Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[JorgeStolfi]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

[1618445611]

1618445611

[1618445611]

1618445611

[1618445611]

1618445611

[JorgeStolfi]

Does anyone know how the Chinese banks work daily? That might play a role if the Huobi volume is credible.

As others have pointed out, the Chinese New Year holidays last a couple of weeks, and presumably have started already.

[fonzie]

So are we going to see a triple top and triple bull trap if there should be another huge rallye anywhere in the future?

[T.Stuart]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

Please quote the part of the article where the author claims bitcoins cannot be stolen?

[WeltMaster]

So are we going to see a triple top and triple bull trap if there should be another huge rallye anywhere in the future?

>bulltraps
>on MY bitcoin

 ishygddt

[adamstgBit]

i think sideways till next week. next week we will see dumps in anticipation of china confirming the bad news, then china will indeed confirm the bad news markets will plummet and bounce back everyone all the hodlers will be like "that wasn't so bad", everyone feels its safe to buy cheap 6XX$ coins, price doubles in 2 weeks time, poeple start seeing ATH! suddenly no one gives a shit about china and all they see is $_$, a mega bubble form hell forms everyone feels rich and go out spending $'s while hodling bitcoin, which improves the economy, then the bitcoin bubble pops at 32,000$, by that time everyone has spent all their fiats, and   so    a   comet hits the earth and kills everyone! obama's dog is the only survivor because we was hanging out in the bunker when the comet hit, doggies around the world start trading doggy coins for goods and services.

[fonzie]

 

[KFR]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

Please quote the part of the article where the author claims bitcoins cannot be stolen?

Well either it's trolling or I don't think he understood the article at all.  The only time theft is discussed is the theft of customer credit card information from Target.  He uses the example to illustrate how, with Bitcoin transactions, Target wouldn't store any customer data and therefore could not lose it.

I would also like to point out that I have a private key memorized.  Nobody's worked out a way to hack human memory as far as I'm aware.

[burple]

obama's dog is the only survivor because we was hanging out in the bunker when the comet hit, doggies around the world start trading doggy coins for goods and services.

If obama's dog is the only survivor, what other doggies can it trade with?

[T.Stuart]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

Please quote the part of the article where the author claims bitcoins cannot be stolen?

Come on JorgeStolfi. Explain how you understood Andreessen to be saying Bitcoins can't be stolen... otherwise I believe you are just trolling... 

[JorgeStolfi]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

Please quote the part of the article where the author claims bitcoins cannot be stolen?

For example, with Bitcoin, the huge hack that recently stole 70 million consumers’ credit card information from the Target department store chain would not have been possible. [...] you are happy because there is no way for hackers to steal any of your personal information; and organized crime is unhappy. (Well, maybe criminals are still happy: They can try to steal money directly from poorly-secured merchant computer systems. But even if they succeed, consumers bear no risk of loss, fraud or identity theft.)

Indeed he was referring only to stealing your bitcoins by hacking into the merchant.  But what will the common reader understand when he reads "organized crime is unhappy", "consumers bear no risk of loss, fraud or identity theft"? 

Why did he not point out that bitcoins have other serious risks that credit card users will not expect? Fine to bring up the Target case, but should he not mention SheepMarketplace too?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[KFR]

Again, he was pointing out that Bitcoin transactions do not require the merchant to receive any payment-authorising information and how this was a distinct advantage over credit card transactions.  Nowhere was he saying coins couldn't be stolen.

I am though.  I have bitcoins in my head.  They can't be stolen.

[JorgeStolfi]

I would also like to point out that I have a private key memorized.  Nobody's worked out a way to hack human memory as far as I'm aware.

In order to use your bitcoins, at some point the key have to be entered into a computer... 

[David M]

I am though.  I have bitcoins in my head.  They can't be stolen.

Yet.

http://www.nature.com/news/brain-decoding-reading-minds-1.13989

[fonzie]

I´m in love with Willy´s red fiend(maybe his evil twin brother).

[WeltMaster]

When capitulation does happen we will bounce back, people lose faith in other bubbles like tulips because they are not backed by fundamentals when things look most bearish.

Something with great fundamentals like Bitcoin or BitTorrent (if it had a value) do bubble from runaway optimism/profits but they will be backed in the end by the usability. Until that stops Bitcoin will be bullish.

[xyzzy099]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

Please quote the part of the article where the author claims bitcoins cannot be stolen?

I would like to see that quote too.

@JorgeStolfi, I am just trying to expand your view of Bitcoin, but you seem to be more interested in finding a point of argument over some detail in each article.  I guess maybe you already knew all this about what Bitcoin is, and what it can be, and I am just wasting your time.  Sorry about that.

[T.Stuart]

This article by Mark Andreessen

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/why-bitcoin-matters/

claims that Bitcoins cannot be stolen.  But of course they can, if people keep the keys in an easily hackeable computer or smartphone (which increasingly means "any computer"), or hand over their bitcoins to exchanges.  (How can he say that that after the SheepMarketplace incident?)

In a sense, it is your computer, not you, who owns "your" bitcoins; and if Apple or the NSA or the Russian mafia control your computer, they will control your bitcoins too.

Indeed stealing Bitcoins is easier and "safer" than stealing credit cards, because a virus can spend your bitcoins as soon as it infects your computer, whereas cashing out from a stolen card usually implies human intervention, delays, checks, etc.

Please quote the part of the article where the author claims bitcoins cannot be stolen?

For example, with Bitcoin, the huge hack that recently stole 70 million consumers’ credit card information from the Target department store chain would not have been possible. [...] you are happy because there is no way for hackers to steal any of your personal information; and organized crime is unhappy. (Well, maybe criminals are still happy: They can try to steal money directly from poorly-secured merchant computer systems. But even if they succeed, consumers bear no risk of loss, fraud or identity theft.)

Indeed he was referring only to stealing your bitcoins by hacking into the merchant.  But what will the common reader understand when he reads "organized crime is unhappy", "consumers bear no risk of loss, fraud or identity theft"? 

Why did he not point out that bitcoins have other serious risks that credit card users will not expect? Fine to bring up the Target case, but should he not mention SheepMarketplace too?

The article is extremely well-written and not deceptive. It is in fact the clearest, most accurate article I think I have ever read about Bitcoin in the mainstream media. If the common reader simply reads the article without distraction (it is perhaps a little longer than your average Bitcoin article) I fail to see how they could interpret what he is saying in any other way.

I must say, JorgeStolfi, you do seem to be clutching at straws with your attack on this. In some of your posts you seem to be very scientific in your approach to whatever you are discussing. I would have thought an article like this would appeal to you over sensationalist articles about drug marketplaces. What's with the change in attitude?

[notme]

I would also like to point out that I have a private key memorized.  Nobody's worked out a way to hack human memory as far as I'm aware.

In order to use your bitcoins, at some point the key have to be entered into a computer... 

Only the signature needs to be input.  This could be worked out on paper from the transaction and the private key.