2% of thousands is, let's say, 50 bitcoins per day or about $300 per day, or $9000 per month. Now that is way more than anything you might need to run the server. A low-cost server might be $10 per month, a high-end might be, what, $50 per month? So, assuming a high-end server (BTC 0.2 per day) handling 3000 bitcoins per day and an admin costing BTC 4 per day on average, a reasonable fee might be 0.2/3000 ~ 0.005% for server costs, 4/3000 ~ 0.1% for admin.
A lot of people aren't going to set up a Bitcoin service in the first place unless it's going to provide them with a decent income stream, especially given that providing such services comes with some legal risk. How much do you think it would cost you to anonymise physical currency - a service which was available long before the digital age made tracking transactions easier than ever before? |
|
|
|
|
A more interesting question might have been at what point Silk Road and the Bitcoin economy start becoming big enough to be attractive to major cartels like Los Zetas. In terms of the illicit drug trade overall, Silk Road is a small operation but it certainly has qualities which could eventually see it - or a similar service - operate on a whole different scale than the mid-level dealers and low-level buyers it seems to attract now.
|
|
|
|
|
Take your fucking meds, Maria. Your periodic bouts of delusion are laughable.
|
|
|
|
They should of put the money into bitcoin.
Which would have worked only if no transactions were in hard currency. So they couldn't have used PayPal to collect the money in the first place. They couldn't have paid their credit cards with Bitcoin. I doubt they could have paid many of their living expenses with Bitcoin. And they would have needed to find a lawyer who accepted Bitcoins and who wasn't obliged as an officer of the court to report that they had assets they could liquidate. If anything, using Bitcoin would have made it look even more like they were attempting to hide assets and avoid AML/FinSEC reporting requirements. |
|
|
|
He followed an unarmed kid on public property, and ended up shooting and killing him. Stand Your Ground laws be damned, that isn't right and he should be made liable for his actions. At the very least there should be a trial so it can be decided by people who know the facts.
The disgusting thing is that the Zimmerman defenders don't want this to go to trial, because they either know he is guilty as all hell or have bought into this whole narrative that the feds or media or something and prosecuting an 'innocent' man because of some conspiracy about gun rights or race wars or something. Stand Your Ground laws are bullshit anyways because whenever there is a body, there should at least be a trial. If the shooter was actually acting in self defense, the jury should be able to see it. I expect that a non-trivial amount of Zimmerman supporters would have been just fine with it if he'd used their donations to flee the country. This is a situation where people on both sides are firmly convinced that justice won't be done. |
|
|
|
You know what Zhoutong, I had a revelation today. Many years ago I realized that money is like blood, you must keep it flowing. Since then I make money flow like rivers. You are clogging up my financial circulation and before I suffer a economic heart attack I want to tell you something.
Keep the money Zhoutong, you obviously need it more than I do. Just next time, give me and the community a heads up so we can act accordingly.
Karma at the end catches up and money keeps flowing. Good luck in your endeavors Ryan ZhouTong.
Maria.
 Is there a single person on this forum who didn't see that coming? |
|
|
|
We don't know their overheads.
actually we do https://mtgox.com/img/pdf/20120201/Transparency_Jan.pdf even if this is out of date. Anyone who ready to put some work into it can figure out their revenue and expecens based on public information. What not known is whether there is any revenue from a hypothetical side biz like "proprietary trading" and whether there are any large losses due to bank fraud, more hacks etc... It was someone confusing because they quoted different things in different currencies, but the 5,000,000 yen they quoted for overhead worked out to about USD 62,000 per month. I expect that figure has increased with the increasing administrative burden imposed by AML/KYC compliance and we have no idea how much they lose to direct and indirect fraud, as Vladimir said. We also don't know whether funds which have been frozen in the past - Technocash, the French bank accounts, and even PayPal when Mark first took over MtGox - have now been released to them. We also don't know whether they still pay anything to the previous owners - remember that the MtGox hack happened when a third party had access to audit them because of this arrangement. |
|
|
|
Some people jumped to Mt Gox's defense, claiming that 14-21 days for wire transfers were "acceptable".
