|
|
|
belmonty
|
 |
August 04, 2016, 10:58:44 PM |
|
 from a reddit post Is that saying Bitcoin is dead and is heading nowhere but down? From Bitcoinity  If Bitcoin is dead why has it bounced back to $580? Shouldn't there only be dump after dump until it's back below $1? Its price is volatile today but its staying above $500, and keeps testing the high $500s. Bullish |
|
|
|
|
JimboToronto
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 4200
Merit: 4903
You're never too old to think young.
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:13:30 PM |
|
Exactly.
It's pretty much where it was this morning.
|
|
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:14:19 PM |
|
people also have to keep in mind that all this bullshit doesn't create real growth but nominal growth. wow some macro-economic discussion, analysis and healthy cynicism on this thread ... amaze me!!  when people realize its all bullshit and nominal growth is not real growth then money-printing (in all it's forms) stops working since the nominal (fake) growth is designed to fool people into thinking there is real growth and act on that falsehood to create the real growth ... it's a mirage designed to spook the herd into spending, working, etc, running on the hamster wheel faster |
|
|
|
|
|
155UE
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:17:04 PM |
|
Interesting way to offshoot this incident they had. To use another exchange to get their crediability back in order. I don't know if it is going to fly though but it is worth a shot cause they have nothing more to lose, in the customer's confidence that is.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimboToronto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4200
Merit: 4903
You're never too old to think young.
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:21:36 PM |
|
people also have to keep in mind that all this bullshit doesn't create real growth but nominal growth. Bread and circuses. |
|
|
|
|
European Central Bank
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1288
Merit: 1087
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:23:03 PM |
|
I think it's probably total junk. there's so many rumors flying around that people are having fun fabricating things. we'll see. they'll have to come out with some kind of answer relatively soon. i'll be surprised if this is it.
|
|
|
|
|
yefi
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2842
Merit: 1511
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:26:46 PM |
|
I thought they lost less than half the coins, so why the 63% haircut? I wouldn't be surprised if they did try to go down this route, however. When Poloniex got hacked for 10-15% they did similarly, with a haircut and then gradual reimbursement from their trading fees. Running fractional reserve, in contract, would just cause a run on withdrawals. |
|
|
|
|
|
belmonty
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:40:40 PM |
|
I thought they lost less than half the coins, so why the 63% haircut? I wouldn't be surprised if they did try to go down this route, however. When Poloniex got hacked for 10-15% they did similarly, with a haircut and then gradual reimbursement from their trading fees. Running fractional reserve, in contract, would just cause a run on withdrawals. Zanetackett refuses to dismiss the haircut route, but says any haircut estimations (like 63%) are false. Poloniex got hacked for a relatively small amount, and still took forever to pay everyone back. How much does Bitfinex earn in fees, and how long would it take to pay everyone back out of them? https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/4vtv1m/bitfinex_down_due_to_bitcoin_security_breach/d64magfSo you're confirming that there are no plans for a haircut of any kind? https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/4vtv1m/bitfinex_down_due_to_bitcoin_security_breach/d64m7qdNo. I'm saying that any haircut estimations are false. |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3906
Merit: 11182
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:47:53 PM |
|
Sure, there may be some better ways and better systems to accomplish the same thing, yet at the same time, the whole BTC infrastructure is developing and evolving and in that regard, a lot of this exchange activity is inevitable...
Now I agree with you on a personal level there are ways to preserve and secure value, but if everyone did the same as you, including institutions, who the hell knows where bitcoin's price would be or if bitcoin would be as developed as it is.
In any event, as an individual acting in the ecosystem, each of us can choose an approach balancing risk and reward that hopefully fits with his/her personal situation.
