Mini update:

I've updated this script to read from a config file for settings. This allows the user to set the polling interval, exchange, exchange variance and exchange field to fetch.

The latter so you can choose which exchange you wish to monitor. To set the correct field, you'll need to view the exchange API. What this means, is that you can even monitor non-exchange sites, like coinbase.

The config file also includes the bitcoin-qt (client) login info, as well as a means to set the log file size, which, once reached, rolls the log over. Debug must be set to True for creating the log.

That said, I must admit, it's pretty nice having this thing talk when major (i.e., increase/decrease by n-amount) market price fluctuations are detected. This allows me to work on other projects, rather than (obsessively) watching the market ticker.

Hi all.

Even though I spend a large amount of my time in front of my computer, I don't always have time to watch the bit coin exchange tickers. Additionally, since I'm playing around with Raspberry PI and basically learning the ropes where that and python is concerned, I decided to write bitcoin ticker app that talks, as opposed to displaying current rates.

This app uses festival, and polls the current Bitstamp price (once, every 61s, to ensure it does not exceed their 600/10m polling rule), as well as computing the BTC value stored in a bitcoin-qt wallet which is running on a separate computer on the network. Notably, I didn't want it jabbering away every time the price changed. As such, it is designed to only speak based upon a user designated variance.

For example, only talk when the price has changed, up or down, by $5.00.

In addition to talking, it will print to a log. Though, in general, outside of debugging, and to keep storage requirements to a minimum, it is better to set the debug flag to 'False'.

And finally, this first pass example is somewhat of a kludge, in that it is my first attempt at writing a python script. So, at this point, it reflects USD only. For example, since I could  not figure out how to set up the tokens so that festival would correctly speak dollars, I kludged a string replace. So, if you want it to speak in a different currency, you will need to modify the dollar bit.

With that said, I thought I'd share the code, which I'm releasing on github, under an open source license: https://github.com/vrhax/BitTalker

Feedback and ideas are always welcomed. And, I'll be happy to answer any questions, should you have them.

Try it again, only change the order. That worked for me.

My review of coinbase.

I did quite a bit of research before deciding to go with coinbase. The criteria I used to make my choice included but was not limited to, the following:

Trustworthiness: Their funders played a huge role wrt my perception of their trustworthiness. That they are headquartered in San Francisco also played a role. The bay area tech industry is a fairly small circle and reputation is everything. That they were able to acquire funding from y-combinator was/is huge, imho.

Verification process: This process is quite simple, and similar to paypal's bank verification. Once you provide your bank routing/account numbers, they make 2 small ACH deposits, and of course, withdraw the sum. Once these deposits appear, it is a matter of clicking on their verify bank link, and entering the deposits. The deposit order is important. So, if they don't verify the first time around, change the order. They should verify at that point. This process is the same for their visa card.

Once your bank account is verified, you can purchase BTCs. One thing I am not crazy about is that if you want to purchase partial BTCs, say, $50 worth, you have to play around with your BTC value to get as close to $50 as possible. It would be great if they allowed you to fill in the dollar amount the way bitstamp does.

After you've executed your purchase, you must wait 5 business days for the BTCs to be credited to your account. This is done to ensure your bank transaction completes. ACH transactions take 3-5 business days, depending upon your financial institution. Which is why they chose the max before crediting your account with BTCs.

Additionally, once you've executed our purchase, a sort of 30 day count-down clock begins. You are not considered fully verified until after 30 days has passed. The primary reason for this is to ensure you do not attempt a charge-back against their company.

Once you've completed this level of verification, you can add a credit card (VISA only) to your account and verify that. This will place you in the level 2 verification status, allowing instant BTC purchases.

This process can be frustrating to the new customer, esp in this day and age of, gimme nao!1! However one could think of the overall process as a bi-directional trust protocol.

