While I'd love to be pleasantly surprised, it does not appear that right now the bankruptcy proceeding is being administered in the best interests of depositors. Rather, depositors will likely be lumped together with all other "unsecured creditors", and then apportioned some amount of cash from the proceeds of auctioning off the 200,000 bitcoins.
I don't think there's any information in the public domain about that either way. But in any case it seems unlikely that Gox have substantial debts beyond what they owe depositors, so even if depositors were somehow considered to have priority it wouldn't make much difference to the eventual payout. GOX has very few other creditors (may their employees, and possibly a few vendors). Grouping depositors with these other groups would likely have a very small impact on the ultimate payout It's unlikely the bankruptcy was declared merely because Mt. Gox couldn't repay all of its depositor's BTC and cash withdrawal requests. By its own admission it still held over 200K BTC (in the old-format wallet). It would have probably chosen first to play fractional reserve banking, or Bernie Madoff 2.0 with those 200K coins, rather than declaring itself bankrupt and risk having the company liquidated. Most depositors would probably have been better off had the bankruptcy never been declared. At least the smaller depositors (say, those with fewer than 1,000 BTC) in piecemeal fashion could have withdrawn their coins sourced from the 200K Mt. Gox wallet. Did you mean to say that the bankruptcy was declared by mistake, because Mt. Gox still held 200K BTC, and could have used them to fund any withdrawal requests? If so, then I could probably come closer to agreeing with you. You say that Mt. Gox had few debts, yet more than likely, the bankruptcy was brought on by a credit squeeze. Do you have some actual knowledge that would indicate otherwise? GOX did not "know" about the 200k BTC wallet/address until after they filed bankruptcy. They froze withdrawals when they though they had run out of coins. Over the next several weeks they tried to make back their coins by arbitrage, trading fees and customers depositing BTC. They were not successful. |
|
|
|
|
There is the "test net" that is a network that uses the same code as bitcoin but is used to test how the network would react to certain things.
|
|
|
|
I believe that rather than picking up the begging bowl and standing in front of big names such as Amazon and Ebay, we should focus more on the mid-sized and small-sized merchants. We don't need Amazon.
i second that, if we can focus on those small businesses and when those businesses grow and become real threats to amazon then they will have to find a way to integrate bitcoin. These big business have the ability to reach the masses. Small and medium sized businesses have much less of an ability to reach many people. |
|
|
|
This is very convincing for me: We never have and never will participate in any 51% attack or double spend against Bitcoin. Still, we are against temporary solutions, which could repel a 51% threat. You ironic, right? That's only words. Well a temporary solution would be just that, temporary. It would be simply kicking the problem down the road to be dealt with later. Any solution would likely hurt them in some way, regardless if it is temporary or a long term solution and they likely do not wish to pay for multiple temporary "solutions" |
|
|
|
Sad that more than 17% of people don't understand that the whole point of Bitcoin is that it is fungible and DOES NOT GET BLOCKED.
This is a terrible precedent.
Seems like the number of people who don't get it is growing : Yes, block the coins! - 27 (20.5%). If they aren't trolling , It's not a good sign. The last wave of adopters seems to have brought a few extremists with it. You should note that this is only 27 people. The other choices are really not much better then "yes, block the coins" This is certainly not a scientific poll. |
|
|
|
...
I saw at Zero Hedge today that apparently some gold dealers will not accept tumbled nor shared BTC.
I do understand that people have their reasons for making their BTC a little harder to track.
But, the gold dealers still have to ship their coins... So, what's the problem? This may be a very n00b question, but I always thought a Bitcoin was a Bitcoin.
Some piece of information is missing here. How do they discern a "tumbled" bitcoin, from a "shared bitcoin," from a plain old bitcoin? They are all the same thing. If you trace the taint in any bitcoin you hold, it will link back to tons and tons and tons of addresses, some of which that were under your control and some of which that were not. I looked through the document/AML policy (it seemed much to detailed to be a customer facing policy) and did not see anything about tumbled coins. It did say that it would not accept any transactions in excess of $10k in one day from one customer and that it would collect lots of personal information from you. |
|
|
|
He claimed that he was doing research and I think he should be given the benefit of the doubt.
Could be... but if he kept the mined coins for himself, then there would not be much room for doubt, I'm afraid He kept the earned bitcoin, but there are still very valid research purposes. He could have easily have been trying to test gambling sites, tumbling sites, and number of the illicit sites with the earned coins. We need more people like the above poster in the world! (As much as I know it's sarcasm, I'm playing along). Don't you see everyone? Just because he did something without permission doesn't mean he's not researching! He probably used those coins to research delivery speed from a number of BTC websites, or did the research to see how long it would take for inflation to render the money made from the coins minuscule! Silly government! There have been a number of people who have purchased bitcoin for legitimate research purposes such as being able to track/trace bitcoin throughout the network. bitcoin mixers have been tested by researchers. People have attempted to measure the number of TX that are actual trades as opposed to transferring one's own coins to another address they control. |
|
|
|
Everyone is using this article as an example to prove that only crooks are involved in Bitcoin.
This is something that I don't think the Bitcoin community should get involved in. This is very similar to tax evasion. When people start using bitcoin for evading taxes at that level governments will put more effort into trying to regulate and hurt it |
|
|
|
|
The issue with you sending a message is that ghash can not really control how much mining power they have at their pool short of disconnecting miners that are already working on it's pool.
|
|
|
|
|
If they were to brainstorm ideas as to how to prevent any one pool from getting too much of the network hashrate.
