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

[Walsoraj]

And then, since your definition is based on someone's calculation to mislead who is the final arbtrar of intent?  

The court is the final arbitrator, you moron.

My definition is also shared by the court.  

[vdcc]

Bitcoin exchanges that are not controlled or regulated could be the major problem for bitcoin's future. Think about it - you need a site, bank account(s) for deposits/withdrawals, decent SW (engine, bots, etc.) and a relatively small amount of coins (for start). Everything else you can fake - volume, trades, transactions between accounts. You (your SW actually) could trade all day, buy/sell thousands of coins for millions of dollars without a single $ spent, push price up or down - wherever you want, and just collect the money/coins that suckers (regular people, investors, traders, speculators, miners, etc.) lost because of your actions.
And that makes me sick

[phoenix1]

And then, since your definition is based on someone's calculation to mislead who is the final arbtrar of intent?  

The court is the final arbitrator, you moron.

My definition is also shared by the court.  

There are higher 'courts' than the ones you speak of

[Walsoraj]

And then, since your definition is based on someone's calculation to mislead who is the final arbtrar of intent?  

The court is the final arbitrator, you moron.

My definition is also shared by the court.  

There are higher 'courts' than the ones you speak of

Which court disagrees with my definition of fraud?

[Peter R]

And then, since your definition is based on someone's calculation to mislead who is the final arbtrar of intent?  

The court is the final arbitrator, you moron.

My definition is also shared by the court.  

There are higher 'courts' than the ones you speak of

Which court disagrees with my definition of fraud?

How Walsoraj defined fraud:

Anything calculated to mislead others is fraudulent.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud

Fraud is a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain (adjectival form fraudulent; to defraud is the verb). As a legal construct, fraud is both a civil wrong (i.e., a fraud victim may sue the fraud perpetrator to avoid the fraud and/or recover monetary compensation) and a criminal wrong (i.e., a fraud perpetrator may be prosecuted and imprisoned by governmental authorities). Defrauding people or organizations of money or valuables is the usual purpose of fraud, but it sometimes instead involves obtaining benefits without actually depriving anyone of money or valuables, such as obtaining a drivers license by way of false statements made in an application for the same.

A hoax is a distinct concept that involves deception without the intention of gain or of damaging or depriving the victim.

[Walsoraj]

And then, since your definition is based on someone's calculation to mislead who is the final arbtrar of intent?  

The court is the final arbitrator, you moron.

My definition is also shared by the court.  

There are higher 'courts' than the ones you speak of

Which court disagrees with my definition of fraud?

How Jarosaw defined fraud:

Anything calculated to mislead others is fraudulent.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud

Fraud is a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain (adjectival form fraudulent; to defraud is the verb). As a legal construct, fraud is both a civil wrong (i.e., a fraud victim may sue the fraud perpetrator to avoid the fraud and/or recover monetary compensation) and a criminal wrong (i.e., a fraud perpetrator may be prosecuted and imprisoned by governmental authorities). Defrauding people or organizations of money or valuables is the usual purpose of fraud, but it sometimes instead involves obtaining benefits without actually depriving anyone of money or valuables, such as obtaining a drivers license by way of false statements made in an application for the same.

A hoax is a distinct concept that involves deception without the intention of gain or of damaging or depriving the victim.

And, your point?

Calculated implies deliberation. Misleading others is a form of deception. So, my definition, if anything, is too narrow.

Idiot.

[kurious]

China is what the current price manipulation is about.

People wanted to get out without selling in china when no new money was coming in.

Once a total crash in China looked likely, the coins were bought off exchange in volume - but some assets were used to keep China prices 'up' so that the world market was confident enough, to stay high enough, to gradually sell off coin elsewhere at good prices without crashing everything to hell.

To keep the price up on BTCC is easy with the minimal volume there.

There is no real basis for the price staying so high, there is no more money coming in.

Once all the big Chinese money is out (in coins) with help from the big guys in other markets, then eventually the support operation will have to slow.

By then of course new money may be in and able to take over supporting the price - no one wants collapse.

My two cents worth.

Disclosure: I am 'hodling' less BTC and certainly less alts than I usually do, I don't think the market price is being decided by normal factors and I do think it is being temporarily managed.

And temporarily is until the end of Jan - max.

I think this particular manipulation is a short term plan, and all about China: managed withdrawal.

Until end of Jan, I am watching carefully and staying cautious.

[Sitarow]

[hdbuck]

@sitarow: hello i was just wondering, what do you use to have such a layout resuming so much graphs? thx.

[Peter R]

And, your point?

Sorry, I should have been more explicit, Walsoraj.  

You said that "anything calculated to mislead others is fraudulent," and later asked what courts would disagree.  I was pointing out (with my quote from Wikipedia [likely inline with Western courts]) that your definition was incomplete.  It also requires the deception to be practiced "in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain."  This second half is one thing that makes it different from a "hoax."

It's also interesting the response of pheonix1, who believes that Karma is the highest court.  I think he makes a good point, perhaps encouraging us to open our eyes a bit wider for the interesting future that lays ahead.  
 

[Sitarow]

MtGox


Bitstamp


BTCChina


24 hour Volume

[spooderman]

what a year it's been

[solex]

monetary economics is the only sphere of human activity immune to technological improvement.

That's a bold statement. Never really thought about it that way, but I'm not so sure I agree..

Where is it coming from? Could you explain it?

I would, intuitively and with not enough knowledge, say that technological improvement should somehow positively affect monetary economics. Why not?

Ah. You misread my post. I am summarizing Krugman's latest view - and disagree with it.

[aminorex]

 It [fraud] also requires the deception to be practiced "in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain."  This second half is one thing that makes it different from a "hoax."

Of course this merely pushes the question back a square:  What is unfair?

[virtualfaqs]

Mtgox 500 support wall at $781 was obliterated instantly.

[MAbtc]

600 or so coins dumped. Small potatoes. 

[virtualfaqs]

600 or so coins dumped. Small potatoes. 

Why does this feel like 1 individual doing this? 

[TERA]

Before July, it was very normal for individuals to have 10,000 or so coins.

Some people are under the impression that in 4 months there's been a complete paradigm shift, all the coins have been distributed, and nobody owns coins like that anymore. I think of it more like a well-played hand.

[virtualfaqs]

Look at this guy. He was somehow able to turn an entire 1000 red candle into green. 

[Peter R]

 It [fraud] also requires the deception to be practiced "in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain."  This second half is one thing that makes it different from a "hoax."

Of course this merely pushes the question back a square:  What is unfair?

Yes, exactly!  The Wikipedia definition requires the arbitror to not only conclude that the deception was deliberate, but that the gain that resulted from it was "unfair."  So we are back a square, indeed.  If a whale places a 3000 BTC ask wall to scare the small fish into selling, does that qualify as "deception"?  A larger whale could eat his wall in a single bite.  And even if one concludes that this is deliberate deception, is this also "unfair"?  The market participants are playing by the same rules, some of them just happen to hold more capital.  Lastly, I'm not even convinced that profitable manipulation is even possible over the long term. 

One reason that I'm excited about bitcoin and the power of the blockchain is that I believe it will allow us to write more exact contracts and motivate de-ambiguity or our legal system.