Well, game theory shows that never works.  Nope, just surprised at how accurate that signal historically has been.   Maybe it is like rolling the same number five times in a row -- doesn't mean roll number six is any more likely or any more unlikely to be the same number.

But it isn't like some obscure concept.  It is a pattern that occurs what appears to be simply because bank wires don't clear on weekend days.

I don't know their exact situations but I do know that in the past weeks a new user that could not send to Mt. Gox was able to send to another Dwolla user.  I didn't get the details, perhaps only certain combinations work.

I was just going to be the guinea pig and do a trial, but my Dwolla account required me to verify my ID, so I submitted it and it is now getting reviewed.  But when that completes, I'll accept a $1 transfer (which I'll then return) just to test if a new user (within the 30 day) can send to me (hopefully not a "high risk" account.)

There is an Important Announcements forum board.  A thread for this issue was (eventually) created there:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=87.0


Some people got an e-mail initially ... though it was only saying API keys might have been compromised.  It even said "No accounts were compromised financially nor was there any access to coins or any funds. Our system are separated to protect against this.":

 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=105079.msg1159003#msg1159003

There was then many hours that passed before the "bitfloor needs your help!" forum post.

The normal procedure for using a hosted (shared) EWallet is to create a new deposit address before each transfer.

Anyone not doing that but instead is re-using a BitFloor deposit address is probably a miner or for receiving some other type of withdrawal.  If BitFloor was offline, then there was no was no way to obtain a new Bitcoin deposit address.   If it was a miner payout, the upside was that the amount sent was probably not all that much (e.g., just hit the payout threshold).

Of course, the best course of action would have been for BitFloor to send an E-mail to all users immediately when it was ascertained that there had been a compromise -- and included explicit instruction to no longer deposit funds and to halt any automated transfers.

After the Linode outage a few days earlier which took BitFloor down, written was:


But that had not been implemented yet.

If you wish to have automated transfers to a static bitcoin address then the most secure solution is likely to have it be an address that you control.  Creating a paper bitcoin and using that for your mining payouts or dividends or whatever is a good approach.  Then when you want to spend using those funds, you simply scan the QR code and spend then (e.g., on Blockchain.info/wallet - import function).

 - http://www.BitAddress.org

The problem is likely that you are misunderstanding a detail specific to how Bitcoin works. 

Your PC's wallet for the Bitcoin.org client doesn't hold bitcoin in "an address" your bitcoin holds transactions for many addresses.

As a result, if you try to monitor the wallet balance from another tool, such as that Android app, it will not stay in synch because it doesn't know all of the addresses that the Bitcoin.org client holds.

There is no good method for monitoring the balance of the Bitcoin.org wallet, other than the Bitcoin-qt client itself.

If you want to be able to access a wallet from both your PC and a mobile client, use a wallet that support that.

For instance, Blockchain.info/wallet is a hybrid EWallet that can be accessed from the web as well as from the Blockchain for Android (and for iOS) mobile client.  That service stores only an encrypted copy of your wallet so the site itself doesn't have access to your private keys.

There are hosted (shared) EWallets as well ... Paytunia's wallet is accessible from the web and from Android.

Weekend dip indicator is GREEN:

Will the weekend dip strategy pay off a second week in a row?  

The high for the previous seven days was yesterday's  ... $11-ish print.   The high in the previous seven day period was above $12.  So we are in a week-to-week downtrend, and the weekend dip strategy says that when this occurs, doing a SELL on Wednesday evening (west) / Thursday morning (east) has historically given the opportunity to buy those coins back at a cheaper rate over the weekend (check the chart starting on Saturday, and if the prices start rising to buy back in -- otherwise can wait until early Monday even to buy back.).

The concern for this weekend might be that lots of USDs were withdrawn from BitFloor today.  If those USDs clear tomorrow and then get deposited elsewhere for credit to another exchange, they might represent pending purchases that were held-up due to the BitFloor security breach.  Personally, I doubt that is going to be a significant amount of funds for that purpose, so ... GREEN light, sell!    The current price is $11, but I'm a little late on posting this, the proper amount should have been at a level a little lower, about $10.80, so that's the amount I'll use in determining if the weekend dip strategy succeeded yet again at generating profit.

Doh!  Brain fart ... I should have remembered that.  So I still can make money betting against ET, awesome!

December 2nd!

86 days left.

The "two week" adjustment cycles are arriving in 12.5 days, 12.7 days at this pace of growth:



 - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmcTCtjBoRWUdHVRMHpqWUJValI1RlZiaEtCT1RrQmc

BitFloor is currently processing ALL withdrawal requests for ALL USD funds for ALL customers.

What this means is that the only creditors remaining will be those who had BTC balances, and those BTCs are gone.  BitFloor is insolvent.  

Shitty situation.  Someone could file an injunction to try to halt the USD withdrawals, but I doubt anyone has done that or is going to do that.  There still is a chance to clawback some of the funds that were withdrawn as some creditors were paid out and others weren't.  But that would require forcing BitFloor to file bankruptcy and a legal mess to follow to try to get blood out of a turnip.

