I wasn't aware of any of that.

he's using a very lame excuse that he doesn't want to be overly criticized on bitcointalk if he releases his code that supposedly leads to Bitcoiner's losing money.

yet he doesn't realize he's costing Bitcoiner's money by talking in public about what he's sure is a fundamental flaw in mining.  yet, the only reason he has confidence to talk in public is b/c his hack has not been thoroughly vetted. he doesn't want to have his code hack vetted by the world community at large like the hackers of the Heartbleed and Bash bug were willing to do.  his hack has been buried for almost a year.  we need to get this out and once and for all bury this festering doubt.

the other way he causes Bitcoiner's to lose money is to the degree that altscam investors believe him.  i saw this firsthand this weekend.  "oh see, Bitcoin has this major flaw therefore i will invest in this altcoin".  he claims his hack has been vetted by a few core devs.  that may or many not be.  that's still not equivalent to releasing it into the wild for vetting according to open source principles.

The Selfish Mining Attack:

https://twitter.com/cypherdoc2/status/521321978037555200

Until Emin releases his code hack and it is found to be valid in practice, I think he should stop making public appearances with talks that essentially scare Bitcoin miners.  This is what occurred this weekend at Hashers United. 

Nice bid walls

I wouldn't think that would make a differenc.  The mere act of allowing the trading of shares without SEC or Fincen regulation would be a problem no matter where you reside.

also, correlations based on 1-2 days of data are trivial.  furthermore, the past may not correlate with the future.

there are some very good theoretical arguments why Bitcoin might begin to thrive in the presence of traditional financial turmoil.

i asked before, does a Dow top correspond with a Bitcoin bottom?

i think so.

as far as NXT, the difference is that if its dev continues devving for NXT, he will be found as opposed to Satoshi who won't. he's at great risk  plus, there's all the other problems with POS we've already debated and him holding potentially the vast majority of NXT coins.

with alts, any wise investor at this stage of the game insists on knowing who the devs are to hold them accountable.  the market has given a pass to Bitcoin in this regard since it was first and it's too late and are satisfied with its current dev team who actually doesn't appear to have a signif amt at risk with Bitcoin.

I doubt Coinbase would be shut down as they've gone overboard with their AML. it's just a rumor at this point anyways, probably from an altscam proponent.

Many months ago I penned a post here stating that "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money". If what is rumored here is true,  then my confidence level that this is true has just gone up to 80%. Perhaps someone can dig it up  for me.

I'm at a conference right now and on my phone so I can't dig the post out but I said that because a lot of these founders, who have lots of shares, are known, they and their protocols are highly exposed to gvt action allowing them to be easily killed.  Contrast that with Bitcoin where nobody knows who Satoshi is nor if he still owns his privkeys. There is a very good reason why  he disappeared.

If anything at all, this is Bullish for Bitcoin as it's truly the only safe haven whose founder remains anonymous and whose keys can't be confiscated.

rocks,  the only thing I'd  say there is that liquidity has been extra tight since gox went down.  The AML/KYC stuff has stopped alot of people from creating accounts. This happened to me until Circle only this last week.

Pantera can presumably see into the order book.  Maybe. They have lots of coin. Would they take advantage of the situation? Who knows.

Not saying it did happen,  just saying a  unique condition is in place for them to take advantage. The fact that Ron Glantz & Pantera Capital follow me on Twitter I suppose should be flattering but I remain suspicious of the timing of selloffs with many of my posts.

 Not to mention the somewhat irresponsible price projections and republishing of the $4.2M projection 2d after the selloff and the disappearance of trolls.

Oh well.  

Dow - 321

Dow - 295

the WAY the wall was eaten is not inconsistent with Pantera being the majority buyer.  remember, the wall was jumping around.  Pantera could have started nibbling at the wall hoping that the wall would be reset at a lower price, as it had actually been earlier in the day.  somewhere around 290 or so, iirc.

also in regards to the OTC buy theory.  that theory requires a doubling of a manipulator's risk.  they have to not only hope to find a large OTC seller in the middle of the night on a Sunday when no one's working PLUS set up the 30K wall which puts them at risk for losing all of those 30K coins at an artificially low price thus destroying that strategy.

no, if there indeed was manipulation, the easiest and most straight forward way to do it would be to keep selling small and large chunks of BTC at the market over a 4 mo time all the while waiting with a large chunk of fiat on the #1 exchange that you happen to own waiting for a weak BTC loaded whale to panic dump.

if anyone knows of any addresses that are owned by Bitstamp and Pantera, those would be an interesting place to start looking for confirmatory movements or accumulations of BTC.

if Jim Cramer can admit to manipulating S&P futures in pre-hours trading via his hedge fund in a public video, don't you think Pantera might be willing to do the same?  especially when they own an equity position in the most often referenced exchange and can probably see the order books?  remember, they are the first Bitcoin only hedge fund established back in the early days with a substantial #BTC.  also, look at the totality of the evidence i've presented. 

BFX shorts at ALL TIME HIGH.  SQUEEZE THE SHIT OUT OF THEM:

the sweet smell of deflation:

sure, it all could be just normal volatility.  we'll never know for sure.

but even if you disagree with the message or the messenger, what excuse to you give for slamming "crypto" in general?