Anyone who did this is naive, and idiot, or a troll. As a point of example. Yesterday I pulled $80K from my Roth IRA for some much needed capital expansion. I realized it had been so long since I sent a wire from that account it had the wrong bank info. Crap that is going to cause some delays. I updated the bank info, sent the wire (no fee BTW) and the funds cleared in my checking account in .... 3 .... hours. The whole point of a wire in INSTANT funds. A wire which takes 14 days is just stupid. You could print a check, mail it across the world, and deposit it, and wait for it to clear in less than 14 days. I'm guessing this was a domestic wire transfer and both the source and destination of funds were known as well as the originating and receiving institution having adequate identity verification information on you. It's likely that neither the originating or receiving institution were designated "high risk" and you may very well be classified as a low risk customer. The game changes when you're talking about businesses like exchanges, which are regarded as being high risk in and of themselves, sending many wires to unrelated people in countries all over the world, many of which are regarded as "high risk" due to high levels of money laundering, drug trafficking, being tax havens, and generally being non-compliant with FATF recommendations. Because users are customers of the exchange and not the bank, the burden of proof that the transactions are legitimate falls on the exchanges. Banks are reluctant to let questionable wire transfers go through without challenge because there have been significant fines levied against financial institutions which have done that in the past - Wachovia is probably the best known example, but Western Union and Ocean Bank have also been fined for inadequate KYC/transaction monitoring. |
|
|
|
Mt. Gox outright deleted one of my accounts when I still had money in it (hardly anything, but that's beside the point). I was given absolutely no warning, no notice, and even though I have posted about it several times on this forum, they have never responded about it to this day.
I consider this outright stealing. I have no direct evidence of this, but it's the only assumption I can make at this point.
Did you obtain express permission from them before opening more than one account? Members may only have one Account at any one time and may not create or use any Account other than their own. For a Member to be exempt from any of these rules, he/she must request express and prior permission from the Platform. The creation or use of Accounts without obtaining such prior express permission from the Platform will lead to the immediate suspension of all said Accounts, as well as all pending purchase/sale offers. Dwolla does only work with US banks, but the amount being withdrawn is greater than the amount being funded with that method, so they are indeed having to wire funds to Dwolla to enable withdrawals. Still shouldn't take that long though. It's absolutely possible that either their Japanese bank or their US bank imposes a monthly limit on how much they can wire transfer. Just as the exchanges set limits for different levels of users, so do banks - and a Bitcoin exchange is going to automatically be regarded as high-risk for both fraud and money laundering and subjected to more stringent limits. In MtGox's position, until it's clear whether Dwolla is going to continue their business relationship and on what terms, the most sensible course of action to protect user funds is to keep a minimum amount of money on Dwolla and transfer funds into the account on an as-needed basis. The other option would be for them to cease Dwolla transactions until Dwolla clarifies their intention, but people would bitch and moan about that even more than they do about the delays. Dwolla's delay in clarifying their intentions regarding trading with MtGox is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
|
Might not be the best idea given that the Zimmermans lied in court about how much was in the PayPal fund in order to get his bond reduced. Bitcoin could do without being thought of as the means by which Zimmerman was able to flee the country.
|
|
|
|
The fact that investors small and large are being hit with incredible delays and missing money reeks of big problems in the organization. There is nothing on the MtGox status page that indicates what the hell is going on - not that it matters though because I've caught mtgox pre-dating stuff they put up there by several days. MtGox has been as opaque as possible; they won't say what the problems are with withdrawls, they won't make available or return funds that are in their accounts even if the transfers were initiated pre-ID requirement, they won't describe how they will use and protect the identities that are being required of users. They are entering into the "do not trust" area where one might even anticipate a limited run on investor funds will be unable to be paid out. Withdraw your money now if you think you might need it mid-July (or later) would be the prudent advice to anyone that has government currency there. They've posted about the Dwolla problems. Last month in May we processed 2,459 USD Dwolla withdrawals for a total of 2.17 million USD.
The number of delayed withdrawals are 8.54% of the total USD withdrawals and represent 13.25% of the 2.17 million USD through Dwolla. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87086.msg956588#msg956588 |
|
|
|
Why on earth would that matter? Most contracts are full of stock standard clauses and boilerplates - it would be more unusual if Bitcoinica's didn't include those. Putting a force majeure clause into a contract doesn't mean it will hold up in court - especially if you're trying to include things over which you should reasonably have had control and mitigated risk. |
|
|
|
Thanks to a post on Quora, - - http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-paypal-and-dwolla/answer/Sam-Ohara/comment/993142I've learned that Dwolla's terms of service have changed in another area as well, unfortunately: (4) Funds in the Veridian Holding Account are held in a pooled account. THESE FUNDS ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR INDIVIDUAL INSURANCE, AND MAY NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR SHARE INSURANCE BY THE NATIONAL CREDIT UNION SHARE INSURANCE FUND.