BTC to fiat process: This was a huge one for me. In the event I want to convert BTCs to cash, I did not want to have to deal with the headache of over-seas wire transfers. So, being able to hook up my bank account (I set up a separate account from my primary) was a huge factor for deciding to go with coinbase. I have both purchased and sold BTCs without any real problems. In fact, the process is very much like paypal. Which makes it quite convenient.

Okay, that's the up side of coinbase.

The down side? Their fees seem to be higher than other bitcoin businesses, though, they're not exorbitant. The biggest downside, imho, is the BTC prices. The buy prices appear to be tracking MtGox, while the purchase prices appear to be tracking bitstamp. So, you end up with anywhere from a $3 to $10, and even greater, variance (i.e, buy: $215 sell:205). As such, I am less inclined to make a habit of purchasing BTCs through them.

In summary, I think coinbase is pretty decent. Esp now that they've released an iPhone app (yeah, I'm a macgeek). The few times I dealt with their customer service as I was learning the ropes of their process, have been educational and pleasant. So, my overall rating of them is 4.5 stars out of 5 (minus 0.5 stars due to the BTC pricing).

For starters, Oracle (yes, I know, teh big evul! lol) has published a nice overview wrt AML (see Best Practices for Anti Money Laundering (AML): System Selection and Implementation). In this day of fast paced technology, it is a bit outdated, but still a comprehensive and well thought out piece.

As for the feedback bit? I think the rather poorly written "high risk: your transaction has been reversed" notification, should be rewritten. For starters, imho, it comes across as neither professional or knowledgeable. Yes, it is important not to "give away the farm" so to speak. Even so, there are ways to avoid revealing "trade secrets," while still helping the customer understand what triggered their system.  But that would require them to understand how their system is implemented. And honestly, that email does not lead me to believe the writer actually understands that bit.

As for how it's normally dealt with? It varies within and between industries, of course. Take credit card companies, for example. If your spending behavior deviates from "your norm" you may receive a friendly (usually an automated voice system [AVS]) call from the credit card company asking you to confirm recent purchases. If not, your card will be frozen, and you will be asked to speak to a real person who will basically do the same as the AVS, with the additional benefit of actually being able to ask them what triggered the process. At which point, they will likely explain that, for example, the sudden flurry of charges and diverse locations, triggered their fraud management system [FMS].

In the case of bitcoin transactions, my guess is that extremely large transactions could potentially trigger their seemingly "trigger happy" system. But that is primarily a guess based upon the various reports I've read. Even so, they do face a challenge that most banks do not. And that is the irreversible nature of bitcoin along with its distributed p2p transaction implementation. In fact, I strongly suspect that is one reason they've implemented their own "internal" bitcoin setup, which, if executed completely within coinbase, never touches the block chain.

And finally, as for false positives? This is where the AML/fraud department comes in. Their job is to investigate flagged transactions to determine whether it really meets the risk criteria. Importantly an experienced and well-trained AML/fraud team will be able to weed out most false positives, leaving the overall stats at under 5%.

As for false negatives? There really is no such thing. If a customer manages to complete criminal transactions without being flagged by the system, that would be considered a weakness in the system. And no system is fool proof and they're always evolving... as will coinbase, as will any company dipping their toe in the bitcoin waters.

Case in point (from the dark ages). A group of convicts figured out the credit card numbering scheme, proceeded to create fake credit card numbers, and made several mail order purchases (like I said, dark ages). There was not much that could be done from a prosecution pov. After all, they were already in jail. What did occur, however, is that little 3 digit number that is now printed on the back of cards... used to verify that yes, it is a valid card. That, along with the expiration date, and, in some cases, the customer's address, helps to reduce fraud.

Although I have not been flagged by their AML/AF system, I have been following these various discussions with interest.

While financial institutions are required to implement such a system, I, personally question their implementation. Having worked in both iSec and Banking fraud, I fully understanding the complexity of these systems... which primarily rely upon actuarial data and pattern/trend analysis to detect money laundering and/or fraud.

