There's no legal precedent yet. Many people have taken the position that a bitcoin wallet doesn't establish possession of value (cash equivalent). Rather, that value is stored on the blockchain. What they possess is access to private keys that can move BTC on the blockchain.

It's a very interesting legal conundrum. A bitcoin address is not an "account" that is tied to a legal name or entity. For example, what happens if you hardware wallet has access to a private key that is also accessible by someone else? What if both of you are boarding the same flight? You can't both be carrying the USD cash equivalent of that BTC at the same time!

I'm sure that regulators will opine on this, though. The SEC recently said that cryptocurrency should be treated like cash, but that doesn't speak to this directly. In any case, I don't like to announce that I'm carrying cryptocurrency. Better to have an encrypted wallet on USB or something.

I disagree. The federal government has always taken the position that the US has jurisdiction over companies that do business with US customers. It was stated in the BTC-e indictment that this was partially the justification for the July enforcement actions. It didn't matter where BTC-e was organized. Similarly, Bitfinex has been fined by the CFTC despite its registration in Hong Kong or the British Virgin Islands.

That's why some exchanges prohibit US customers. Others continue to serve them because it's a massive market, and the profit motive outweighs the regulatory risks.


Link? I haven't heard of anything like this. There is a Senate Bill (not passed yet) which would prohibit concealing your identity to financial institutions, with that term being expanded to include exchanges. So if an exchange requires KYC, it would be unlawful to lie to them (fake names, etc).

Seems like the market is telling us that Bitcoin investors don't care about rising fees. If cheap fees were important to the market, it would have a discernible effect on supply and demand.

If most people are simply holding BTC as an investment, they're not even paying fees to use Bitcoin, so it doesn't matter to them. At the same time, transaction volume is generally increasing, meaning that people still find value in on-chain transactions at these fee rates. At some point, equilibrium will be found, and transaction volume will drop due to growing fees. That will naturally cause network fee rates to drop.

Yeah, seems like a good way to get some gullible newbies to hand over their BTC private keys. I don't think anyone will make as much loot as the guys who made the fake BTG web wallet, though. I think the market for Bitcoin forks has peaked, so to speak.


Its main proponent is Chandler Guo (and he is the only reason it's worth mentioning at all). And all I've heard from him is "Bitcoin God to the moon!" "Something something Christmas gift." I'm not even sure it's trying to address a problem.

South Korea accounts for the #1, #10 and #14 cryptocurrency exchanges by volume. Yes, I know there could be wash volume involved, but as we all know from the Chinese exchanges' history, that doesn't necessarily matter. Korea seems to be approaching Japan with regard to market relevance, and Koreans are especially active in the altcoin markets.

So, the government called an emergency meeting yesterday. The topic: methods for curbing cryptocurrency speculation. Sources at the Bank of Korea say that the government will announce measures targeting cryptocurrency traders by the end of the week. They already banned ICOs in September. According to the article:


Could this be fuel for a price correction?

Altcoin volatility is great for increasing your bitcoin stack. The bounces can be so easy to trade sometimes that it feels like stealing. That said, I've been around the block a few times, and suffered some nasty drawdowns in my day. People think Bitcoin takes conviction to hold...altcoins bring it to a whole new level.

As far as long term investment goes, it's not too late. But if I were sending USD to an exchange right now, I'd probably sit on the sidelines for a bit. There's a good chance it'll go higher -- it's really unpredictable -- but FUD abounds, and the one thing I've learned about crypto is there will always be dips. If you draw a trendline at log scale from the Sept. 13 - Nov. 11 bottoms, I'm looking to buy any dip near that trendline.

That's a very ballsy move. I hope it works out. I think it probably will; WEX is performing better than many expected, and it's new structure seems to be holding up to scrutiny from affiliation with BTC-e. If I had to guess, the exchange has been accumulating the tokens at a discount. They said at the outset to expect 1-2 years for full repayment. I think one year is a reasonable guess at this point.

Unfortunately, it doesn't get the free advertisement of being listed at the top of Bitcoinwisdom anymore (in fact, they still list BTC-e there). Exchange Wars lists WEX at #17 right now.


Not sure, given the SEC's recent ruling. They said that cryptocurrency payments should be treated like cash with regard to AML/KYC. I'm guessing that means that inter-account codes are problematic above a certain dollar amount. Doesn't apply to WEX anymore since they don't serve US residents, but it would apply to CEX.io. I had no idea CEX.io had codes like that.