- https://www.dwolla.com/tosI hope I am understanding this correctly. This means that, just like with MF Global, if the CEO orders your funds to be applied for use in whatever manner of his choosing, regardless of whether or not that action was legal, individual account holders have no guaranteed access to those funds. This is unlike PayPal, which uses pooled accounts with FDIC pass-through protection (up to $100K USD per account): - https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/gen/fdic-outsideIn other words, don't park your funds at Dwolla like you would at a bank. I'm reading it as the funds not being individually covered by insurance because Dwolla users are not members of Veridian. When you open a credit union account you're usually required to buy a token amount of shares to become a member - which makes your funds eligible for share insurance. Even though Veridian is an investor in Dwolla, Dwolla users are not members of the credit union itself and it's therefore unlikely that their funds would be covered by share insurance. Dwolla would be the "member" in this case and the funds in its Veridian account may or may not be eligible for insurance. It looks like the maximum amount for which a member account at a given credit union is insured is $250,000. The passage of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 increased the amount of covered shares to $250,000 until the end of 2013.[7] This increase was made permanent by the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in July 2010.[8] NCUA insurance covers "member share accounts and deposits": Share draft accounts (aka "checking accounts"). Share savings that can be added to or withdrawn from at any time. "Money market share" accounts, essentially high-interest share savings accounts (the name is similar to "money market funds" which are not insured). Share certificates (CDs), which generally require funds be kept in the account for a set period. Outstanding Cashier's Checks, Interest Checks, and other negotiable instruments drawn on the accounts of the credit union. |
|
|
|
they suspected money laundering it seems. but there policy is they dont do it unless they have proof. so i have been trying to get them to give me info about this. i have no had time to respond to their last post hen they said they no longer think i am laundering money. proof must mean suspect in japan... there is a thread about it in the trade discussion, they stickied it i think.
they did admit they screwed up, but it does not fit their policy on when they call the police on their customers... i just want to know why they keep saying their policy is only when they have proof when they clearly did not have it. i also have asked many times about information to clear my name but no response. it is almost lawyer time:(
I can't find a whole lot in English about Japan's specific reporting requirements, but elsewhere the requirement to report is triggered by suspicious activity (and your circumstances would have met that benchmark elsewhere so they may do so in Japan too). Although it does have a financial intelligence unit, Japan's AML/CTF regulatory authority seems to operate as part of their police force (it's a separate entity in some countries). I think they're using the word "proof" in a non-typical manner and that's creating confusion. |
|
|
|
Dylan, in payroll, when we want to move money to lots of people at a time, we send a text file, or an excel spreadsheet, or even just take a printout to a processor or bank. There is no amount of activity (especially when the bank is charging a hefty fee for each wire) that would ever make a bank say, "Whoa there, that's too much, it's going to take us days/weeks to do all of this". They would jump on that shit like throwing fresh steak into a pack of hungry stray dogs.
Payroll's a very specific purpose, though, and you have a specific relationship with the recipients and probably have more than enough identifying information on your employees to satisfy KYC requirements. It's not the same for AML purposes as sending large amounts of money by wire to people in various locations throughout the world whom you're not paying for goods or services and about whom you have limited information. Banks can and do impose transaction limits on accounts, especially when your business and/or your customers are seen as "high risk". If you look at the cases where banks and money transmitters have received large fines for non-compliance with AML/KYC requirements, they've always involved large volumes of wire transfers to and from overseas jurisdictions and inadequate verification of identity, origin of funds and destination of funds. |
|
|
|
Now we know what Gage's price is  I could easily be bought for one medium size century-old barn. Hey, Maria. Is it true that you've had a relationship (not that kind  ) with ZT long before Bitcoinica? ~Bruno~ EDIT: I forgot a hyphen. Don't forget that she also claimed Actually, I am positive I am one of the oldest users of bitcoin. Helped Satoshi take this off the ground https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=19987.msg249688#msg249688Which was kind of funny given her first few posts on the board. |
|
|
|
Here's my conundrum. I have all these ideas for Bitcoin based businesses, but neither the programming skills, nor the cash to hire programmers. What I can do is create a skeleton type website (like the one below) with basic web 1.0 skills, but right now I don't want a bunch of crappy looking websites. I am thinking of hiring filipino web developers, that would at least get me started, but even that can get expensive. I can create a GLBSE IPO or several and get funds for programmers for each site or several at once. Some of the websites will be moneymakers, some are just plain needed and may or may not make money. So should I just build crappy websites and build them slowly as I can afford, or should I look for investors?
Here's another future issue. I am already financing a money lending operation in the Philippines that will take awhile to realize profits, but my goal there is to really start making money with Bitcoin eventually. I'm not sure it would be ethical to include investors in this project, but at some point advertisers will be sought. I plan to merge the money lending with a Bitcoin exchange. For that I may need additional investors, but I hope to bootstrap this project for awhile until the business model is better developed. Or maybe I should just put together one big massive IPO and use the money to develop the projects all at once. Any thoughts?
I think that if you're going to include investors in financing any kind of money service in the Philippines, you need to make them aware that the Philippines is a FinCEN embargoed country in which foreign terrorist organisations operate. It's status is also due to be reviewed by FATF this month as it's been identified as not making sufficient progress in relation to AML/CTF. Sanctions could be applied following that review. |
|
|
|
can you stop put down no my idea
WHAT??? I swear that I can understand what naima says better than I can understand you, and naima uses google translator. I just ran it through English>Romanian>Icelandic>English on Google translate and it comes out virtually unchanged. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
