Noob questions

[jorlowitz]

Hi, I'm just getting started with bitcoins (well, I've read about 20 hours worth of webpages).  I still have a few questions.

1.  How long, start to finish, does it take to create and fund a dwolla account and purchase bitcoins on mtgox?

2.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because so much of its liquidity depends on mtgox?

3.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because the developers are few and could be influenced?

4.  How long does it take to be able to post outside of this sub-forum?

Thanks and hello!

[nmat]

Hi, I'm just getting started with bitcoins (well, I've read about 20 hours worth of webpages).  I still have a few questions.

1.  How long, start to finish, does it take to create and fund a dwolla account and purchase bitcoins on mtgox?

2.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because so much of its liquidity depends on mtgox?

3.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because the developers are few and could be influenced?

4.  How long does it take to be able to post outside of this sub-forum?

Thanks and hello!

2. Sort of. Feel free to use other exchanges. I suggest CampBX or TradeHill.
3. No. Everyone needs to agree on a fundamental change (miners and consequently users). If you don't like what is being done, you can use an alternative crypto-currency or create your own.
4. Read the stickies

[notawake]

...
1.  How long, start to finish, does it take to create and fund a dwolla account and purchase bitcoins on mtgox?
...

I did this last week for the first time. The main bottleneck was the ACH into Dwolla, which took five weekdays. Once that was done, the transfer from Dwolla to MtGox and the subsequent purchase of Bitcoins was quick, maybe within 15-30 minutes or so after the ACH completed.

[Stephen Gornick]

1.  How long, start to finish, does it take to create and fund a dwolla account and purchase bitcoins on mtgox?

About six to eight business days, in most instances.

When you first sign up to Dwolla and link your bank account, Dwolla will push a set of two transactions to your account.  That will take three business days, in most instances, before those amounts will appear in your bank account.  Once you confirm those amounts with Dwolla you will then be able to have Dwolla initiate a transfer of funds from your bank.  That also will take three business days, in most instances.  So at best, you are at six business days.  The time of day the actions are performed is a factor as well.  If you do a transaction late afternoon or in the evening, that action will likely be treated as if it happened the next business day.

Of course, once the funds have reached in Dwolla the transfer to an exchange is fairly quick ... like under an hour for most (e.g., w/ Mt. Gox)

These delays through Dwolla are just the nature of how the banking ACH network operates.  If you need a smallish amount of funds transferred sooner, you can deposit cash at a bank (as described by the exchange http://www.getbitcoin.com or by the intermediary, http://www.bitinstant.com which uses http://Trustcash.com ).   If you are transferring a larger amount (e.g., $1,000 or more range) a bank wire is the fastest and least expensive method.

[notawake]

...
When you first sign up to Dwolla and link your bank account, Dwolla will push a set of two transactions to your account.  That will take three business days, in most instances, before those amounts will appear in your bank account.  Once you confirm those amounts with Dwolla you will then be able to have Dwolla initiate a transfer of funds from your bank.
...

I had done this about a month ago and I completely forgot about including it in my time frame.

[jorlowitz]

Cool, thanks for the answers folks.  6 days for dwolla is a long time!  I can see why bitinstant is so useful (except for the 5% fee).  Hopefully I'll be able to post in the rest of the forum soon.

[finway]

Good questions.

3.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because the developers are few and could be influenced?

I think it is .

[abaaj]

4. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15958.0

[DmanX]

On getbitcoin.com... if you deposit into their account at a local branch, expect your bitcoins in 14 to 20 hours currently. I did 5 transactions in December and all of them took about 16 hours on avg. If you do any single transaction over $1000, they require your social security and ID. So keep it under that.

[Stephen Gornick]

If you do any single transaction over $1000, they require your social security and ID. So keep it under that.

They being the bank or they being GetBitcoin?

[MoonShadow]

Hi, I'm just getting started with bitcoins (well, I've read about 20 hours worth of webpages).  I still have a few questions.

1.  How long, start to finish, does it take to create and fund a dwolla account and purchase bitcoins on mtgox?

2.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because so much of its liquidity depends on mtgox?

3.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because the developers are few and could be influenced?

4.  How long does it take to be able to post outside of this sub-forum?

Thanks and hello!

1) No idea.  I've never bought bitcoins this way.

2) Vulnerable to what, exactly? 

3) Again, vulnerable in what way?

4) Not long.

[nmat]

Just to elaborate on number 2 (the MtGox question), Bitcoin itself is not vulnerable because MtGox has nothing to do with the Bitcoin protocol. The vulnerability I see is just psychological... Quoting slush:
 

Well, *technically* it's not dangerous for p2p network, of course. But crash of MtGox (for any stupid reason like they get busted for keeping marijuana in their office?) would be the real disaster for Bitcoin project and economy. Mostly because they hold milions of bitcoins and some huge amount of dollars. Many bitcoin businesses are holding funds there. Also trust in whole concept will be shaken a LOT ("where we should keep our funds when *even MtGox* is gone?"). I believe that only few believers will remain here after such disaster scenario.

