So what do you all wise men think, how bad is it looking now? Seems like Stamp bottomed 530 for the third time now. Is this something we can see as a positive thing? Triple bottom at 530? Atleast it looks like the charts have really been glowing red for some weeks now so maybe we can start hoping for a better tomorrow soon? I guess Gox is starting to be irrelevant and we might be able to move on soon?
the bottom we are looking for will come slowly and miserably over days if not weeks. we are only hours into a fresh medium term down trend, give it some time, it will likely pass through 500 and into 450. the squeeze has only just begun, 600 was not desperate territory. 500 is getting serious. only between 200-400 will the weak be relieved of their stash. +1 I recently got a phone call of the owner of about BTC300 who had grown so tired of this downtrend that he wanted to sell now to buy back at 300. I told him that if you are so afraid now, you can't make it to buy when it is 300, so better not sell. He had owned through the 2013 bust no problem but this was getting too hard. 200 to 400 is a double, which is the same as 400 is to 800. Because BTCe and Gox have seen 200 (or almost 100), there is the symmetry that Bitstamp also see it momentarily (not necessarily happening but I wish). But the street price or any longer term price, I feel the bottom is not far from 400. maybe we can start hoping for a better tomorrow soon? I guess Gox is starting to be irrelevant and we might be able to move on soon?
To move on, someone must start buying. Who? Me? I haven't even really started buying at these low prices, why would I start buying higher? |
|
|
|
What is the theory - why is goxbtc/goxusd price so low?
OMG its not a theory, its in front of your eyes ! Insiders (people connected to Mark and other readily accessibles accounts and he himself are cashing out!) no matter what ---- nobody is doing anything about that --- so they just go on....extincting any kind of proove...creating a story together with some parasites laywers and the die is cast - pronto This does not answer the question - why is goxbtc price so cheap compared to goxusd. They are both gox, and have been non-withdrawable for about 4 weeks. |
|
|
|
|
What is the theory - why is goxbtc/goxusd price so low?
|
|
|
|
I have quit reading this thread due to high volume and very low signal to noise ratio. Just stopping by announce that my 10k EUR withdrawal from January 4th changed to pending today, and will arrive tomorrow. I have cancelled my other withdrawals to buy BTC.
Please re-consider. There needs to be a voice of reason in this mad house. I'm sure I'm not alone in appreciating your input. What in his input do you appreciate the most? Surely you understand that by following his advice, I would have lost about 1 million dollars compared to my biting the bullet and losing "only" 150k?Of all the people outside Mt.Gox, sturle bears perhaps the most responsibility of the untold millions that ordinary people lost by listening this lulling voice of "reason". |
|
|
|
Sirs, Your support makes me cry. If you would speak as nice words in the other threads, the trolls would be silenced also there, and this would be a better place in an instant. Try it! The stuff I've been doing here is not really so difficult. The hardest and least satisfying part is to moderate the threads so that they are even remotely readable, which they are not, which in turn compels me to start new user-moderated threads all the time. It is a sorry thing that the forum management cares so little of its most valuable members (and everybody, as a result). Then there is the issue of dozens of requests to the Other Place (we call bitcointalk the same name there  ) I will have to take them one by one based on how much time I have, and we also let people in only few at the time, tryin to avoid the problems mentioned. So please be patient with the delay. I am not abruptly leaving, I have a nice announcement coming any day from now..  |
|
|
|
|
THIS PLACE IS ALMOST DEAD. JUST LIKE MTGOX.
I started lurking in Bitcointalk when I contemplated buying bitcoins the first time, during the 2011 bubble. Afterwards I made the purchase, and continued lurking through the plateau at $5, fall of Bitcoinica, Pirate@40, etc. until this thing started to interest me more and I registered late 2012.
I was really active in March-May 2013, and again starting October 2013. Now after 2,500 posts and 33 days of activity, I feel that not only my stay here, but even this very place, is coming to an end.
In the very beginning (of which I was not witnessing), the average IQ of the posters was probably +3.0 (145 if sd=15). That kind of community functions really well. But when Bitcoin started its exponential rise in the exchanges, exponentially more people were drawn in and given posting privileges. This started the slow but inevitable slide in the quality of discourse.