Fair enough, but at this stage I'll be selfish and think of my own security first.  Nothing wrong with that... ... Part of the rationale behind efficient market theories is for folks to act in their own self-interests, and to consider what they believe to be their own self-interests from their own perspective. Of course they may get it wrong from time to time, but still.... Kind of related to this whole matter, we have quite a few posts in this thread in which posters are attempting to lecture other folks about what they believe to be in the other person's interest or in the interest of folks who have funds on bitfinex as if they know what is in the self-interests of those bitfinex account holders. That's all fine and dandy, if you happen to have enough information about the other guy's situation. On the other hand, there may be some guys who may have some unrealistic expectations of wanting to have their cake and eat it too. the balance is not always going to be clear... Bitfinex does have a duty to communicate about this matter and they have a duty to the users of their system, yet at the same time, we continue to kind of shoot in the dark regarding what is actually going on, what happened and what the path forward is going to be. Bitfinex agents are surely weighing their options in order to figure out how to deal with this matter in ways to carry out their duties to their customers while weighing the feasibility of their business model and security practices (that is to the extent that they may not be totally scamming, which seems to be a low possibility, even though the nicest of folks may turn into scammers, if they realize that the scammy option is the most feasible under the current circumstances). |
|
|
|
|
UngratefulTony
Member
Offline
Activity: 115
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2016, 11:58:34 PM |
|
Sure, there may be some better ways and better systems to accomplish the same thing, yet at the same time, the whole BTC infrastructure is developing and evolving and in that regard, a lot of this exchange activity is inevitable...
Now I agree with you on a personal level there are ways to preserve and secure value, but if everyone did the same as you, including institutions, who the hell knows where bitcoin's price would be or if bitcoin would be as developed as it is.
In any event, as an individual acting in the ecosystem, each of us can choose an approach balancing risk and reward that hopefully fits with his/her personal situation.
Fair enough, but at this stage I'll be selfish and think of my own security first. Nothing wrong with that... ... Part of the rationale behind efficient market theories is for folks to act in their own self-interests, and to consider what they believe to be their own self-interests from their own perspective. Of course they may get it wrong from time to time, but still.... Kind of related to this whole matter, we have quite a few posts in this thread in which posters are attempting to lecture other folks about what they believe to be in the other person's interest or in the interest of folks who have funds on bitfinex as if they know what is in the self-interests of those bitfinex account holders. That's all fine and dandy, if you happen to have enough information about the other guy's situation. On the other hand, there may be some guys who may have some unrealistic expectations of wanting to have their cake and eat it too. the balance is not always going to be clear... Bitfinex does have a duty to communicate about this matter and they have a duty to the users of their system, yet at the same time, we continue to kind of shoot in the dark regarding what is actually going on, what happened and what the path forward is going to be. Bitfinex agents are surely weighing their options in order to figure out how to deal with this matter in ways to carry out their duties to their customers while weighing the feasibility of their business model and security practices (that is to the extent that they may not be totally scamming, which seems to be a low possibility, even though the nicest of folks may turn into scammers, if they realize that the scammy option is the most feasible under the current circumstances). I didn't read your post but I assume it is some kind of twisted logic on why you let others hold your BTC for you. Well, you did that, and now some of your BTC are gone. You were derided repeatedly for keeping all your coins on exchanges... and now you've paid a cost for that. Either you learn a lesson from this and do a little research on how to properly secure your own keys, or, you don't. It is was your money.  |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3906
Merit: 11182
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
August 05, 2016, 12:05:28 AM |
|
[edited out]
I didn't read your post but I assume it is some kind of twisted logic on why you let others hold your BTC for you. Well, you did that, and now some of your BTC are gone. You were derided repeatedly for keeping all your coins on exchanges... and now you've paid a cost for that. Either you learn a lesson from this and do a little research on how to properly secure your own keys, or, you don't. It is was your money. If you at least do not take time to read my relatively short post, then I am not going to take time to respond to your stupid-ass repetitive trolling comments, Lambie, aka... you fucking goofball.  |
|
|
|
|
UngratefulTony
Member
Offline
Activity: 115
Merit: 10
|
|
August 05, 2016, 12:23:32 AM |
|
I didn't read your post but I assume it is some kind of twisted logic on why you let others hold your BTC for you. Well, you did that, and now some of your BTC are gone. You were derided repeatedly for keeping all your coins on exchanges... and now you've paid a cost for that. Either you learn a lesson from this and do a little research on how to properly secure your own keys, or, you don't. It is was your money. If you at least do not take time to read my relatively short post, then I am not going to take time to respond to your stupid-ass repetitive trolling comments, Lambie, aka... you fucking goofball. Listening to my "stupid-ass repetitive trolling comments" about using exchanges as banks would have saved you money, i.e. you'd have more money than you do today, remember that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
yefi
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2842
Merit: 1511
|
|
August 05, 2016, 12:46:38 AM |
|
Zanetackett refuses to dismiss the haircut route, but says any haircut estimations (like 63%) are false. Poloniex got hacked for a relatively small amount, and still took forever to pay everyone back. How much does Bitfinex earn in fees, and how long would it take to pay everyone back out of them?
