Since a lot of you guys must have been doing this for longer than me, along with a test on one of my own systems, am I leaving something out?
Yes, you forgot #6: 6.) Have you ever lied to help make a sale happen? |
|
|
|
There are alt currencies that won't be affected by ASIC. I've no idea what the profitability level is, but if you have paid-for GPUs and phenomenally inexpensive electricity (or free), then mining a scrypt-based crypto currency wouldn't be all that radical of a shift. But with the Bitcoin difficulty rising thanks to new capacity from FPGAs coming online, the day may come that GPUs are no longer good for bitcoin mining even before the ASICs ship. Fortunately the incease in the exchange rate has more than exceeded the rise in difficulty, but it could be that difficulty will rise even faster going forward. - http://blockchain.info/charts/miners-operating-profit-margin |
|
|
|
Hmm ... now it is reporting it correctly for new trades. That got fixed then, or am I misreading the log?
Bah ... I think I see my problem. When the log shows buy that means I bought a future position. So even if I click "sell" I am actually buying (opening) a short position. So it shows buy in the log, but doesn't say which type of position I am entering. If this is what is happening, then the log could be improved by including a column with a long/short flag. Or there are other ways of properly reporting these trades. |
|
|
|
I see on the deposit page: * EU, Euro zone countries (17)
Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, France, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Spain.
* EU, non-Euro zone countries (10)
Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Great Britain, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Sweden.
* EEA zone countries (charged with standard wire fee)
Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein, Monaco and Switzerland.
Your SEPA deposit will be credited in 1 - 3 business days. All funds transferred in EUR will be converted to USD, free of charge. Check our current exchange rates here. So transfers from Switzerland, for instance. They would be SEPA direct debits after the Swiss bank converts to EUR? (which Bitstamp then converts to USD?) |
|
|
|
Obviously the usage for bitcoiners of this service would be to exchange from for instance their national currency or EUR to USD for deposit with an exchange. From the Bitcoin wiki: CurrencyFair can convert funds added from your bank account to a growing number of foreign currencies. The converted funds can then be transferred to a beneficiary account that you specify.
[...]
This ability to send directly to the recipient's bank will likely make CurrencyFair a preferred method that will allow those purchasing bitcoins through a person-to-person marketplace, such as the Bitcoin-otc marketplace, to transact internationally. - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CurrencyFairSo in addition to letting you convert funds for deposit at an exchange, you can use the service for person-to-person transactions. It would seem to be a great way for a trader to ship a foreign currency back home but because the deposit can only come from your own bank account (and not from a bitcoin exchange), then CurrencyFair doesn't serve this need. A couple other services that are similar, include TransferWise and for tuition, for instance, PeerTransfer. - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/TransferWise |
|
|
|
So, I have a half-technical half-systematic question. As I understand it, bitcoin uses a cryptographic proof of work with a most-work-wins approach to double-spend resolution. Just to clarify, the blockchain (like a ledger) uses a proof of work in knowing which blocks are added to the chain. That chain then holds the ledger which is used to ensure the coin has not previously been spent. The "most-work-wins" refers to resolution when there are competing branches when there is fork in the blockchain. So presumably you are considering this only for double spending where the spend in one branch of the fork contradicts the spend in another branch. What are the implications of black-holing any double-spent coins? The double spend in a competing branch could then be spent with an innocent party. Your black-holing means bitcoins are no longer fungible. Innocents will be harmed. That's bad. Without a blockchain fork, there are a couple other double spend attacks as well: Not all double spends attempts are intentional even. Take the scenario where someone who imports their private key from a wallet.dat into Blockchain.info, for example, and then spends the one in blockchain.info. Then the bitcoin-qt is launched but it hasn't caught up on the blockchain and a payment is sent, which happens to spend the coin that was transferred to blockchain.info. That would be a double spend. That can happen seconds apart or months apart. |
|
|
|
do you trust what bitpay says on these matters?
I see Bit-Pay describing their trades that take advantage of volatility -- something that appears to be courtesy of pirate, and they clearly state their opinion that pirate is ponzi, but is there more from Bit-Pay that I'm not aware of that you are referring to? Real businesses are hurt by these BTC scams. Well, bitcoin's image is hurt by them, and in that way yes -- real businesses are harmed from there being unsavory dealings like these occurring. But are you referring to a more direct harm from these type of "investments"? Personally, I feel the main problem with these comes from deception. The words "bank", "savings", "deposits" come with expectations as to their meaning. If you are running a HYIP, pyramid, ponzi or a penny auction even, then call it what it is and nobody would have a problem with it. But when the words "bank", etc. are used for a ponzi, then that's deception. |
|
|
|
So after 20:00 GMT each day, I lose any record that shows my actual cost basis? Not even in Logs?