At first, a little-less-smart people respect the oldtimers, and fit in well. Afterwards one level less smart people enter in, and soon the oldtimers who actually know about things are outnumbered such that they cannot keep the average level of discussion up, and it reverts to the level of the newcomers. In the next stage the oldtimers are so far above the newcomers that meaningful discussion is not even possible, and at this point they segregate themselves to speak actual matters somewhere else, leaving the education of the forum to middle-knowledgeable people like me.
As recently as a year ago, people were laughing at me here, because my mouth was bigger than the actual knowledge. Now they respect me (except the trolls that are so much below me that they don't recognize it). But talking about the forum, it is a terrible thing that the people who know stuff are inundated with junk, and leaving. And now I am thinking the same.
Perhaps this is the way things go. My friend who knows the lifecycle of Internet forums, has explained that ever-expansion and quality cannot remain in the same place. In theory this could maybe, possibly, have been remedied long time ago by guarding the posting rights carefully. Now it is almost certainly too late, and the new forum software after minimum 12 months will not come on time to bring the lost contributors back.
This is a lamentation. Not a suggestion, nor a call to action. Sorry.
There are other communities available, I am a member of one, and if you really burn for Bitcoin and the economy it enables, shoot a PM with some kind of introduction.
|
|
|
|
perhaps he's too busy in his private btc-elite only forum to spend time with the unwashed masses . though I admitt I would like a peek at it to see if it will generate interesting content or if the isolation devolves it into an elitist Groupthink circlejerk. I am there, and will offer a sneak peek for free (asked permission from the poster). This one is from an ongoing essay competition where 1,000m BTC will be given to the forum member who most succintly expounds the importance of why the decision-making in the Supernode Network is based on economic majority, with the votes based on the difference of status (rank), which is closely tied to Bitcoin ownership and thus the wealth of the SN member, instead of the majority of number of members. Because that's the natural way - and that's how everything works anyway, even if you tried to distort it on some superficial level. In "democracy", power is artificially and superficially re-distributed equally between all - well, not really, but to sell the idea, to keep masses peacefully going along - and this is even more important: whether deserved or not. Unconditional love is the coolest thing. Unconditional power is probably the worst of all things. That's like deciding that that from now on everyone can benchpress 100 pounds and not a pound more. Well, it's in some people's nature to press much more than that - AND THEY WILL. It's better to let them do it openly and naturally, so they don't have to do what's naturally anyway, but do it sneakily behind the scenes, while selling the weaker people the image that all power is distributed equally. When you go to the gym, and it's okay to openly lift as much as you want, you get people sharing secrets, inspiring each other to grow and give more - heck, even making music videos on how cool it is to be in this together: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3UUpta18w4Distributing power equally is so artificial that you need force to force it. And guess who end up using and owning that force? Of course the naturally more powerful (or power-hungry) ones. Except that now, besides power, they also have all the apparatus of force in their hands - of course, paid by all those "equal" people, or middle class. When the masses try to deny anyone from lifting more than 100lb, the big (or motivated) guys have to use force to keep others out of their own secret gyms. It's good to keep in mind, that to really go against nature, there's always some kind of war going on - and in war it's not always the best people who win. The war is not won by using even heavier (and even more expensive) force to make things even more unnatural, but actually letting the stream finally settle on the path of least resistance & most flow. The more you try to equalize people, the more you end up separating them. The more atificiality you introduce to the system, the harder it is for people with less initial connections or shrewdness to ever make it up the ladder. And the cronier it gets. The more proggressive the tax system, the more reggressive it in actuality gets - because of course the people in power will make it so for themselves, while having to exert massive, otherwise unnecessary work to make it appear proggressive to the common folk - or, the average voter. And, in the progress introduce massive amounts of soul-crushing friction to the whole system, where it's no longer sufficient to serve your customer well, but you also need to become an expert in international law and all the silly complications in tax code, even though your time is valueble and you initially wanted to invest yourself in (improving) the service you actually cared about. Let the powerful be powerful. The less there is need to resort to cronyism to attain power, the likelier you are to create culture of actual service and creative, attentive value sharing. ** ** ** ** I feel like I live in a society (Finland, to be exact), where you can go through your whole life without really ever touching this thing of wealth and power. You don't really