And Wences Casares and the Winkies used an exchange run by an autist on a beach ball. Even if it was the only game in town at the time, I would've found another game.
Where's the info about that much Bitfinex volume being corporate? If it was then that's very stupid on their part. Even without the hack, it's pretty obvious to anyone that Bitfinex is not an organisation that's corporate grade.
=> |
|
|
|
Update;
After much thought, analysis, and consultation, we have arrived at the conclusion that losses must be generalized across all accounts and assets. This is the closest approximation to what would happen in a liquidation context. Upon logging into the platform, customers will see that they have experienced a generalized loss percentage of 36.067%. In a later announcement we will explain in full detail the methodology used to compute these losses.
So their total fiat/crypto assets are in the range of ~330k BTC. Hmmm... Now "all accounts and assets" also include ETH, right? So dumping time for ETH?  |
|
|
|
So, from what the article says, bitfinex is run by a ~30y.old ponzi schemer, who nobody really knows anything about (no pic, no address etc), yet individuals and corporations (88% of the trading volume was supposed to be corporate?) are trusting him to run an exchange with >100mn in assets? I can only L O L. My name is Raphael NICOLLE, but I prefer unclescrooge. I live in Lyon, France, and I'm 26. Google is your friend for more.
And now, a special one for my ponziiiiii friends
"my ponzi friends" ahahahaha, omg this is even worse in appearance than the moolah guy. |
|
|
|
|
Btw, if you are planning to make a clone, do not ask for names (publicly) or say names out loud for obvious reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
It's because it's the only altcoin that you can obtain without spending anything besides your time (blogging/commenting).
Besides, it's better than spamming the bitcointalk.org forum with ad-sig campaigns and dropping one-liners all over the forum to get the post count up for the payment.
|
|
|
|
The market overreacted and, at peak, we got ~1/3 of the marketcap wiped out. You can't have a 60mn theft taking billions of the marketcap - it's irrational.
I don't believe market cap is a rational way to get the measure of anything, especially something as thinly traded as Bitcoin, let alone alts. The marketcap may not make sense for small players, but it does for large players as it creates internal hedges within the market. |
|
|
|
|
The first two, ok. Then we get to this:
"A third woman said she submitted to his unwanted sexual advances after he threatened to leave her if she did not have sex with him."
Eh? So he told her he'll leave her and she said ok (because I don't want you to leave me). How is that rape? Aren't women supposed to want to run away from their rapist instead of saying "please don't go mr. rapist, I'll do whatever you want".
Something doesn't add up.
|
|
|
|
Well at least nobody can say that steemit isn't pushing crypto to mainstream adoption. "Bimbos" and playmates are now using cryptocurrency....  |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is still holding up quite nicely after that 119k BTC theft...
The market overreacted and, at peak, we got ~1/3 of the marketcap wiped out. You can't have a 60mn theft taking billions of the marketcap - it's irrational. The DAO "hack" was larger and Ethereum lost a couple hundred millions at most in marketcap - despite the fact that percentage-wise the DAO was very big compared to the ETH marketcap. So, as I see it, the over-reaction is due for mid-term upwards correction. The amount stolen was not that big anyway (~0.7%). Although the air must be cleared first with the coins and funds at finex before the upwards trend resumes. Once that is done, it might trigger a race to frontrun the other buyers towards 600+. |
|
|
|
2kool4skewel/Decentralizeeconomics's greatest fear takes shape:  LOOOOOOL... so that's what steem dollars look like  |
|
|
|
We do that here for several pages  But you do have a point. |
|
|
|
|
Not all votes count the same. Vote weight differs depending how much money each voter has invested in the platform. This prevents, say, 100 bots with zero money backing their votes rigging the system. It's more of a "put your money where your mouth is" type of voting system.
So if you get 100 votes by people with not much investment it may not count as much as 10 votes with people that have a small investment.
Note that this investment is not necessarily acquired by putting money in. It is also automatic by the fact that all article rewards are split in two: Half the money you get in steem dollars (liquid) and another half in steem power (which is the invested part).
So, if you make an article and I upvote you (I have ~1500 steem power), you'll get 0.03$. And when you get them, you can liquidate 0.015 and the other 0.015 will be invested so that you can have some voting power as well. Something like that (I've left out curation percentages to simplify it)
|
|
|
|
|
13Hb3b6hZXP35XL8qz4qZNYhduB1NHyRXv
|
|
|
|
... too funny. In all seriousness, we have had some progress: MyBitcoin was an excel spreadsheet on some anonymous guys laptop Mt. Gox was a web based exchange written in PHP by some tubby french guy bouncing on a Swiss ball nursing a frappucino Bitfinex was web based exchange written in Ruby by some HK hedge fund wannabes ... continuing on this evolutionary arc next we'll have the new 'biggest' bitcoin Javascript-based exchange blow-up, then a java-based exchange, one day some real coders and security guys will decide to start an trustless, dark exchange because the financial shilly types, lawyers, regulator parasites and govvy agents have been run out of town with bigger problems (of the lamposts and nooses type) Next thing you know, the safest exchange will be a human operated one. All deposits and withdrawals checked by human operators, one-by-one. Zero chance of hacking without a human being complicit. I'd offer that service with a fee attached (1$ for standard processing time - which could take hours, 5-10$ for ultra fast processing - which could take a few minutes). No more monies flying out of wallets by themselves while nobody notices. At least now we'll know for sure it's an inside job |
|
|
|
And up we goooooo... almost to $570.. come on you bloody bastard ... SKY! As I said, you can't expect a 70mn hack to sustain a marketcap suppression of 2 billion+. It's not reasonable and it's not sustainable. If it was reasonable, the entire ETH marketcap should have been zeroed out after the DAO hack (similar size hack yet at a coin of 1/10th marketcap). Well sorry to say I'm waiting for the other shoe to fall....the Chinese miners saying they are gonna fork ....nothing from the meeting to me means nothing was fixed of this last year go around on block size...thus FORK (fml) wait for it...... In the last 24hrs, 54.000 txs were confirmed while paying 1-20 satoshi/byte... This doesn't happen when you have capacity issues. They wouldn't even get processed due to fee competition. |
|
|
|
And up we goooooo... almost to $570.. come on you bloody bastard ... SKY! As I said, you can't expect a 70mn hack to sustain a marketcap suppression of 2 billion+. It's not reasonable and it's not sustainable. If it was reasonable, the entire ETH marketcap should have been zeroed out after the DAO hack (similar size hack yet at a coin of 1/10th marketcap). |
|
|
|
If you are trading a larger spectrum, like "oh it's 550 today, I think it will rebound to 600+ levels in a week", why would I keep my money on the exchange? I'll buy at 550, take it to my wallet, return it to the exchange in a week, sell them then, get my fiat.
because you were waiting for a dip in the 5xx s and had bids ready to take a big leveraged long position? FML If I'm waiting a dip to buy with my fiat, then my problem is not the 10-40m confirmation times of bitcoin, but the eons of time that bank wires take. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