It's all logged of course, and I'm going to deploy a more advanced Logs page which would show your trades history, executed orders, etc. Are those logs misreporting the transaction type? It looks like it is reporting "sell" as the type when a "buy" is what occurred, and vice-versa. Hmm ... now it is reporting it correctly for new trades. That got fixed then, or am I misreading the log? |
|
|
|
As an European user, I'm eagerly waiting you can provide these services in EU.
From another thread: We can pay direct deposits in Euros each day to bank accounts in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands.
So is the list of direct deposit methods now like this? - U.S. (USD) - Canada (CAD) - Mexico (MXN) - Germany (EUR) - France (EUR) - Italy (EUR) - Spain (EUR) - Netherlands (EUR) |
|
|
|
|
I'm having a case of deja vu, .. right now I'm adding to an article something I swear I added several months ago. I checked the article's history and it doesn't show the edit I believe I made previously. This has happened now for at least several articles.
When adding details for an exchange, those details sometimes get replicated to other pages like the Buying bitcoins, Selling bitcoins, and Trade page. For this specific entry (Bit-Pay), I remember doing a search on the Selling bitcoins page after the update to see if it was the only entry to list Mexico (MXN). Today the entry for them did not already show this edit, so I'm completely baffled.
I know the site had technical errors (mysql errors) a couple months ago. It almost seems like the DB was restored from a point-in-time backup and thus some updates since that backup became lost. That's just speculation though.
This wiki could really use some better administration though.
Some pending issues: There still are many links that still go to the old forum structure (bitcoin.org/smf or forum.bitcoin.org), which could be identified and manually edited even. There are a ton of spam bot articles. Most have been renamed, but because delete requires admin, they remain eyesores.
There is a growing amount of editing / updating needed as well. The "securing your wallet" article, for instance, is horrible, and hasn't been tweaked now that wallet encryption allows for it to be vastly improved. And some articles have incorrect information.
The wiki needs someone to champion it.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin FBI Report April 2012 May 8, 2012 Location: U.S. agency, International distribution Abstract: (Allegedly) The FBI provides analysis of bitcoin for distribution to an international audience - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=80114.0 |
|
|
|
An interesting read about Bitcoin & legislation... Oct. 26, 2011 Location: UK Abstract: (Allegedly) the British regulator FSA responds to a question regarding Bitcoin's legal status as a monetary instrument. - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=49862.0 |
|
|
|
Press Release - TradeHill, Inc. Files Suit Against Dwolla, Inc. Mar 6, 2012 Location: Suit filed in California, U.S. Abstract: Dwolla allegedly reversed transactions. TradeHill asserts Dwolla promoted its service as being like cash with no chargebacks and sues for damages. - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67625.0 |
|
|
|
[Update Feb 19, 2014: This thread is no longer being updated all that much. As Bitcoin further permeates the world, most every nation (or state, etc.) will have content specific to that jurisdiction's involvement with Bitcoin. Feel free to continue posting as you wish, but this thread will no longer be even close to being a comprehensive list as it had been for a period of time. Other resources: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country [Added Sep 3, 2015] - http://coincenter.org/2015/06/tracking-bitcoin-regulation-state-by-state [Added Sep 3, 2015] - http://www.coindesk.com/regulation [Added Sep 3, 2015] - http://merkletree.io (formerly bitlegal.io I think) [Added Sep 7, 2015] - http://www.cryptocoinlaw.net - http://twitter.com/virtuallylaw - http://BitcoinFoundation.org - http://coindesk.com - http://datauthority.org (info: http://coindesk.com/bitcoin-industry-leaders-launch-data-a-self-regulatory-body) - http://bitcoinfinancialassociation.org - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Compilation_of_legal_and_regulatory_information] This list is to serve as an index to all the events in which Bitcoin-related topics interact with the courts, police, regulators, etc. This is similar to how the NEW Articles in the Press Forum thread serves as an index to media mentions. Topics related to regulations, taxes, etc. are also cataloged in a Bitcoin.it Wiki article: Compilation of legal and regulatory information - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Compilation_of_legal_and_regulatory_informationI'm hoping for this thread to remain an index, mostly with just a brief summation and then links towards other threads and external sources -- rather than be where discussion for each index entry occurs. If an entry is made, feel free to reply with a link to a relevant thread where further discussion occurs or to other related content. |
|
|
|
To bookend this thread, the issue was offered on GLBSE today. The terms are a little different those listed in this thread though. And a follow on offer which has physical delivery option without expiration is coming at a later time, apparently. - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94381.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