negotiate your salary; the union does it for you. You know, those guys in the cabinets; the ones that are "qualified" to play these dangerous, difficult and awfully mysterious power games - so that me, the small person, don't have to; I can just go through my life minding my own business; go through the motions, not cause too much hassle. Reminds me of the Steve Jobs quote: "When you grow up you, tend to get told that the world is the way it is and your life is just to live your life inside the world, try not to bash into the walls too much, try to have a nice family, have fun, save a little money. That’s a very limited life. Life can be much broader, once you discover one simple fact, and that is that everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you. And you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use. Once you learn that, you’ll never be the same again." What's left out in that quote, is that to Really Live in this world, you need to "get your hands dirty", and realize that there is this thing called power, and I'm going to be playing with it sooner rather than later. I'm going to be negotiating, strategically upping my position. It's not going to come by simply increasing my contribution and letting someone else handle the money matters. Steve Jobs himself tends to give you that impression (that he didin't really need to think about money), but even he was in fact a quite wonderful negotiator and quite a player in corporate power games. It doesn't need to be like that. The more naturally power is distributed, the more you can just earn and deserve it, and the less you have to "play" for it, of know all the complications of law, and other distractive barriers the "heavy lifters" have had to raise to make it difficult for common people to enter their secret gym. ** ** ** ** It's clear, that even if all votes were equally distributed, you'd still feel like guys like Goat or rpietila are on a different position or status, than someone with less than one BTC in his paper wallet. So why not let the voting system reflect that which we already feel is natural anyway? Of course the ones with more at stake should have more votes. But it goes deeper than that. All my life I've sort of struggled, ever since the school system tried to make us all bench press that same 10lbs weight over and over again. Also there was this forum at one point, where I was probably the most influential contributor, and lots of very high class contributors came along to join ranks & have a ball together. And then there was this one homo ignoramus, who didn't even want nor seek to contribute, but rather talk against the whole topic of the forum (which was organic, fresh, real, high quality food by the way, along with holistic health). The owner of the forum maintained his opinion that "everyone needs to get an equal chance in this forum". Well, soon all the best contributors found better things to do with their valuable time, so the owner of the forum was left with... well, what you get from trying to artificially make "everyone's contribution equal", even when it clearly is everything but. In my life experience, I've noticed huge differences in people't energy levels and how they live their lives. The most impressive contributors are often the biggest eaners - and they usually end up re-investing a ton, in what they originally cared about. Making it better, making it bigger, perhaps adding diversity as well, depth; heck they even take steps to increase the value of social capital in the whole industry, and basically make everyone happier. Anyone could be more like that, but perhaps they haven't read their Napoleon Hill yet, perhaps because they were busy reading sociology of gender studies (which they didin't even care about in the first place, but thought that was okay, not too bad at least). It's wrong to say that the guy living hundreds of times bigger, having a network worth 10 000 times more, and making ridiculous contributions, while garnering masterful experience and ridiculous insigth to the matter, should have equal vote to the guy who was reading sociology and didn't even care about that - and probably cares even less about the subject matter at hand. Usually - not 100%, but usually - the people who care deeply and personally about subject matter A, have more knowledge, experience, relevant networks, personal investment, social investment - and also financial investment in A. At least they should, and it would be very natural for them to. ** ** ** ** Now comes the interesting part. I'm that guy with <1000mBTC on my name. And even for me it's preferable to live in a "society" where power is distributed naturally rather than equalized artificially. First, it gives me clear incentives, to serve more, earn better, step my value up. It creates culture where my friends have similar incentives, so it's exponentially more fun for each of us to walk the walk, make our journey upwards - not by doing bad the bad, evil, sneaky or in best case irrelevant things you often need to do in a forcefully artificial system to rise up, but just simply improve my communication, courage, wisdom, experience, skill; serve the market, use my network and treat them well. Secondly, even when my voting power is ridiculously low, I have much better chances to influence things, and do it in intelligent manner. I don't have to sink my self worth to convince the masses, when I can see who has the power, and I can be sure it's their own money that's at stake, so there aren't any sneaky conflicts of interest complicating things. All I need to do is talk sense, or present my argument, to the guy(s) who