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

[JayJuanGee]

Can anyone explain exactly why would bitSTAMP claim to getting hacked? what do they gain doing that this point? they don't have any problems. On the other hand bitfinex im pretty sure it's still hurting from the latest august "hack" (remember the BFX tokens?). It should have disappeared, they are just beating a dead horse.

A lot more weight is being given to the concepts of scams etc, which allows for more manipulation - yet the fact of the matter remains that bitfinex is likely going to resolve these various matters in the coming days - and it may take weeks for longer term fixes.

Furthermore, bitfinex's trade volume remains relatively strong which is hardly a sign of a dying exchange (you can allege "fake" volume all you like, but there is no real evidence that bitfinex's volume is fake).

[Biodom]

Don't you think the fact that Finex's 4 Taiwanese banks have frozen transfers (under pressure from Wells Fargo) has something to do with it?

I find it rather odd that this question is still popping up. The reasons are on Bitfinex's site and it's obvious why it is how it is.

it's not this simple, perhaps.
BTW, bitfinex uses USD or USDT?
btc in USDT is also abnormally higher on polo than on GDAX or coinbase (which use USD, of course).
maybe it is also related to tether, which never liked anyway.

[jbreher]

concerning Bitfinex's solvency, etc... , unless you just wanting to spread fear and just bullshit that is not really backed up by the facts

Well, there _is_ the fact that some time ago they lost quite a large sum of funds to theft. That is a _fact_ that directly impinges upon their solvency. Of course, we don't _know_ how significant that loss is in relation to their assets.

Have you seen their current balance sheet and P&L Statement? No? Hmmm.

[JayJuanGee]

concerning Bitfinex's solvency, etc... , unless you just wanting to spread fear and just bullshit that is not really backed up by the facts

Well, there _is_ the fact that some time ago they lost quite a large sum of funds to theft. That is a _fact_ that directly impinges upon their solvency. Of course, we don't _know_ how significant that loss is in relation to their assets.

Have you seen their current balance sheet and P&L Statement? No? Hmmm.

At this time, there is not really any evidence of bitfinex solvency issues - beyond a bunch of nearly pure speculation.

Yes, we can agree that there were major issues in August, and yes we can agree that Bitfinex has not shared a lot of specifics and yes we can speculate that there may have been some insider job aspects to the august "hack". 

We also know that bitfinex employed a lot of very creative and innovative recovery tools, and seem to have a pretty decent recovery... Yeah, sure some of that "recovery" is likely to be smoke and mirrors, but that does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered as some kind of central issue in this current situation that seems plausibly connected with bank relations issues and largely not made up by bitfinex.

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

[bitserve]

concerning Bitfinex's solvency, etc... , unless you just wanting to spread fear and just bullshit that is not really backed up by the facts

Well, there _is_ the fact that some time ago they lost quite a large sum of funds to theft. That is a _fact_ that directly impinges upon their solvency. Of course, we don't _know_ how significant that loss is in relation to their assets.

Have you seen their current balance sheet and P&L Statement? No? Hmmm.

Anyone knows if Hong Kong's companies registry is public as it is in many countries? In Spain and some other European countries anyone can access the annual balance sheet of a company for a measly 10€.

[gentlemand]

Anyone knows if Hong Kong's companies registry is public as it is in many countries? In Spain and some other European countries anyone can access the annual balance sheet of a company for a measly 10€.

I don't think they have much to do with Hong Kong any more. Their parent company is located in the British Virgin Islands or something.

[jbreher]

does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered

It is a crypto exchange. Operating in an opaque manner. Their potential for insolvency should _always_ be considered.

Crypto exchanges inherently have a huge incentive to operate in a partial reserve manner. Such would be dishonest, but very, very, very^very, profitable. One must always be wary of malfeasance.

I employ exchanges, too. With a small fraction of my overall holdings. As a calculated risk. But always aware of the potential for the operators to cut & run.

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

Questioning their solvency is rational whether one assumed malfeasance _or_ incompetence. The evidence that they had a major loss directly backs this suspicion for this particular exchange.

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

[bitebits]

concerning Bitfinex's solvency, etc... , unless you just wanting to spread fear and just bullshit that is not really backed up by the facts

Well, there _is_ the fact that some time ago they lost quite a large sum of funds to theft. That is a _fact_ that directly impinges upon their solvency. Of course, we don't _know_ how significant that loss is in relation to their assets.

Have you seen their current balance sheet and P&L Statement? No? Hmmm.

