no way. at the very end of the filing, you can see the government justifies seizing all the coins on 2 grounds: 1. they are proceeds of an illegal hack, and 2. they were commingled with funds tied to narcotics trafficking. in their eyes, they don't need to let the hacker enjoy any of the coins. if he doesn't cooperate, they can throw the book at him and get him thrown in prison for most of his life.


the IRS was definitely central to this investigation.

in this case, we know where the government began their analysis. this is from the filing:


they mention a transaction that deposited some of the stolen funds to BTC-E in 2015, which is probably how they identified the hacker. they also mention being aware of the hacker's online identity, so it's possible he was identified that way.

that was my original assumption, and is probably the case. after reading through the pleadings though, i'm not actually sure. the US attorney only says


......which makes me wonder if he leaked his identity in other ways.

it's possible (but unlikely) that they seized his computers and his wallets were unencrypted---no password---or something similar, like having a seed written down in plain text. in that case, the coins would be ready for the taking.

but this line from the article, "the individual consented to the government seizure on Tuesday" makes me think they arrested him and scared him into giving up the coins.


only if you give up the private keys.

i wonder what the exact course of events was, or more specifically, where the hacker made his mistake. this makes it sound like he moved the coins in a way (or to an exchange?) where they were identified by the USA government. then they gave up access to the coins to police as part of a plea agreement, or in an attempt to gain leniency.

if this is anything like the first silk road seizure, those coins will start being auctioned off by the US marshals in.....6-7 months? i wonder if it'll have much effect on supply, in the sense that OTC buyers accumulating via those auctions won't be accumulating from other OTC or exchange sources.

i finally had a chance to sit down and watch the stream today. after all the buildup, it was a much friendlier affair than i expected---so friendly in fact that pokershares is now offering odds on whether DN will be best man at doug polk's wedding, lol: https://www.pokershares.com/market/poker/8f22c541-59f7-4142-9be2-72f0265e8500

odds are at 41.

very solid play (and also a few spots of rungood) by DN---up $117k after 200 hands. it barely makes a dent in the total hand count but, nice showing anyway. it didn't affect the odds for the overall grudge match though. DN is still being priced above 6.

it sure looks that way. betfair punters are now pricing trump's chances at 3-4%.

it's been a roller coaster though. i remember seeing his chances as high as 70% on election night, when the count in michigan, wisconsin, and pennsylvania were temporarily in his favor.

i expected that any close election would end with recount/lawsuit drama, and we'll see that unfold in the coming weeks i'm sure, but the chances of a reversal via that route are slim to none IMO.

trump is so old, he opened the door wide open for biden.

i hear ya regarding the incumbent bit. i do think this year is quite different though, mainly because voters are so active in this election, as early turnout and mail balloting shows. high turnout is traditionally bad for republicans, and the jury is still out on whether republicans will truly show up in numbers on election day.

combined with unfavorable polling in battleground states for trump, he has maybe a 15-20% chance of winning in my eyes. since the betting markets are pricing him closer to 34%, i just don't see any value there.

what's it been, 6+ years of shit talking between these 2? i should hope there's a lot of pride at stake. i sure hope one of them gets destroyed---just for the lolz.


let me know. they geo-block americans but supposedly:


.....so i suppose i could risk a small amount.


is that all we get, 200 hands?

even so, he should be distancing himself from bitmex for the sake of the company and customers. these are serious charges he's facing. stepping down is a standard executive decision in a situation like this.


because everyone always looks for someone to blame, some sort of conspiracy.

i don't think binance had anything to do with it. the feds have been investigating bitmex for a very long time, and their policy of having absolutely no limits on withdrawals and allegedly not enforcing USA/international sanctions is likely what did them in.

i reckon huge markets like the USA are a bigger concern to them, in terms of the anticipated growth they expect from this crypto venture.

rolling out in 49 out of 50 states at launch is pretty huge, re the sheer number of customers all being reached at once. maybe i'm wrong, but this seems like a very powerful advertisement for crypto that every american paypal user is now seeing on their dashboard:

punters on pokershares have been consistently pricing him above 5, usually closer to 6. https://www.pokershares.com/market/poker/c0baedd8-236b-4bd5-884d-ee1926743070

i dunno any other site offering odds, and they don't allow us muricans on pokershares.

i still want 5 to 1 on DN myself, if someone will take the other side of the bet....