have lots at stake in this - and I can be quite sure that they are the ones who actually care (because it's their property, not public land), and they either know and understand this stuff very well, or at least have the incentives to make otherwise sure that their decisions are of high quality, for example by hiring some knowledgeable people who have demonstrated their love and deep caring for this thing (plus perhaps ability to make good decisions). Ultimately it's about (finally) creating world without politics. What is politics? It's really the art of re-grabbing the power that was artificially (and forcefully) re-distributed, and then vandalize one's own integrity in all the complicated mess that follows. When you erase the ultimate reason to have any conflicts of interest in the first place, you pretty much get rid of (the need for) politics, or any other forms of bad behavior. FINALLY the best argument wins, not the sneakiest or most evil, or populist - or the one bought with other people's money. The highest uncommon denominator finally beats the lowest common - by 10 000 to one, in the case of me and rpietila for example. Like Steve Jobs would say, "that's how it should be." Come to think about it, that is the natural, and right way of things. There are things that I have cared about more, and invested more of myself in, than Risto. And in those things I naturally have more say than him. If a superfood distributor wants to know what strains of enzymes to use in his newest product, of course he'll ask me. That's the natural, correct and intelligent way of things. The "democratic" way would be to have an equal vote between me and Risto, where Risto's vote would be equal to mine. But he doesn't know crap about enzyme strains or how and where they were produced and what the practical implications of all that are... so why on earth should Lasse from Rawmance Ltd even care about Risto's opinion? Well, in "democracy", you kind of have to. Let's not be that silly in this community. I'm better of off by having Risto have more power than me when it comes to decisions concerning matters of Bitcoin. Plus, I know who to talk to, in case I happen to think I have a better idea - and best of all, even in that case I don't have to worry about politics, or winning over every average person who might not even care let alone understand that much, or might have most his stakes & attention invested somewhere else. That's all good, natural - and in every imaginable sense most effective way to advance things. Who would you ask, who's opinion do you trust most (in matter A)? It kinda makes sense to let that person have an equal share of votes - not equal to the number of his fingers or hands, but his ability and will to benefit us all. This is written by a newbie of 0 posts before this one. We aim to make it a quality place with meaningful discussion, and are happy to see this forum cater to other needs. |
|
|
|
Citizen's arrest based on what? You need to tread carefully when doing such a thing.
No, it's simple as pie. If you have grounds to believe that there is a crime going on, and that the criminal may be about to run with the money, you just detain him and leave the matter to the police for investigation. The police cannot fine you unless they find out that Mt.Gox is committing nothing criminal. In the complaint you outline the crimes in such technical precision that the police cannot find them not true without real investigation. So they will have to investigate. Of course they can summarily decide that you are wrong and the arrest was unlawful, but if Mt.Gox ever is found guilty (which I would say is 99% sure at this point), you will triumph as a hero and Japan police and judicial system is shamed. This is exactly why citizen's arrest prevails in the legal code. When it's taken away, then there is nothing more to do but whine. |
|
|
|
|
If someone has read all what I have written in this thread and has similar plans, contact me in a secure way.
|
|
|
|
If you don't mind sharing, what do you think is the fair price for goxBTC right now?
It is a little bit hard to say, because in my understanding, Mt.Gox today admitted that they don't have all the bitcoins, and that they are selectively giving them away. So it depends on your preferential treatment level there. Mine is understandably very low, so I would not buy them. |
|
|
|
Protest at MTGOX update
According to law of Japan, the protesters have the right to stop the crime in progress by citizen's arrest. In this case, Mark is detained using necessary force to prevent him from leaving the scene and delivered to the police. It helps if the allegations against him are clearly written. |
|
|
|
|
You are right to point out that it was me who showed that such has never worked in the past. But now we have much improved technology, so I am interested to see what happens this time.
|
|
|
|
The 200 SMA now sits just north of $450 on Stamp. Do not see us going below that for more than a day or so. In another 20 days it will be at $500 and moving up. $400s are getting less and less likely outside of a flash crash.
I am following these indicators. If you are preying for cheap coins, flash crash works fine. Gox is currently 292. If I had had my net in BTCe, the crash there would have given me coins at 420 average with every order fulfilled. The issue is not whether it will go down but how low and for how long. Probably my average buyin will be more than 420. In the last big crash it was 519. But everyone is free to follow their own strategy. |
|
|
|
Selling goxBTC @ 75%, tomorrow Tuesday 18th from GMT+3, up to 100 BTC during the day.