Aren't we already seeing mainstream adoption? Futures markets on CME and Nasdaq, renewed talk of ETFs. Coinbase hit the top trending app in the Apple app store. They're shilling Bitcoin daily on CNBC and there is now a Forbes offshoot called "Forbes Crypto." Not mainstream enough for you?

As much as people keep repeating that rising fees inhibit adoption, the price continues to rise. That's the most telling thing to me. In spite of the rising fees, the price just goes up -- parabolically. That means the market really doesn't care about fees right now. What they seem to care about is that there is only 21 million bitcoins, and they are quickly being mined out.

Can we complain? That's the monetary policy we signed up for. It's the gold rush 2.0.

Have you compared it to gold mining? Mining and recycling gold consumes far more energy. It's important to keep this in perspective as environmentalists begin complaining about Bitcoin's energy consumption. Here's a recent comparison:


In the same article, one researcher -- Marc Bevand -- claims that Bitcoin mining uses ~ 4TWh annually, which is considerably less energy than is used by Christmas lights in the US during the holiday season. Granted, as difficulty grows and proof-of-work becomes increasingly difficult in the context of decreasing block subsidy, the network's energy consumption can be expected to increase.

But my point is this: When we consider how much energy is consumed by Bitcoin, you have to consider the alternatives (like gold), which have significant energy costs themselves.

The price action in LTC definitely reminds me of 2013. It's sort of a "late stage rally." The smart money has been in this market for months already, after Bitcoin began its parabolic trend in July. Now mainstream investors are arriving in hordes and Bitcoin "looks expensive." So what other options are available on Coinbase? Ethereum and Litecoin. LTC got its pump..... ETH is probably next. That's my guess. After that, I wouldn't be surprised to see a nasty correction that shakes out a lot of newbies.


That's like saying Bitcoin is going to crash and burn because fees have risen so much. The situations are exactly the same. Everyone is paying drastically higher fees to use both currencies right now. But speculative hype is more important than worries about fees.

Maybe for a high priority transaction that you need confirmed in the next block. But you should check https://bitcoinfees.earn.com/ before sending a transaction. If you are willing to wait 4-87 blocks (up to 15 hours delay) for a confirmation, then you can send a transaction for 125 satoshis/byte. At the median transaction size, that costs less then $5. Considering that Bitcoin is the most secure ledger in the world, that seems like a steal!


This spike in congestion resembles the one that took place about a month ago. It's a spam attack. It'll subside when the attackers have either achieved their objectives or run out of money.

I use a VPN and I've never had issues. If I weren't allowed to use a VPN I'd probably take my business elsewhere.

Also, what makes you think that depositing coins from WEX is an issue? Has anyone ever had their account frozen after depositing from WEX? WEX might appear to be BTC-e, but the fact is that they have a completely different corporate structure in Singapore. I highly doubt anyone will blacklist WEX until/unless the US government indicts them as well.

Do you have any idea how many accounts must have logged in from the same IP at some point? IP is meaningless. They can be spoofed and changed incredibly easily. If Bittrex is using this to auto-disable accounts, I'd advise people leave there immediately. Then again, I don't think this is why Bittrex is disabling accounts...

Some brokers might require accredited investor status, but I'm pretty sure CBOE contracts are available on platforms like Interactive Brokers. It's a far cry from the days when anyone could anonymously fund an account with $5 or $10, though. I guess we can't really act surprised with Bitcoin trading above $10,000 now.

Wall Street whales definitely have more cash to play with, but since these futures markets are cash-settled, there is little room for manipulation. They are mostly useful for hedging exposure for company operations (Square Cash comes to mind).


I'm more interested in ETF offerings, personally. I can't wait until it's easier to roll Bitcoin investments into my retirement account.

What exactly does "practical" mean in this context? Is the current price the product of speculative hype, and could it be overshooting actual adoption rates and realistic utility? Sure. But that's the nature of markets. But every time the bitcoin price has crashed, it has recovered with higher lows and higher highs.

The price measures supply and demand over time, and the trend is clearly telling us that adoption is increasing (among other metrics like Coinbase/Blockchain users and transaction volume). Metcalfe's law says that the value of networks is exponentially proportional to its user base. So if Bitcoin's user base is increasing linearly, we can expect that over time, the price will increase exponentially. Exactly when these cycles occur is anyone's guess.


