., Japan, etc. do not close for Easter. But a four day weekend for these banks in the EU where much of the recent surge has apparently originated could be the removal of support that is helping to keep the exchange rate this high, and then a resulting drop from those looking to lock in their gains (as there's no guarantee there is a rebound after a selloff.) |
|
|
|
as long as at least one of the parties involved in a currency exchange is licensed, then it is all good by FinCEN.
That's not their position at all. It depends on the transaction. |
|
|
|
since coinlab is registered they wouldn't be considered "a person" Just because a company that has registered as a Money Service Business (MSB) doesn't make them no longer a "person" - which is defined here: - http://www.fincen.gov/financial_institutions/msb/definitions/person.htmland therefore I am not a money services business or transmitter or exchanger or anything else if I use mt gox services, right? If you serve as an agent of a money transmitter, then you don't need to register as an MSB yourself. - http://www.fincen.gov/financial_institutions/msb/definitions/serves_agent.htmlBut Coinlab's customers aren't its agents. If you are asking if you can use Coinlab to cash out your own coins without you having to register as a money service business then that is a different question. FinCEN makes it clear that as a merchant you can receive bitcoins for goods and services and that you can spend those bitcoins for goods and services -- all without registering as a money service business. But if you receive bitcoins and then convert those coins to dollars at an exchange, are you transmitting money? I believe the answer is no if you are covered under the limitation for 31 CFR § 1010.100(ff)(5)(ii)(F): (F) Accepts and transmits funds only integral to the sale of goods or the provision of services, other than money transmission services, by the person who is accepting and transmitting the funds.
- http://blog.bitpay.com/2013/03/how-fincen-guidelines-affect-bitpay.htmlSo if you received the coins from the sale of goods and services and cash those out at an exchange and withdraw the funds to your own bank account, for instance, it appears then that you are not a money transmitter and don't need to register as an MSB. Now if you received the coins from someone and converted those to cash and returned cash to that person, then that is a completely different transaction and if you would need to register as an MSB in that instance is a completely different question. |
|
|
|
ok but which one of them are widely used and require no or minimal registration?
You are possibly overlooking the question you should be asking. Which ones can be trusted to hold your funds? And the answer to that is, the ones whose identity is known, the ones who make use of cold storage -- preferably with the private keys protected using something like SSSS (Shamir's secret sharing scheme) stored in a bank vault, etc. That narrows the list pretty significantly -- Coinlab/Mt.Gox (U.S.--soon), Bitcoin-Central/Paymium (France), ?? Now there are others that might qualify, such as Coinbase (U.S.), but they aren't shared wallets -- addresses in your wallet are not shared with other customers of that service. And Blockchain.info/wallet is a hybrid EWallet and addresses are not shared. Also, two-factor authentication is an important criteria for an EWallet: Which Two-factor authentication methods are available at which exchanges? - http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/4113 |
|
|
|
Needless to say, this weekend we are not in a downtrend [...], so there's no green light.
Having burst through the previous weekly high, Ditto. What is interesting is that last weekend even without a green light, there was a dip -- from $74.90 to $52.35, a 30% dip from peak to bottom, but sure enough the exchange rate came right back up. This weekend there is a unique situation. It is a FOUR DAY weekend (i.e., banks closed) in the EU due to the Easter holiday: - http://www.ecb.int/home/html/holidays.en.htmlWhether that is enough to trigger a dip I have no idea. I only describe when there is a green light indicating when the Weekend Dip Strategy has historically resulting in profitable trades. This weekend there is no green light. |
|
|
|
So i've been seeing Alot of "my mt.gox account was hacked" "my xbox account was hacked" "my facebook account has been hacked" Etc...
Fortunately there is also two-factor authentication, rendering dictionary attacks essentially worthless for compromising the login credentials. Which Two-factor authentication methods are available at which exchanges? - http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/4114/153 |
|
|
|
Every private key I entered came up with the response that the wallet was empty and it might be a typo. Besides that message it seemed to have accepted the private key because if I tried to resubmit it would tell me it was already uploaded.
Out of curiosity, try sending a reasonable amount (e.g., 0.01 BTC or above) to an address that you have already imported to your Mt. Gox wallet. If that gets swept but the "dust" doesn't then you have your answer. [Update: From another thread: 18:02.47 ( @MagicalTux ) must have been some changes with the new version of bitcoin
18:04.19 ( @MagicalTux ) we have a project that will solve that, I guess I'll have to push it sooner than expected
18:04.59 ( kakobrekla ) any eta on when these get credited?
18:05.57 ( @MagicalTux ) I guess we have created the txs, but it's stuck in the transfer queue because bitcoind randomly refuses connections
] |
|
|
|
What happened? i never seen a transaction need more than 10 confs
What you are describing is a delay where a hosted (shared) EWallet is not crediting your account in a timely manner. This is not a problem with bitcoin but instead a problem with that specific EWallet provider. You should contact that specific EWallet provider to inquire why there is a delay. |
|
|
|
Engineering the Bitcoin Gold Rush: An Interview with Yifu Guo, Creator of the First ASIC-Based Miner by Alec Liu And quietly in the background, a company called Avalon shipped the first ASIC-based bitcoin miners, custom-built rigs with specially-designed chips for efficiently printing the market’s hottest commodity, ushering in what can be considered the internet’s first gold rush. (Someone recently paid $20,000 for a $1,500 miner from batch two on eBay. At the time of this writing, another auction has a batch two Avalon miner going for over $19,000.)
