Someone with money is not going to be willing to pay $30 for a $200 loan that lasts a month.

If you spent the money, you would not have been able to repay the loan.

I would have pegged you as a kid, but the 6 years you have been around makes me believe you are of age.

You should find a job that pays well enough to support yourself.

Receiving a gift was the worst possible outcome for his last loan request.

I believe his intention for taking out his recent loans is to build up reputation and not having to repay his “gift” means he is deprived of that opportunity.

This particular loan could be a safe opportunity, but I believe you would be playing a role in an eventual exit scam.

Where did tether admit they are insolvent?

Tether has liquid assets to cover appropriately 74% of tethers and less liquid assets to cover more than the balance.

It is more common for banks to hold liquid assets totaling closer to 10% of deposits.

---

It seems as if Bitfinex is going to sell the entire billion dollars worth of coins privately.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitfinex-token-sale-has-lined-up-1-billion-in-commitments-shareholder-says

The 2% of BTC holdings is the btc they are holding on behalf of customers. As a percentage of their own money (shareholder equity), the number is much higher.

What happened to the gift given to you by jackg the last time you asked for a loan?

Is it that you would have been unable to repay that loan if you were asked to do so?

Binance contributes 10% of trading revenue towards an insurance fund (the "#SAFU fund") that is used to cover exchange hacks and large scale account compromises. 

The loan is not unsecured, it is secured by shares in Bitfinex and presumably the accounts receivable from CC.

It is normal for banks to not have cash to backup all deposits of their customers. It is normal for banks to hold about 10% of customers deposits in cash/cash-like securities.
I believe Kraken allows for shorting of tethers if you believe they are overvalued.

I don’t believe any government agency is suing Bitfinex. If you are referring to the court order obtained by the NYAG, this is not a lawsuit.

I have seen what I believe to be a marketing document for the IEO and it appears Bitfinex is asking customers to prepay a billion dollars worth of trading fees in advance in exchange for a trading fee discount and other features regarding the tokens.

I PM’ed 10 of the first 11 OPs of the threads listed and the below is what I found:

One thread appears to be deleted, hence why I didn’t message him.

I received the below responses:



The message I sent to all of them was:


I was unable to message more than 10 people because of PMs hourly limitations and haven’t had the time to come back to message the rest.

The first guy claims he isn’t selling hacked accounts but doesn’t give an explanation required by the rules. The second person gave an explanation so I guess he is compliant with the rules. The third guy claims to not be selling hacked accounts, but doesn’t give an explanation and his ability to sell in “bulk” gives me specific reason to not believe him.

Even though the second guy appears compliant with the rules, I would be uncomfortable with these types of transactions occurring within my forum because even with the consent of the person whose identity is being used, laws are almost certainly being broken when the buyer uses the account and both the broker and buyer may be breaking laws by completing the transaction.

Here is the law regarding identity theft in CA and I believe even the second person that responded would be violating this law.

I didn’t receive any type of response from anyone else I messaged.

It has long been publicly known that tether and Bitfinex have common overlapping ownership and management.

Bitfinex has made about $7M this month based on my estimates, based on their published trading volumes. This has been a very slow month, after several slow months. In 2017, they were likely making $100+M per month based on the same information.

That is only based on cash equivalents not total assets. Including total assets tethers are fully backed.

KYC accounts are assumed to be hacked unless an explanation is given.

There is an argument to say that selling KYC accounts is prohibited period because this could be construed as identity fraud.

What are you talking about? Read the OP. I clearly cited the rule the threads listed in the OP are breaking according to my reading of the rule.

Yes that’s possible. Once an explanation is given, the moderator can make a judgment as to how realistic the explanation is and they can ask follow up questions, in your example they could ask how he is finding so many people willing to sell a PayPal account.

I agree, their promise to a large shareholder that they will recover the money in a couple of weeks is probably not realistic. 

I think they might have held off on starting litigation out of not wanting the issue to be public. With the NYAG changing these circumstances, they no longer have that problem.

Taking out loans of increasing sizes in a short period of time looks suspicious.

Vouching for sockpuppets in order to allow them to obtain loans is a clear indication of bad intentions.

I saw a thread where you were asking for a loan and someone offered to gift you what you were asking for. If you ask for a loan after that it will look very strange.

it is nearly impossible to prove a negative when it comes to proving that someone is *not* a specific anonymous person who took steps to hide his identity.

You cannot prove that I am not satoshi either. I am not claiming to be satoshi.

There is a decent amount of evidence to suggest CSW is not satoshi, such as providing dubious evidence to prove he is satoshi which leads me to believe he is not satoshi. He could sign a message or a transaction from an address reasonably belonging to satoshi.

I don’t believe the whole “the coins are locked in a trust” story for a second. A competent trustee would require the coins be held in an address only the trustee controls to prevent being accused of misappropriating the coins if someone else moves them. The coins satoshi mined haven’t moved.  

If CSW wants to present credible evidence that he is satoshi, I will be more than willing to admit he is satoshi (I am willing to keep an open mind and consider additional evidence). I don’t think he will present such evidence.

You should not try to manually convert your seed into a number nor should you try to calculate the xpriv key yourself. This is what your wallet software is for.

The mnemonic word list was chosen so that it allows the end user to make certain minor mistakes and still have access to their private keys. If you only know part of a word in your seed, you can deduct what the word is with limited information. If you know the first 4 letters of the word, there is only one possible word it could be.

When you generate your seed, you should write down the seed on a paper and you may not need to recover your seed with what you wrote down for a long time. You may have difficulties reading your handwriting or the paper may be partially damaged.

Your seed should be generated at random. The ultra paranoid will use dice to generate a seed, however for most people a computer should be fine to generate a seed as long as it doesn’t contain malware. For additional protection from malware, you can use a computer that has never and never will be connected to the internet to generate your seed. If you subsequently load the seed into wallet software on a computer connected to the internet, you will lost most of this protection.

The lack of moderators is an easy fix.

As of October 21, 2017, if you are selling a KYC verified account, it is assumed to be hacked (and against the rules) unless you provide an explanation. This rule, could be extended to other types of items such as gift cards, or at a minimum, the seller could be required to attest he obtained the gift cards legally.

There are some legitimate reasons to sell a gift card below its face value, for example if you received it via a loyalty program or some kind of contest and you do not normally shop at the store. Some companies with very high profit margins are fast and loose with giving away credits as a way to get new business.

Despite the above explanations, it is my belief the majority of gift cards sold in the Digital Goods sub either do not exist (a scam attempt), or were somehow obtained illegally. 

Both the trading of "illegal" gift cards and cracked/hacked accounts are against the rules, which you seem to acknowledge (?).

For some reason, it looks like there are no active moderators in the digital goods sub.

Bitfinex took a loan from tether for the amount of the money that is inaccessible, so they can process customer withdrawals.

I don't think bitfinex has $850M+ in reserves because they have a practice of paying most of their operating earnings to shareholders. They invested in a small number of altcoins, IOTA being most notable, but altcoins have performed very poorly, and I don't know how much these investments will help.

Based on the above, I don't think bitfinex is solvent. I am comfortable saying I believe they can pay out all customer deposits because of the loan from tether. Bitfinex does not currently have access to $850M worth of USD. Some of this money is customer deposits, and bitfinex did not disclose this to the public until the NYAG disclosed this fact for them.

The failing to disclose the missing USD is probably something most of their customers will frown upon.