i appreciate the sentiment guys. i'm back home now and just sent all the chips back to both of you. like i told @arallmuus before, i was never that concerned about the money and this never should have been made public. it's all very embarrassing and petty. cheers.

does coinbase give users the bid/ask spread on coinbase pro? do they not charge a spread on top? i've never actually used it. i only ever signed up for the zero fees when they launched GDAX. their regular platform is such a ripoff and i see this as an extension of that.


in my experience with coinbase, ACH transfers hit your bank account on the 2nd day. if you're willing to pay for a wire, then next day. it's not that bad, certainly not enough to justify the liquidation fee + ATM fee IMO.

any speculation about why difficulty and price are moving in such opposite directions this month? does it have to do with the end of the rainy season in china, and is that an expected phenomenon from year to year?


maybe that's fitting, since BTC price is hitting a wall right at the 2019 top. traders/whales love to paint a good double top.

one unfortunate reality you're gonna have to accept is that strong bull runs coincide with network congestion. probably the biggest factor is the inefficiency of exchange-related transactions. since the potential gains of leveraged trading and altcoin trading are so large, many users think nothing of the transaction fees involved and the exchanges they use are willing to pay extremely high network fees to facilitate timely customer withdrawals. as a result, on-chain transactions among exchanges skyrocket in volume, and so do on-chain fees.

i don't think there is any quick fix for this. the fundamental problem is the extreme demand for confirmation in the next block. as long as so many users demand instant withdrawals from their exchanges, or are otherwise willing to pay extreme amounts for nearly instant confirmation, fees are going to rise exponentially.

one thing i'd like to see is for exchanges to embrace blockstream's liquid sidechain. so many exchange customers are simply withdrawing bitcoins to other exchanges. if exchanges could settle these transactions using liquid instead of on-chain bitcoin transactions, the fees involved would be miniscule and it would free up so much block space (and lessen fee pressure) for other on-chain transactions.

wanna bet? i'm game.

when have you ever seen regulators across the globe make a unified order for crypto exchanges to de-list a cryptocurrency? even if that kind of insanity ever happened, it wouldn't happen fast enough to stop USDT holders from unwinding their exposure after a seizure. the panic buying would happen very fast IMO.


me too. they're probably gonna pass all user data on to the feds as part of a settlement. that's always been their bargaining chip of last resort.

are you suggesting pools would actively censor LN settlement transactions, making LN unreliable for users? i suppose there are some incentives to do that, but it would surely cause a scandal and uproar among bitcoin users, and would probably drive some miners to other pools. so there are rational reasons why pool admins would avoid engaging in that type of censorship.

more importantly, once taproot is active on the network lightning channel closes can be made to look like single key spends, preventing miners from singling them out for censorship.

some of them are---bitfinex comes to mind---but they can only process LN withdrawals to customers to the extent that they actually request them. most people just request regular on-chain withdrawals.

the same problem applies to the liquid sidechain. lots of exchanges support it, but not many people actually take advantage.


it's kinda confusing because they gave it the symbol LNX. i sometimes wonder how aware bitfinex customers are that the option exists.


that drop in the hash rate was kinda surprising, considering the rally bitcoin has been on for the past few weeks. it's definitely adding to the congestion, yes. blocks are coming in nearly a minute slower than usual.

meh, i've been hearing this sorta "china phobia" since 2013 when most of the hash rate migrated there. people used to bitch and moan that the chinese exchanges ran the whole market too. this was years ago.

i don't see any harm done. i think the financial incentives built into bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, and the exchange business generally keep us well protected from any sort of nefarious conspiracies. if anything, the ecosystem is becoming more resilient all the time, year after year.


i love small businesses, but one issue we need to consider is liquidity---traders need thick order books to obtain adequately sized positions and to avoid slippage. that's why most of the global exchange volume will always gravitate towards a handful of the largest exchanges. every once in a while those top exchanges get shuffled around but the dynamic never really changes.

those cash back levels look less attractive when you look at the fine print---2.49% per transaction to liquidate crypto. that's high even for coinbase's regular (non-pro) service. i guess people won't care if they're realizing huge capital gains, but i hope people don't start using this as a day-to-day spending card without realizing how much coinbase is pocketing.

if you could trade on coinbase pro and then spend that USD or USDC value with the card (without incurring liquidation fees of course), then this would actually look tempting.