After opening up its third batch of 600 miners for sale yesterday, customers from around the world from countries like Argentina, the UK, and even Egypt (although the majority of orders came from the big three of the U.S., Russia, and China) made sure Avalon’s units sold out in fifteen minutes. We had the chance to sit down with Avalon’s founder, Yifu Guo to talk bitcoin, mining, and the future.
[...]
If bitcoin is a $1 billion market, and it only takes less than $1 million to secure the network right now, that’s not a lot of money for someone to try and take over the mining scene. The faster the technology progresses, the more secure the network is, because it will be that much harder for a malevolent entity to mess with the system. We want to [improve performance ...] The sooner the better so we’ll never again have this scenario where one company like Avalon essentially controls more theoretical computing power than the entire network’s hash rate. This will never happen again.
- http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/engineering-the-bitcoin-gold-rush-an-interview-with-yifu-guo-creator-of-the-first-asic-based-miner |
|
|
|
Would it help if the service allowed you to launch your project with your own BitCoin project address, rather than keeping the funds in escrow. Then the issue of security is isolated to that user? That has it's own issues, but perhaps in the beginning this would be the best approach?
One of the reasons Kickstarter is "all or nothing" (i.e., meet the target level or funds are returned to the contributor) is because the funds returned on projects that never reach the goal get funneled into the remaining ones giving those leaders a better chance of reaching their goal. Occasionally a project that only gets partial funding can still become a successful project but other projects will fail unless the entire minimum level of funding is achieved. Two successful, fully funded projects and twenty projects that never reached full funding is better than twenty-two partially funded projects, and all or nearly all failed. So I don't think letting the project owner provide the bitcoin address is ideal either. This is an example of where M of N signatures would come in useful. |
|
|
|
Why in the world would I, or any other sane person spend the coins, knowing that tomorrow, they will have greater value. In the U.S. I can easily add USD funds to an exchange so that they are ready to be converted to BTCs at any time. (E.g., sending funds using Mt. Gox using Dwolla, my costs are simply the $0.25 per-transaction fee.) So I can replenish my stash of bitcoins at about the same time I make a purchase so that my net holdings (number of bitcoins) never decreases. The reason I might do this is so that I can make purchases where Bitcoin's attributes as a payment network are superior. For instance, my retailer may give me a discount when I purchase using bitcoins since there are no merchant payment network fees. Or my supplier will only accept bitcoins due to it being a non-reversible payment method. Or I wish to send internationally and the delays and/or fees are prohibitive. Additionally, if I have all my savings in bitcoin, and I want to make a purchase, it costs me money to first convert those savings to fiat (e.g., USDs) and then to spend them. So being able to spend them directly is advantageous. The thing is though, it is all a moot point. If there will be an economic decline because of Bitcoin, then there will be an economic decline because of Bitcoin. Even if I am told that using bitcoins will cause some economic deflationary spiral, I will still listen to my personal ambition to acquire and use bitcoins versus to avoid them as the result of this prediction of doom. After a whole bunch of decades watching our currency get devalued to protect us from negative economic cycles, the market is now making the decision to use a different currency -- one that doesn't get devalued. Like it or not, that's what is happening. |
|
|
|
I've looked at one but may want to make a tool that feeds the data in to my mobile and would be great to even see someone else already API'ed or at least see some options.
BTC/USD at Mt . Gox then converted using GBP/USD from (? source). |
|
|
|
|
WARNING - THE MARCH WINNER HAS NOT BEEN PAID OUT
DO NOT PLAY BITLOTTO AT THIS TIME
|
|
|
|
This may have a really simple answer but why if the first 8 characters of the btc address are all unique do they need the other ones.  The first 8 characters are not "all unique", they just happen to be "unique enough" that it is extremely unlikely to ever have a collision. Now Firstbits are different as they can be tied to a Bitcoin address because of the order they have been seen in the blockchain. For instance, the Firstbits "1" will uniquely identify the first Bitcoin address that starts with a 1 -- which happen to be the Bitcoin address for the generated coin in the genesis block. Every other Bitcoin address also starts with a 1, except the fist one in block 0 is the only one with a Firstbits of "1". |
|
|
|
|
Your domain is newly registered and has privacy protection enabled.
Your forum account is new.
You have not shown any trust history in the -otc Web of Trust.
And you hold (escrow) user's funds.
The history of sites run anonymously is not very good. Even those that build up trust by being honest seem to eventually succumb to the allure of anonymous digital cash just sitting there for the taking.
If this is a gift-based crowdfunding (like Kickstarter) then it can be offered legally and there is no reasonable excuse not to disclose who the operator(s) are.
That still doesn't protect against against a claim of "oops, the site got hacked, coins are gone" or the operator simply disappearing.
In the instance where the person listing a project is soliciting funds, if things go wrong, that person may feel personally responsible for using a service that didn't have protections against a loss like I describe.
What assurance does this person have that any funds raised are secure (other than a claim of innocent intent)?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