Well, a long time. Say roughly 0.1% fees on 200K per week equals about 10K BTC per year. 15% cut of lending fees would net around 1-2 million per year in USD also (about 3K BTC per year). I scan my actual paper-and-toner wallets, copy them to multiple encrypted microSD cards, hide them well in multiple offsite stashes, and then securely shred the original files and tear up the original printed wallets and flush them down the toilet.
Flash memory has limited data retention, have you taken precautions against this? |
|
|
|
|
JimboToronto
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4200
Merit: 4903
You're never too old to think young.
|
|
August 05, 2016, 01:17:35 AM |
|
I scan my actual paper-and-toner wallets, copy them to multiple encrypted microSD cards, hide them well in multiple offsite stashes, and then securely shred the original files and tear up the original printed wallets and flush them down the toilet.
Flash memory has limited data retention, have you taken precautions against this? Only to the extent of checking them from time to time. If one were to fail, I'd replace it with a copy from one of the other. Personally, I've never had an SD card or SSD fail and I was an early adopter of SSDs. I'd hate to admit what I paid for my first PATA 32GB Memorite SSD almost a decade ago but it's still running fine. When OCZ brought out their first Vertex SATA SSDs, I replaced my Raptor RAID-0 array with 4 of them. When I got my first Revodrive PCIe RAID SSD card, the Vertex cards went into netbooks. All are still working as far AFAIK. The only flash memory I've had fail were USB keys and that was probably due to physical abuse.  |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3906
Merit: 11182
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
|
|
August 05, 2016, 01:19:47 AM |
|
Thanks for that link ECB... The post pretty much states that Bitfinex is going to make a more official update tomorrow, but in the meantime, like you said, Bitfinex is considering a way to socialize losses amongst Bitfinex BTC holders. I don't really have a problem with socialized loss in the sense that Bitfinex would later pay back those "losers"... yet, I believe that they are not considering paying back the "losers"... I think that it is a bit irresponsible to cause the users to hold the bag... and even though we are finding out some details, we still have to wait for more specifics, which seems to be scheduled to come out tomorrow. |
|
|
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
August 05, 2016, 01:28:41 AM |
|
from a reddit post so market was moving hours before or after the coins moved? i'm not sure i see a correlation coinbase fud was full on during the selling also bitfinex said they lost 119K not 180K the two smaller moves are probably just normal random movements and unrelated? |
|
|
|
|
|
belmonty
|
|
August 05, 2016, 01:41:39 AM
Last edit: August 05, 2016, 01:55:22 AM by belmonty |
|
Thanks for that link ECB... The post pretty much states that Bitfinex is going to make a more official update tomorrow, but in the meantime, like you said, Bitfinex is considering a way to socialize losses amongst Bitfinex BTC holders. I don't really have a problem with socialized loss in the sense that Bitfinex would later pay back those "losers"... yet, I believe that they are not considering paying back the "losers"... I think that it is a bit irresponsible to cause the users to hold the bag... and even though we are finding out some details, we still have to wait for more specifics, which seems to be scheduled to come out tomorrow. Although Zanetackett keeps talking about scenarios he has stated twice that USD funds will not be susceptible to the socialised loss. I feel for the Bitfinex Bitcoin holders, but it seems the Bitfinex USD funds holders dodged a bullet, provided Bitfinex implements its socialised loss scenario. https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4w7o1j/itfinex_update_regarding_margin_funding_providers/d64q1b3So USD funds (that were simply held and not lent out) would not be affected at all by the hack, correct?
In that scenario, they would not be susceptible to the socialized loss. https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/4vtv1m/bitfinex_down_due_to_bitcoin_security_breach/d64qhkrIm presuming the BTC I was holding may be subject to socialized losses, but not the USD in my account?
That would be correct. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