[Dutch Merganser]

Just to elaborate on number 2 (the MtGox question), Bitcoin itself is not vulnerable because MtGox has nothing to do with the Bitcoin protocol. The vulnerability I see is just psychological... Quoting slush:
 

Well, *technically* it's not dangerous for p2p network, of course. But crash of MtGox (for any stupid reason like they get busted for keeping marijuana in their office?) would be the real disaster for Bitcoin project and economy. Mostly because they hold milions of bitcoins and some huge amount of dollars. Many bitcoin businesses are holding funds there. Also trust in whole concept will be shaken a LOT ("where we should keep our funds when *even MtGox* is gone?"). I believe that only few believers will remain here after such disaster scenario.

What happened to the robust nature of this decentralized network? Oops, never mind, it really isn't. Back to the drawing board 

[MoonShadow]

Just to elaborate on number 2 (the MtGox question), Bitcoin itself is not vulnerable because MtGox has nothing to do with the Bitcoin protocol. The vulnerability I see is just psychological... Quoting slush:
 

Well, *technically* it's not dangerous for p2p network, of course. But crash of MtGox (for any stupid reason like they get busted for keeping marijuana in their office?) would be the real disaster for Bitcoin project and economy. Mostly because they hold milions of bitcoins and some huge amount of dollars. Many bitcoin businesses are holding funds there. Also trust in whole concept will be shaken a LOT ("where we should keep our funds when *even MtGox* is gone?"). I believe that only few believers will remain here after such disaster scenario.

What happened to the robust nature of this decentralized network? Oops, never mind, it really isn't. Back to the drawing board 

The network is very robust, it can't be forcibly stopped without destroying the Internet itself. For that matter, not all of the nodes can even be identified.  A crash at MtGox would, at worst, cause a crisis of confidence.  I doubt even that, because it's already happened and we are all still here.  I bought bitcoins before Mtgox was around, and I'm sure I'll do it again without them.  A market majority position doesn't imply that they are a critical component of the bitcoin infrastructure.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Cool, thanks for the answers folks.  6 days for dwolla is a long time!  I can see why bitinstant is so useful (except for the 5% fee).  Hopefully I'll be able to post in the rest of the forum soon.

The first transaction from a new bank account take ~6 days because of the verification.  Every transaction after that take more like ~3 days.  I have had it occasionally complete in 2 days (timing of when bank if open and when ACH actually goes through has a lot to do w/ it).

Dwolla also offers an option for instant cash but it doesn't apply on first transaction (due to verification) AND it costs $3 per month.

One nice thing is that Dwolla offers free instant ACH withdraws.  So I mine, exchange on Mt Gox, and do a Dwolla withdraw.  As soon as that hits my Dwolla account (usually 30 min) Dwolla instantly does an ACH deposit to my bank account and funds are usually in my bank account in 48 hours.

[SkRRJyTC]

Good questions.

3.  Isn't bitcoin vulnerable because the developers are few and could be influenced?

I think it is .

Is the number of developers limited in some way?  Im sure if you can code you can be a developer too.

[tlhonmey]

3.  The main issue I see here is that the official client doesn't have signatures (at least, not easily findable ones) available to verify that it hasn't been tampered with.  There could, therefore, theoretically be someone who hacks the mirrors or a malicious network admin who alters it in transit if it's downloaded over non-SSL.  But, since the protocol is open, any such problem is on a per-client basis, and there are enough people who *do* inspect the source code in at least a cursory fashion that any egregious theft attempt will likely be noticed and the community warned.  At which point the developers responsible would have a difficult time finding work ever again.  Assuming that it's not a matter of a government rubber-hosing them, in which case they're probably already having trouble finding work due to incarceration...

[MoonShadow]

3.  The main issue I see here is that the official client doesn't have signatures (at least, not easily findable ones) available to verify that it hasn't been tampered with.  There could, therefore, theoretically be someone who hacks the mirrors or a malicious network admin who alters it in transit if it's downloaded over non-SSL.  But, since the protocol is open, any such problem is on a per-client basis, and there are enough people who *do* inspect the source code in at least a cursory fashion that any egregious theft attempt will likely be noticed and the community warned.  At which point the developers responsible would have a difficult time finding work ever again.  Assuming that it's not a matter of a government rubber-hosing them, in which case they're probably already having trouble finding work due to incarceration...

The sigs are available, but apparently not on the main bitcoin.com site via http.  That should be fixed.