|
the difference between coinbase and blockchain.info is that you stay in control of your private keys and the server never receives them unencrypted.
so i trust it more than most other online wallets.
but: never store all eggs in one basket. everything is hackable ;(
|
|
|
|
Make a anonymized user list (I'll explain this below), publically post this list of users and their btc account balance, then sign messages to prove ownership of cold wallets. The total amount of coins in your wallets should match the total amount of coins on the list. Everybody can see their anonymized name in the list, and thus feels confident that he/she is included, and that the company has the funds.
Now the anonymization part: let users chose a password for the public balance, hash that password (or perhaps the concatenation of the username and that password to ensure that a certain combination doesn't occur twice), and use that hash as the username. You could also give users the option to split their account into several anonymized usernames, if they don't like it that their total btc number is shown publically.
at least for the exchange and trade wallet this should be possible (and done by every exchange). borrowed funds can be at bitstamp: i dont know how to proof that. |
|
|
|
Showing your wallet address to someone is like showing your bank account number to someone. Anyone can deposit money into it, if you're ok with it  there is a huge difference. you usually dont have very much bank accounts but everybody can have very much bitcoin addresses |
|
|
|
what do you think about gmaxwells proposal how an exchange can proof it has the coins?
its more difficult in your case, as you have also funds in bitstamp: but they have commited themselve to provide such a proof so it should be possible for you also.
gmaxwells proposal does not reveal how much user you have or how much fund an user owns.
can u provide a link? i wanna read up on it thanks.. "In order to re-establish the trust squandered by the failings of Mt. Gox, responsible bitcoin exchanges are working together and are committed to the future of bitcoin and the security of all customer funds. As part of the effort to re-assure customers, the following services will be coordinating efforts over the coming days to publicly reassure customers and the general public that all funds continue to be held in a safe and secure manner: Coinbase, Kraken, BitStamp, Circle, and BTC China." |
|
|
|
i know once your hot wallet gets empty, u guys will refill it up with your cold wallet... do u guys have only 1 cold wallet or many? from what i know once a cold wallet is activated online there is risk! and then the cold wallet becomes a hot wallet too I'll leave it up to Bitfinex to give an official statement on this and the safety of the Bitcoins. I'll just share this: I know for a fact it's both offline and multisig. We have multiple offline cold wallets, so that what allegedly happened to MtGox will never happen to us (i.e. we will never "discover" one day all the coins are gone). Thanks a lot and have a good day Giancarlo Bitfinex Team what do you think about gmaxwells proposal how an exchange can proof it has the coins? its more difficult in your case, as you have also funds in bitstamp: but they have commited themselve to provide such a proof so it should be possible for you also. gmaxwells proposal does not reveal how much user you have or how much fund an user owns. |
|
|
|
And everyone will know that as soon as the the 2016 block is done everything will be back to normal...
depends. the difficulty will only be lowered to a max amount (i think 30%, but not sure). there are alts which suffered from that. but i dont believe more than 30% of miners are quitting (are there even any quitting yet?) and i am sure we could make a fork to circumvent the problem |
|
|
|
new sig rules in place. any comment? Perhaps the allowed signature styling should change with activity score / membergroup. Like:
- Newbie: No styling (including links) allowed. Max 40 characters.
- Jr. Member: Links allowed. Max 100 characters.
- Member: Unlimited length.
- Full: Color allowed.
- Sr. Member: Size allowed
- Hero: Background color allowed
This is done, except that Newbies can use 50 characters and Jr. Members can use 150 characters. The style limitations are applied immediately, but the size limitations only apply when a signature is updated. Tell me if there are problems. EDIT: obviously i'd love high payouts for hero members  |
|
|
|
|
bitcoin is manipulated since exchanges exists.
just be smarter...
btw why do you think they are chinese? i have other people in my mind
|
|
|
|
|
why do you dont talk to bitstamp?
you could get to an agreement which would solve the deposit/withdraw problem.
btc can be solved with multi-sig: just let both sides sets up a service which signs transactions (eg bfx btc sold on stamp: bfx and stamp signs transaction to stamp, bfx btc sold on bfx: stamp signs that too and "withdraw" it). (i am sure there are better solutions than this: just a sleepy idea.)
