Thanks for the reply.  We're talking about pretty much any court in the world.  That which has no precedent is hard to decide, and will be decided badly.  It all depends on the judge.  That's why religious disputes taken to court are usually thrown out by a judge in the USA, and elsewhere.  It's not so much the First Amendment as it is the courts don't want to get into something that really has no precedent--how do you decide if plaintiff 'sinned' against defendant and deserved to be thrown out of the temple, or not?  See also my "TradeFortress" post, just after you posted, where I try and make things more clear.  What I am saying is this:  if somebody took your bitcoins for a year, sold them, bought them back a year later at a lower price, gave you back your coins but kept the profits from this short sale, and the fine print says he is not liable if he does that, then you're OK with this?  Because that's the state of bitcoins now, with online or even offline storage.  No regulations means anything goes, including what most people consider unethical behavior (but again, see my TF post--actually TF is doing the community a favor by 'screwing over' his customers, so you could say that for the greater good what TF did in my hypothetical is net good, not net bad).

By now if you've read this thread with a sharp eye you can see the point I was making in the OP.  Let me make it more clear for you speed readers.

Suppose TradeFortress (TF) is indeed shorting the bitcoin market with other people's money--what's the problem with that?  Actually, nothing, for the community as a whole.  As I said in the OP, finance theory says shorting a stock leads to better 'price discovery' and a more stable bitcoin price.  So TradeFortress is doing everybody but his customers (let's assume he's a guy) that he stole from a favor--bitcoin prices will drop, TF will buy back what he sold at a lower price, and the price will rebound, which makes for a stable price (ups and downs is stable, while exponential growth or 'rocket ship to moon' growth is unstable).  But what about those Inputs.io customers?  Well chances are, since TF probably had a standard agreement saying he's not liable for anything, at any time--and these customers presumably read the fine print-- and since he did not report any crime to the Australian police (a nice excuse was that the crime cannot be solved, but a better reason is that if he were to report a crime to the police, that report itself would technically be a crime, the crime of false reporting of a crime), then since bitcoin contracts are not regulated, then Inputs.io customers really have no cause of action against TF.  The perfect crime (or un-crime if you will).  If you're OK with no regulation, then you should be OK with the above.  If you don't like the way TF treats his customers, then move on to another online bitcoin wallet service.  No crying for you crypto-anarchists! :-P

You're right BurtW. If you really are like the Vandervoss Twins then whatever I say means nothing.  

As for beta software, I think bitcoin stuff is really alpha software.  It's basically some quant PhD thesis put into practice, and it might end up failing badly.  But, like modern art, it might be insanely profitable--for the hoarders.  The scarcity value of bitcoins and their cache in the popular imagination makes for an interesting investment proposition.  Not unlike perhaps the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes, hopefully without the embarrassing ending for us Bitcoin longs.  As for the shorts?  TradeFortress is putting my theory in the OP into practice IMO.  He/She is basically shorting the market--with other people's money.  A king-sized (emperor-sized?) naked short, pun intended. Which perhaps explains the huge trade of exactly the amount that was supposedly stolen, a few days after the alleged theft, as well as the huge drop in bitcoin prices recently.  See the other thread for details on this caper (and while you're at it, note the amusing Stockholm Syndrome replies by the Inputs.io victims, which cracked me up but if I was in their shoes I'd be saying the same thing).

Happy trading.

Thanks anth0ny.  But surely you confuse "can" with "should"?  I *can* enter into an illegal gambling agreement with a bookie--but unless the agreement is enforceable, *should* I?  The bookie can honor the bets I make most of the time, let's say 99% of the time, and pay out.  But one day I make a really big bet, and the bookie decides they don't want to pay me.  Instead the bookie takes my money and shorts some stock called TradeFortress (TF), pun intended, and promises to pay me 'someday', while I end up on this forum, with Stockholm Syndrome written all over my face and keyboard, hoping and praying the price of TF does indeed drop so the bookie can make tons of money off the short and then pay me back (sorry for the hijack thread but I had to get that in, LOL).  So I sue the bookie in Hong Kong and ask the communist judge about making me whole, about enforcing the illegal contract I had with the bookie.  The judge mutters something about 'unclean hands' or something legal like that (yes I Googled that phrase), and refuses to honor my contract with the bookie.  That's what might happen with an unregulated market.  Against that, a magistrate in Brooklyn last month I believe did say bitcoins are 'money' and, for money laundering purposes (they were trying to convict some guy laundering money, that's why the government bent over backwards to say bitcoins were money), bitcoins are money and presumably therefore a contract in bitcoins is enforceable in court (whether short or long).

The counterargument to the above is that a lot of diamond dealers in Belgium and elsewhere never have any kind of formal contract, but it's understood that they will not be dishonest with one another.  But that only works in a small, close-knit community, of which the bitcoin community is increasingly not.

OK I am learning more...

more questions:

--thin client or fat?  Should I store all the block chains on my hard drive, which is something like 12 GB in size?  Do I need to?  Does the BTC wallet need to?  It's not a big deal now, but in a few years maybe the size is 120 GB?  So thin client is best unless you are a miner or have let's say a serious amount of money at stake?

Awesome!  This is exactly what I was looking for, bookmarked!  I think I will go with Kraken for online trading, which is from Frisco USA and therefore regulated somewhat (I can sue somebody if they run off with my money, whereas if they're in some developing country that's harder to do).