The primary problem I see with this implementation is that the filter is being applied after the fact. That is, rather than applying the filter prior to attempting to execute the transaction, they are applying it after the funds are withdrawn from the customer account. This leads me to wonder how much they truly understand about these sort of systems. And importantly, how little they seem to understand with regard to consumer perception.

That being said, the way these systems "should" be implemented is fairly simple.

Joe customer attempts to execute a buy/sell. The AML/AF filter should be applied before they try to execute a transaction with his bank, at which point, if he is flagged, he would be notified that the transaction did not complete, and why. Moreover, if the system is executed correctly, it should have less than 5% false positives. Though, if Joe customer is fairly new, there will not be enough data to necessarily correctly raise an alert. It is the over-time transaction activity of Joe customer that these systems monitor. For example, if Joe customer is a merchant, then his transaction activity will reflect commerce patterns. Whereas if he is a bitcoin speculator, his transaction activity will reflect stock market speculation patterns.

Regardless, the number of positives, true or false, should be low enough for their fraud team to review. Although, I suspect, given the small size of their company, they do not have a fraud team, and are relying upon a fully automated process. Which in turn, is likely playing a role in the seeming high number of false positives.

The aforementioned is, of course, nothing more than an oversimplified hypothetical, as I have no idea how this particular company has implemented their AML/AF system. I only have the 10K foot view based upon various customer complaints that have been posted to the forums and elsewhere. Nonetheless, from my pov, I do think this company needs to spend some time revisiting and revising their implementation. But that's just my opinion. And you know what they say about those.

As for claims that they are defrauding their customers? Serious claims, those. And, imho, wholly without merit.

And finally, as for the speed (or lack there of) of receiving BTCs, once purchased? That is one of the unfortunate challenges (that is company independent, btw) wrt mainstreaming bitcoins. Simply due to the irreversible nature of BTC as opposed to their reversible fiat counterpart.

57 please

Full article posted to reddit. Here's an excerpt (spacing added for readability).


Paper to presented in DC: PDF

Yes, they (barely) mention bitcoin. Importantly, the proposed model could change the bitcoin payment processing landscape. Hopefully, for the better.

The way you have been repeatedly pimping this leads me to think you're jabtcs.

Absolutely. The fees are arguably the only/primary downside. That, and that you'll likely end up with a few cents and a few lindens in your account after you've purchased your satoshis. Going in the other direction is also decent if you already have an SL account, bc you can convert your satoshis to lindens, send them to your SL account, sell the lindens on the SL exchange, and withdraw your money via paypal.

Check out the Genesis Block Mining Calculator. You can select different mining products, and their calculator will do the rest. Now, take a look at KnCminer... which appears to be the market leader at the moment. Select "Mercury" under their product list. Assuming you received the miner today, you could mine ~5.67 BTC. You would be mining zero BTC by next july. Your cumulative BTCs would be under 10. At today's market, that's about $2K. You've just paid for your equipment but will be no longer mining BTC.

Or, take that same $2K and sign up with a reputable exchange. Throw your money in that exchange, and wait for a market lull, then buy your BTCs. Sell them when the market peaks. Rinse repeat. If you're a decent investor, you could very well double your investment.

And finally, if you're intent on mining. Split your funds between purchasing BTCs and purchasing mining equipment (or, sign up for cloud mining). Keeping in mind you won't make an ROI from the mining portion of your investment. If you go the equipment route, hook it up, power it up, and point it at a pool, with a  minimum payout set, so that you'll automatically receive satoshis every so often.  let it crank along, while continuing to play the market with your BTC investment.

That said, I opted for the latter route... purchasing BTCs and dabbling in mining. For example, when I purchased my asic miner, it was already obsolete. That is, the big boys were already out the gate. Nonetheless, I still get a little bit from my mining, and it also gives me the opportunity to play with the mining code (i.e., cgminer, bfgminer, etc).