usd can be handled with lawyers...
|
|
|
|
|
you forgot to add:
after a few announcments of new announments they finally managed to solve it themselves and continue.
but we have to understand that we are only allowed to withdraw 1btc/day because of the risk they take beeing the biggest exchange and permanently attacked.
|
|
|
|
I have been using tools such as https://www.coinlock.com and http://satoshibox.com/ to sell digital downloads. As a record label that uses bitcoin it would be useful to have a service that allows you to split the payment for the download between the label and the artist, let's say 50/50. 50% to the label wallet 50% to the artists wallet This would create a trustless system for artists and labels saving on admin and legal stuff. A step further would be to allow multiple addresses to be assigned percentages of the payment, providing royalties to all musicians involved. sounds like a nice idea for bitpay. what you can do: use a 2-2 multisig address. so at least no one can spent money without the other party signing it |
|
|
|
I mean if the coins get flagged they're meaningless as you can't use them.
lol? what do you mean by flagged? who do you expect to honor this flag? |
|
|
|
It basically boils down to this:
Any provably fair site can cheat its users if the users don't take the steps required to verify the fairness.
At Just-Dice, those steps are:
1) make a note of the server seed hash
2) set your own (unpredicable) client seed
3) play as much as you like, making a note of your rolls
4) verify the rolled numbers
doesn't step 2 require at least 100 rolls? if i understand you right doesnt that mean that you can cheat the first 100 rolls of every user? btw i am not concerned. i did choose just-dice because i do trust dooglus. i would never gamble anywhere where i do not trust the operator - even if they claim to be provable fair and has lots of trust of others and i did check the code. |
|
|
|
After appeals and a retrial, this case will conclude by 2018 at the earliest.
Money may be frozen before. afaik US funds are frozen a long time ago |
|
|
|
you could start bitcoin with -rescan to scan the blockchain again and please: dont delete wallet.dat  |
|
|
|
There was some discussion today that started around here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1yj5b5/unverified_pastebin_gmaxwell_irc_log_mtgox_was/cfkze3p and here's some more explanation: https://iwilcox.me.uk/v/nofracTL;DR exchanges can prove that: - they own specific amount of bitcoins
- and that your bitcoins on their exchange are included in this amount
But they are not doing this yet. I'd like to do something towards changing this. I'll give shout out to the first exchange that implements it on Bitcoinity, and it will be displayed for a week under the page title (where sponsors are displayed). Another 3 weeks are going to the first exchange that implements it with volume over 1k BTC over the last 30 days. Exchange must include BTC/USD pair and it's not relevant whether it's currently listed on Bitcoinity or not (although it must provide full API - list of latest trades and orderbook). I'm considering sorting exchanges not only by volume, but first including those that provide such proof if the idea works out. I love that idea. any exchange should do this a long time ago. do you have an idea how an exchange could implement this? maybe a unique token for every user (which only the user can see) and a public list with amounts and tokens? of course they would have to show their addresses to public (and sign a message or something to proove they have control). this can also be cheated (say you are an exchange and you just ask a whale if he would provide the prove for a small fee) EDIT: i see.. gmaxwells idea sounds very nice |
|
|
|
|
It should be possible to prepare the unspent outputs to the correct size (which would just require another transaction beforehand).
but i dont really like that idea (i dont like it that my bank does the same). wouldnt it be better to just split your bitcoin holdings to different addresses and put them in coldstorage.
whenever you need money you just pick one key from there
|
|
|
|
germany has something called "Verbraucherschutzverein" which sue's companys which dont follow german privacy laws. they dont do it for the cash - just to make sure germans get their right i dont care about account deletion btw. and i dont think bitcointalk has anything to fear as long as they dont plan to open an office inside eu. |
|
|
|
|
i wish they would close shop... but i dont believe so. i've heard that way to often but gox somehow survives
|
|
|
|
|
my account was not verified, and even before this hole desaster i was not able to withdraw anything (for whatever reason they blocked me and required verification).
as i only had around 50$ there (which i already have written off: not worth the verifiying) it does not really bugs me.
yesterday i tried to login and nothing happens (the login button switches to "Loading..." and then back to "Login"). today i tried with ff and chrome: same effect.
am i the only one?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