Hindsight, ... be more careful with whom you trust your bitcoins.

[Fair disclosure, I had some bitcoins at BitFloor, and no USDs.]

SpendBitcoins was, but no longer as they no longer serve the U.S. market.


BTCBuy.info has been offering them for quite some time:

 - http://btcbuy.info/GiftCards.cshtml

Recently another vendor, BTCJoe offers them:

 - http://www.btcjoe.com

You probably see a lot more failed attempts of people trying to do exchange using MoneyPak.  

The problem is no commercial service can accept MoneyPak as payment for the purchase of bitcoins.  Green Dot doesn't want that happening.  They only allow you using the MoneyPak codes with authorized merchants or for loading funds to your own debit card.  So the only ones where trading MoneyPak for bitcoins  is happening is with individuals who accept MoneyPak for payment when selling bitcoins person-to-person and are small enough to operate below Green Dot's radar.  The person that accepts MoneyPak then uses it to load a PayPal account to to add funds to a reloadable debit card.

Cashing out your bitcoins to MoneyPak is not a problem, and there are a couple of commercial services which offer this:

 - http://www.BTCPak.com
 - http://www.FastCash4Bitcoins.com  [Update: Discontinued cash-out to MoneyPak]
 
While you will see individuals offering this as well, you would only want to trade with someone with an established trust history.  The reason is that a MoneyPak is a bearer instrument -- anyone that knows the code can spend it.   There are a few ways these MoneyPak codes can end up in the hands of theives and criminal hackers who then trade them with you.  After a trade you might see the funds loaded to your account but then later they get reversed after the rightful owner reports the theft.   To regain access to the funds, you need to provide to Green Dot a copy of the receipt used to purchase the MoneyPak, using cash.  Even with that, if there is someone else with the same receipt reporting the theft, you would lose the dispute as you weren't the party that bought the MoneyPak from the store.

Essentially, MoneyPak is a decent method for cashing out bitcoins if you can trust the party who is providing the code to you.  They are almost never a good way for you to buy bitcoins either -- again, unless the seller can be trusted or sends the bitcoins to you first, and the transaction confirms.

To know if a counterpary is trustworthy, the #bitcoin-otc Web of Trust (WoT) will show trust history of the trader.  If you are trading your bitcoins for someone else's MoneyPak, that is something you only want to do after reviewing that history and even then proceed with caution.

 - http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/MoneyPak

BitFloor files complaint with FBI and Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3).
September 6, 2012
Location: New York City, NY USA

Abstract: BitFloor suffered a security breach/hack in which about 24,000 BTC were stolen after access by the hacker was obtained to an unencrypted backup copy of the private keys hosted on BitFloor's systems.  The exchange is essentially insolvent as a result and remains shuttered, except for facilitating withdrawals for the funds that weren't stolen -- the U.S. dollar balances, none of which were impacted as a result of the security breach.

 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=106251.0

I bet they've got someone who has been just itching for a set of blockchain data tied to identities, to use in matching up BTC withdrawals from a U.S.-based exchange against addresses associated with SR:



 - http://www.BlockViewer.com
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=103609.0

Mt. Gox customizes the Yubikey .. it is not the same as the yubikey that you would buy from Yubikey. 

You can use the Mt. Gox key for static passwords I believe, but no the One Time Passwords (OTP).

Like this?



 - http://blog.ezyang.com/2012/07/secure-multiparty-bitcoin-anonymization/

Not really "ANYONE" but all those flagged as being "high risk".  Dwolla probably determines that an individual who transfers to or from an exchange also is a high risk, thus that limits the options for the new Dwolla accountholder that is still in the 30-day probationary period.

This type of request occurs every once in a while:

 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98685.0

Sounds like there is demand.   It could be offered anonymously.  It is surprising nobody has become the "for-hire movie download source"

The client will notice that it isn't getting confirmed and will eventually (e.g., in a half hour or less) rebroadcast  the transaction.   It will keep doing this (checking and sending about every half hour) until it does eventually get confirmed.    Obviously, if the program isn't running it can't perform this check.  But you'll never lose this transaction ...  with the exception where from another copy of the same wallet you might end up doing a double spend of the coins that this poorly transmitted transaction was also using.

Tarrant_01 will deposit cash to your Wells Fargo account, 2.25% fee:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82983.0

There might be someone locally willing to do a trade with you:

 - http://www.LocalBitcoins.com

It can change the makeup of a wallet where there is much less taint in the coins held.  It does leave a direct trace to every wager, and thus for the purpose of mixing fails miserably.

This topic is discussed here:
 - http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79079.0

I ordered a refill, and on the page where it gives me the Bitcoin address and QR code, it is missing an important detail ... the amount (in BTCs) that I am supposed to send.


It looks like there was supposed to be some amount displayed there in the paren, but for whatever reason, didn't happen.

Incidentally, the first line has a grammatical error ... "Action is required on your partNo."     "No."?

This is the URL for the page I am describing:

 - http://btcbuy.info/CallingCardBuy.cshtml

I was able to see the amount from the e-mail, so I was able to complete this order, but for others or for next time for me, the "send payment" page should probably state the amount to send.