Member here since 2011, but not just very talkative. I can send first in increasing amounts if you have some reputation here.
I guarantee this member for up to BTC100, provided that I am notified of the trade beforehand. |
|
|
|
I made a crude back-of-the envelope calculation back last year suggesting that if Gox is actually under water, it's only a few million total (when their orderbook is tens of millions). So, the people shouting "GOX IS INSOLVENT", please back your claim up with some kind of evidence or reasoning.
About the recent BTC withdrawal issue, evidence would be easy to gather from the blockchain. If you're suggesting someone scammed huge amounts of BTC out of Gox.
The burden of proof is on Gox and them alone. They have the means to prove if the have the coins, nobody outside of them has any realistic means to disprove it. Oh wait, perhaps they do... you have to dismiss all the circumstantial evidence by 10,000s of people who have not had their coins or anything from gox first..  And even then the burden of proof is on Gox. |
|
|
|
Exactly.
The smell of a sockpuppet is strong here. |
|
|
|
Also what does this last part even mean: "and to take into account current market conditions"; are withholding your BTC because they don't think the price is right?? WTF?
I think the most important part of the statement is the the supposed guardian of the customers' bitcoins, Mt.Gox, has finally admitted that they run a fractional reserve. The market has confirmed that this is a good news. Perhaps because it is the first honest public statement I remember ever to have heard from them...  |
|
|
|
If they claim to not have 100% of the coins, that automatically classifies them as criminal, so as a corollary I must be wrong, and they must have the coins. Their "problem" to transfer them is not a function of number of BTC transferred, but the transaction size (which may be very large if parsed incorrectly) and the raw blocksize of the Bitcoin network. Essentially they can send a certain number of transactions per day, regardless big or small. No, the Bitcoin network did not change overnight in a way which suddenly makes it impossible for MtGox to handle everyone's BTC transactions. That's the most stupid thing I've read in a very long time. Umm. There is the blocksize limit in place, right? MtGox provably has very large amount of dust in their BTC balances, right? This limits their ability to pay everybody at exactly the same time (at least so that the transactions would be confirmed, because they cannot be all included in an exact same block due to their sheer number (300,000) compared to the blocksize (1MB)). Since you appear knowledgeable on the subject, perhaps you can compute the reasonable estimate how long this would take, because surely it is not instant, but certainly it won't take weeks either. |
|
|
|
What would the new daily limit be?
If 10B per account ,that is obviously too high because most of the users have less than 10B.
1 B per account? That seems some big holders should wait for years to withdraw all of them....
Bitcoin distribution. Mt.Gox claims to have a million customers, and I think 300,000 of them had nonzero balance in the latter part of January when the withdrawal by any means became impossible. It is unlikely that many of the very smallest balances would have used Mt.Gox, but also unlikely that many of the very biggest would have had at least all of their coins there. Judging from the characteristics of the distribution, I believe 5% of the Mt.Gox accounts (15,000 accounts) have larger than BTC10 balance in them, and that they collectively hold 90% of Mt.Gox BTC IOUs. Likely at least BTC1,000,000 is still held in Mt.Gox atm. If they claim to not have 100% of the coins, that automatically classifies them as criminal, so as a corollary I must be wrong, and they must have the coins. Their "problem" to transfer them is not a function of number of BTC transferred, but the transaction size (which may be very large if parsed incorrectly) and the raw blocksize of the Bitcoin network. Essentially they can send a certain number of transactions per day, regardless big or small. Once withdrawals are enabled, there is nothing, except Mt.Gox's insatiable desire to rape their largest customers once more, to prevent them from sending out 90% of the coins to 5% of the customers in the first 24 hours, essentially proving that they are solvent and pacifying the 95% of customers with the remaining 10% of coins. Any other solution is a further proof of insolvency resulting from and in criminal action, lying, cronyism etc usw. |
|
|
|
I think you are right. I also think that we will see 500 in the last exchange where we haven't yet seen it. End of March suits me very well. All we need anymore is the proof that 800 will not be seen again. There will be a great plenty of people who decide to sell a little bit. Guess what? After loading myself absolutely full with bitcoins between 3 and 100, I also felt the urge to sell when it dropped through all supports last summer. Selling at 90 is not the best decision I made, but it gives me the confidence that there will always be investors going through the same stage |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