Any evidence for that statement? Anyway, there is one rule in crypto: There will always be dips/crashes. Be ready to buy them, because it's hard to find volatility this good.

It's really up to the feds.

In all seriousness, it's clear that three-letter agencies or state regulators have been crawling up Bittrex's ass for a while. I guess that's what they get for setting up operations in Washington State, of all places, where state regulators are second to none (except maybe New York). They're doing their best to survive, implementing these tightened KYC procedures and blocking accounts from sanctioned countries. Whether it's enough? Who knows. There is no precedent for this stuff.

I'm honestly concerned that they are basically a honeypot at this point. I won't go anywhere near them. I can't wait until the decentralized exchanges take over and put these guys out of business.

The shadier/grey market exchanges have been largely reduced to third party bank accounts. For instance, Bitfinex brought back USD/EUR banking, but it's through a third party account; they aren't using their own bank account. BTC-e operated this way for years and Wex continues to do so.

As sketchy as it is, I think that banks are largely still willing to do business with companies like MoneyPolo (Mayzus--a UK company) and other payment processors because they are regulated companies that are supposedly following AML/KYC laws. Mayzus in particular is widely believed to be a money laundering operation, and I was amazed that they didn't go down when BTC-e did. I really don't know how sustainable this situation is.


The market is going to shift away from crypto startups and dodgy exchanges and towards the Squares and Apples of the world. Square Cash BTC integration is the start of that, and the launch of futures markets enabled it. I'm honestly not sure where exactly that leaves the commercial banks. Bank of America is apparently planning to push into the cryptocurrency exchange space.

It's worrisome, but I felt a bit better when I saw that Jerry Brito tweeted skepticism that it could be passed. He's executive director of Coin Center, and they've done a lot of advocacy and legal work on Bitcoin issues. As written, it's pretty worrisome indeed. It's pretty vague with regard to individual disclosure, and the case that one must declare bitcoin holdings but not gold is dubious at best.

It seems like the most troublesome aspect is the expansion of the definition of "financial institution" to include "redeemers of digital currency" and "digital exchanger or tumbler of digital currency." The word "redeemer" is super vague. And the next phrase definitely refers to exchanges, mixers and probably CFD brokers as well.

I've been asking around, trying to get more information about them. All the projects are fairly obscure. I'm intrigued by GOD because of its affiliation with Chandler Guo, who is considerably more well-known than Jack Liao (Bitcoin Gold's main backer). Terrible name for a coin, though.

Personally, I'm happy to claim the coins if there is hype/value. But only if there is an apparently safe wallet, after I've moved the BTC to safe new addresses, and on a junk PC with no access to any crypto. The first condition (safe wallet) seems to be a pretty high bar for some of these forks. Indeed, hopefully we can dump them before they crash entirely....

It's just markets being markets. During the 2013 bull cycles we saw supply dry up on the exchanges in a similar fashion. Lack of supply combined with mainstream media hype and a solid 2-year bull market? That's enough reason for a parabolic rally! The general theory with blow-off tops is "the higher it goes, the harder it will fall." It's hard to imagine losing the majority of these gains (like we did in 2011 or 2014), but I guess anything is possible. I'm definitely taking some profit off the table just in case.


There is also the distinct possibility that the price curve is merely reflecting the S-curve of adoption. If Bitcoin really is like the television or the internet, then it's possible the price will continue like this until after the top of the S-curve (after mainstream adoption has occurred).

Satoshi once said that if Bitcoin caught on that they'd be worth millions....

I'm not too concerned until the top is in. This kind of FUD doesn't usually catalyze a bear market; we still need the market to become exhausted. It's in the bear market that bad things usually start happening. For example, MT Gox shut down in February, long after the top was in.


There isn't much evidence, though. The fact is that Friedman, LLP was very careful not specify their statement as an audit nor to make any guarantees on Tether's solvency, for good reason. They have no way of confirming whether Tether has access to the funds or whether those accounts are tied to obligations other than USDT redemption.

Personally, I think they have all funds in reserve, but I think they are terrified of regulators. They have no realistic way of redeeming USDT for anyone. You can only deposit to Bitfinex or altcoin exchanges and exit via crypto.


The reason that Tether has a face value is because people believe they are redeemable, or at least that they will be someday. This is sustainable in a raging bull market because a lot more people are entering the market than exiting. When the market finally crashes and everyone wants USD -- and by that I mean real USD in their bank account -- I'm not so sure.