At this time, there is not really any evidence of bitfinex solvency issues - beyond a bunch of nearly pure speculation.

Yes, we can agree that there were major issues in August, and yes we can agree that Bitfinex has not shared a lot of specifics and yes we can speculate that there may have been some insider job aspects to the august "hack".  

We also know that bitfinex employed a lot of very creative and innovative recovery tools, and seem to have a pretty decent recovery... Yeah, sure some of that "recovery" is likely to be smoke and mirrors, but that does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered as some kind of central issue in this current situation that seems plausibly connected with bank relations issues and largely not made up by bitfinex.

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

There is a chance Bitfinex is indeed currently USD insolvent, according to the market(price).

[JayJuanGee]

does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered

It is a crypto exchange. Operating in an opaque manner. Their potential for insolvency should _always_ be considered.

Of course, we take these matters with a grain of salt - but presuming insolvency seems a bit much, even though it remains a factor, like you mentioned.

Crypto exchanges inherently have a huge incentive to operate in a partial reserve manner. Such would be dishonest, but very, very, very^very, profitable. One must always be wary of malfeasance.

Of course, again.  Seems a bit too much to presume malfeasance, even if we remain wary of it.

I employ exchanges, too. With a small fraction of my overall holdings. As a calculated risk. But always aware of the potential for the operators to cut & run.

Exchanges seems to have become a market created mechanism in the bitcoin space, so each of can decide the extent to which to risk our capital in such or to participate in such.  Bitcoin would be a much different space without exchanges, but even if we could imagine a world without exchanges, we would not be dealing with the reality that exchanges exist, serve a function and have varying degrees of risk - some exchanges are likely more scrupulous than others, but at the same time there continues to be exchange risks (understood).

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

Questioning their solvency is rational whether one assumed malfeasance _or_ incompetence. The evidence that they had a major loss directly backs this suspicion for this particular exchange.

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

Yeah right.. in other words you have no evidence beyond the fact that they were hacked in August and that their "hack" story in August was implausible in your view.  In other words, some of their subsequent behavior to stay open, to not run away with the funds and to engage in various innovative pay back resolution carries little to no weight with you, and instead you want to focus on some narrow situation and lack of evidence for your current assertions.    

[JayJuanGee]

concerning Bitfinex's solvency, etc... , unless you just wanting to spread fear and just bullshit that is not really backed up by the facts

Well, there _is_ the fact that some time ago they lost quite a large sum of funds to theft. That is a _fact_ that directly impinges upon their solvency. Of course, we don't _know_ how significant that loss is in relation to their assets.

Have you seen their current balance sheet and P&L Statement? No? Hmmm.

At this time, there is not really any evidence of bitfinex solvency issues - beyond a bunch of nearly pure speculation.

Yes, we can agree that there were major issues in August, and yes we can agree that Bitfinex has not shared a lot of specifics and yes we can speculate that there may have been some insider job aspects to the august "hack".  

We also know that bitfinex employed a lot of very creative and innovative recovery tools, and seem to have a pretty decent recovery... Yeah, sure some of that "recovery" is likely to be smoke and mirrors, but that does not even come close to rising to the level that insolvency should be considered as some kind of central issue in this current situation that seems plausibly connected with bank relations issues and largely not made up by bitfinex.

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

There is a chance Bitfinex is indeed currently USD insolvent, according to the market(price).

Yes.. of fucking course.


There is a chance of a lot of things, but that "chance" does not mean that we should structure our whole view of the world based on something that is less than a 5% chance, for example, when there are other explanations that have a greater than 80% chance of being correct, no?

[york780]

Watching Bitfinex exitpump with music like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZkTh_T75QY&index=20&list=RDnBhpiUFSYWI

Love to be in this btc world.

[darlidada]

Watching Bitfinex exitpump with music like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZkTh_T75QY&index=20&list=RDnBhpiUFSYWI

Love to be in this btc world.

love the music

btw, tether supply increased by 20% 7 hour ago

http://omnichest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=3MbYQMMmSkC3AgWkj9FMo5LsPTW1zBTwXL

+160% increase since 1rst of march

i think we found how they paid back everyone ))

This is the scammiest market I've ever seen in my life.  $60 spreads while people pretend it's perfectly normal with no fraud at play.  I think someone from Bitfinex is going to jail eventually, or will just disappear into the sunset never to be seen again with all the cash, Big Vern Cryptsy style.

lmao

read anonymint and roach posts if you want to know more!!! these guys hate each other guts but they are the best source of knowledge on this board

[jbreher]

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

Questioning their solvency is rational whether one assumed malfeasance _or_ incompetence. The evidence that they had a major loss directly backs this suspicion for this particular exchange.