I look forward to your replies.  I also see Mt.Gox is flagged with this helpful thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=179586.0 

Also if you or anybody can tell me whether I can set up a small "play" account somewhere, and buy/sell/trade fractions of a BTC (bitcoin)?  Something as small as 0.001 maybe?  That way if I screw up somehow, I'm only out a couple of USD rather than several hundred dollars.

TonyT

You will notice I am very clever in posting this request.  I am asking for "this month's" BEST bitcoin list.  So if you point me to another thread, I will ask whether or not this thread is current or not. 

By "best bitcoin list" I mean:

- "best place to buy a bitcoin" - is it from an exchange or a private person?

- "best place to trade bitcoin" (is it MtGox?  I've heard some good and bad, the bad being it's hard to get your money out)

-  "best online wallet" - best in terms of user friendly interface, not security.  I don't care too much about security (of course everybody will use some form of encryption) at this point since I, personally, don't intend to spend more on bitcoin than I can afford to lose, and for me that's about $1000 USD.  It's just a hobby at this point.  BTW why would you even use an online wallet?  Just store your private keys offline, right?  My guess is that if you want to trade bitcoins, like foreign currency, then you need to use an online wallet.

- "best way to send bitcoins to another user who is offline"--this is somebody who does not use an online wallet

- "best way to send bitcoins to another user who has an online wallet"--does every online wallet accept bitcoins sent from anybody, even if they don't have the same online wallet?  I would think so.

- "best offline wallet" (is it just anything you can keep your private keys in?  Even an encrypted Excel file?  I will use Excel probably--the latest version is actually pretty secure when encrypted)

- "best place to trade bitcoins for fiat currencies"

- "best FAQ to explain bitcoins" (probably this site seems to me: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ)

Thanks for your replies.  I am still learning about bitcoin and have not yet bought my first coin.  I am thinking of buying one--but where?  Of storing one but where? online or offline?  Of converting one into fiat currencies for profit, but what exchange?  Also, I have dual citizenship including a non-US citizenship.  Does it help buying and trading bitcoins if I'm not an American?

Cheers,

TonyT

Thanks for your and the others replies.  It seems one of the posters discovered Bitfinex, which is still beta after thinking a bit more about the OP (I am skeptical of this member's claim that they use Bitfinex, but that's just my intuition), but keep in mind Bitfinex is beta and "The Bitfinex Exchange and Trading platform is currently in a beta phase (testing phase). The company is incorporated in Hong Kong with limited liability and once the beta phase is completed the system will go live under the company name."

So if Bitfinex goes under, who are you gonna sue?  You will not get sympathy for collecting on a short trade in bitcoins from a communist country court (Hong Kong). See here for what can happen if a cybercoin site shuts down:  http://www.coindesk.com/phenixcoin-ashes-developer-goes-awol/  And one word: "TradeFortress" anyone?

I work in a developing country as a programmer, but have experience with the politicians of a developed country; I used to work for them.  This country will soon be having hearings on whether or not to regulate bitcoin.  When and if bitcoin goes mainstream, you can be assured that bitcoins will be regulated.  That's the "should" in my title.  Bet on it.  Actually I think it would be a plus, not a minus, for the bitcoin community as it would attract the suburbanites and family people out there, who own the bulk of the money anyway.

Cheers

TonyT

First, some background.  Shorting a stock makes for less violent swings in price.  This is academic theory.  One reason Bitcoin prices fluctuate so much is due to the inability for most people to short Bitcoins.  So shorting is good for the community.

Now some interesting news.  Recently there was a theft of some Bitcoins from an online storage of private keys wallet, of over $1 million USD.  The owner of the wallet, who some have accused stealing through an inside job, made an interesting promise: that he would pay back the Bitcoins to all victims.  Now some speculation with a twist:  Bitcoins are at all time high prices now.  If the owner is dishonest, he would do the following and still fulfill his promise:  he would sell the Bitcoins he stole from his customers now, and get cash.  Then, later, when the price of Bitcoins falls (even perhaps in response to the shock of the theft, affecting other Bitcoin owners who feel Bitcoin is not stable), this dishonest owner in my hypothetical would buy back all the Bitcoins he stole at a lower price.  Then he would give these Bitcoins back to their rightful owners, and "everybody would be happy" (to get their Bitcoins back), but the dishonest owner would have made money, in the amount of the difference from the price he sold the stolen Bitcoins to the price he bought them back.  This is, btw, essentially how shorting a stock works:  you make money from a fall in price.

Now for the twist in the above tale (which is hypothetical):  this activity by the dishonest owner is actually beneficial to Bitcoin owners everywhere! (except the ones ripped off by the owner).  This is because academic theory predicts 'shorting' Bitcoin makes for a more stable price in the long run, and most people like stable prices.  Whether shorting such a small amount of Bitcoins (> $1 million) makes a real difference in price fluctuations of all Bitcoins, whose value is much more than a mere million dollars, is of course debatable.

Finally, I believe Bitcoins have the ability to become like art:  finite in supply, trendy, hence valuable in the future, with a real economic value, namely anonymous payments, which btw criminals favor.  Hence when the price comes down I will be buying Bitcoins.

Thanks for reading.  My first post here so be nice. :-)