Once they come up with a solution they would all need to implement such solution as if they didn't they the pools that did not could possible come close to the 51% mark
|
|
|
|
Where is the bloomberg link ?
This looks like the bloomberg terminal, not the bloomberg website. The terminal is available to wall street/investment banking professionals and costs tens of thousands per year |
|
|
|
Hi,
Sure price drop is comming to 400$ for sure! I am very optimistic person and i am sure that the price will go back to 650$ and more, but it needs time. Bitcoin will never die! Believe me!
BR
Gondel
Bitcoin function do not diminish regardless of its price. It will work fine at 650 or at 50. Technically it does, but practically it doesn't: you are unable to transfer large amounts in fiat value. And that is why the price of a bitcoin needs to go up when adoption of Bitcoin increases. Transaction fee also go up with bitcoin price. While it might benefit large institution transfer, it will lose the small payment merchant market segment. A cup of coffee costing 10 USD in bitcoin, if value at 1000 usd per coin, will have $0.50 (0.0005 btc) transaction fee (around 5%). The TX fee policies are set by the mining pools based on the market. If the market is not willing to pay a mining fee at a certain amount then they will not and in order for miners to received the maximum amount of revenue they will lower their minimum amount of a fee they will accept for a TX that needs a fee |
|
|
|
Please, so that I can get some sleep, please, please hard fork the chain as soon as you possibly can and change Bitcoin as you described so that it won't get banned.
This wouldn't be my suggestion. Governments around the world are just starting to learn about bitcoin. As long as there are very basic misconceptions and contradictory regulations I see no reason to act. Moreover, those governments would first need to agree on who should be given the power over BTC money supply. I hope it will not be the fed but an international entity (with a UN mandate?). So waiting is not a healthy option for you. If you want to sleep better: sell!  No government would be able to control the BTC money supply. To have that level of control would be like controlling the internet. |
|
|
|
Seems to not have boosted the price. I hope not too many people start booking vacations on Expedia and it starts suppressing the price...
When companies accept bitcoin they will often sell the bitcoin in exchange for fiat as they must pay most of their bill in fiat. Expedia must hire (or use existing) employees to manage the bitcoin process, monitoring sales, selling the bitcoin to pay it's fiat bills, explaining how the process works to customers, ect. These employees will see how well bitcoin works in general and would possible become adapters of bitcoin themselves. |
|
|
|
There's no apparent need in cutting the portfolio. It will decrease naturally as bonds mature.
If there's a need in soaking up the excessive liquidity they have a range of other instruments, namely repos and manipulating rates on excess reserves.
The fed would need to reinvest the proceeds of matured bonds into new bonds or else liquidity would dry up. When US treasury bonds mature the treasury must issue more bonds to repay the bonds that are maturing. If the Fed does not buy some of those bonds then the effect would be the same as if it had sold the bonds in the open market. Are you saying that 80% of the Treasury bonds sold by the U.S. are bought by the Fed, and if the Fed doesn't buy them, nobody else will? That can't be true!  If the fed don't buy the bond, the interest rate will most likely go up the roof as no rational bank or institution will lend the government at near 0% rate. That would probably be an exaggeration. If QE were to suddenly stop then interest rates would rise. The federal government is considered to be risk free in terms of a possible default. The only risk that banks take in lending to the federal government is inflation risk |
|
|
|
Why not invests in a UNIQUE idea you have, which is about bitcoin also ?
Or, you can buy bitcoins now, hold them, and then sell them for high price.
And what happen if bitcoin keeps dropping ? Then you would lose money, like what would happen with any other investment You don't lose money until you realize the loss and actually sell at a loss. Otherwise, you could still make profit... even if the price falls. Unless you are long on margin and get margin called... On paper it would still be a loss. If the price is below what you paid for it then you should understand that it is showing as a loss and should not assume that the price will go back up. |
|
|
|
Competition is high among producers.
Profit is mostly in negative territory for ASIC and GPU mining.
GPU miners have long been unprofitable to even run. You can now run ASICs profitably (mining revenues exceed electricity costs) but most market prices of miners are too high to ever reach ROI |
|
|
|
I imagine this will be for fiat currency. Facebook has a huge network already for this; I don't see a reason why they would include bitcoin. They would include bitcoin because of less regulation associated with bitcoin then with being a bank and/or paypal like service |
|
|
|
want to diversify into something low-risk, low-return - anything above 5%/year would be OK You are not going to find any investment that is low risk that will pay 5% interest/growth/return Your best bet would probably be to invest in investment grade corporate bonds with a 5-10 year maturity. I don't think you would get quite 5% but it would be pretty low risk. When interest rates rise the market value of these bonds would fall, but your principle would be repaid when the bonds mature assuming the issuer does not default |
|
|
|
Investors would have been burn so badly they will be not likely to trust someone else with their money.
Hard asset and cash on hand would be more likely asset investors want to hang onto.
Exactly! After a stock market crash, investors will be very risk adverse and would not want to risk what funds they have left in something that is more risky then stocks. People who will buy bitcoins or hold to them bitcoins would be people already interested by bitcoins Gold is risky and volatile but in case of market crash or hyper inflation it is a safer asset for some so the price raises People who buy bitcoin sometimes see it's potential as a possible currency but may have little interest in it. Gold has long been a vehicle to hedge against inflation of any kind. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