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

Yeah right.. in other words you have no evidence beyond the fact that they were hacked in August and that their "hack" story in August was implausible in your view.  In other words, some of their subsequent behavior to stay open, to not run away with the funds and to engage in various innovative pay back resolution carries little to no weight with you, and instead you want to focus on some narrow situation and lack of evidence for your current assertions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJX1REQB12o

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

[JayJuanGee]

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

Questioning their solvency is rational whether one assumed malfeasance _or_ incompetence. The evidence that they had a major loss directly backs this suspicion for this particular exchange.

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

Yeah right.. in other words you have no evidence beyond the fact that they were hacked in August and that their "hack" story in August was implausible in your view.  In other words, some of their subsequent behavior to stay open, to not run away with the funds and to engage in various innovative pay back resolution carries little to no weight with you, and instead you want to focus on some narrow situation and lack of evidence for your current assertions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJX1REQB12o

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

In other words, you have no fucking evidence beyond some feelings that you have that included suspicions about their August 2016 situation.  Great.  Makes no fucking sense, but great.

And, yeah,  like I already mentioned, on a personal level, you can choose how much, if any, money to put at risk in using their system.

Part of my earlier points in responding to these seemingly baseless allegations is that the mere fact that Bitfinex is having troubles with its banks does not, in itself, rise to the level of some kind of conspiracy to defraud, run away or even evidence of insolvency... even if you may have a variety of other reasons or feelings not to trust them.

[jbreher]

So why read malevolence into what could more easily described as incompetence?  especially if you have little to no evidence to back up your less likely scenarios?

Questioning their solvency is rational whether one assumed malfeasance _or_ incompetence. The evidence that they had a major loss directly backs this suspicion for this particular exchange.

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

Yeah right.. in other words you have no evidence beyond the fact that they were hacked in August and that their "hack" story in August was implausible in your view.  In other words, some of their subsequent behavior to stay open, to not run away with the funds and to engage in various innovative pay back resolution carries little to no weight with you, and instead you want to focus on some narrow situation and lack of evidence for your current assertions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJX1REQB12o

Whether they are thieves or bumbling idiots matters little - either is a disqualifier for entrusting them with _my_ funds.

In other words, you have no fucking evidence beyond some feelings that you have that included suspicions about their August 2016 situation.  Great.  Makes no fucking sense, but great.

And, yeah,  like I already mentioned, on a personal level, you can choose how much, if any, money to put at risk in using their system.

Part of my earlier points in responding to these seemingly baseless allegations is that the mere fact that Bitfinex is having troubles with its banks does not, in itself, rise to the level of some kind of conspiracy to defraud, run away or even evidence of insolvency... even if you may have a variety of other reasons or feelings not to trust them.

Jeeze, you have an outstanding reading comprehension problem.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

 

Jeeze, you have an outstanding reading comprehension problem.

OMG... I do?

 

[york780]

Why you guys are so serious about such a thiny thing. 90% on an speculation topic on bitcointalk is just some fairytale conspiracy. We all get used to it right?

[jbreher]

btw, tether supply increased by 20% 7 hour ago

http://omnichest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=3MbYQMMmSkC3AgWkj9FMo5LsPTW1zBTwXL

+160% increase since 1rst of march

i think we found how they paid back everyone ))

Never looked into Tether. Seemed impossible on its surface. How is the peg maintained? Don't know, don't care - it is an inherent impossibility.

[Lecter]

btw, tether supply increased by 20% 7 hour ago

http://omnichest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=3MbYQMMmSkC3AgWkj9FMo5LsPTW1zBTwXL

+160% increase since 1rst of march

i think we found how they paid back everyone ))

Never looked into Tether. Seemed impossible on its surface. How is the peg maintained? Don't know, don't care - it is an inherent impossibility.

Issue 1:1 ratio between Tether and USD held in reserve.  In theory, settlements would result in USD passed to the customer, Tether passed back to the originator, then Tether being destroyed.

[yefi]

read anonymint and roach posts if you want to know more!!! these guys hate each other guts but they are the best source of knowledge on this board

Or I could I smack my head repeatedly into a cinder block (also likely to impart more wisdom).