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

[dreamspark]

My buddy recommends electrum wallets to newbies, but I haven't seen it mentioned here to protect from at least losing your coins accidentally. Is there something wrong with it that I don't know about?

I have used eletrum for some time now. Very easy to use and a deterministic seed is very helpful.

I use a combination of an offline computer for signing transaction and an online watch only wallet. This gives me the security I need while still being able to send transactions.

[1715144909]

1715144909

[1715144909]

1715144909

[1715144909]

1715144909

[1715144909]

1715144909

[ErisDiscordia]

"TA can't possibly give you a greater than 50% edge" sounds awfully similar to "it is impossible to make a living by playing poker it is all just luck" to me.

Speaking as someone who doesn't day trade, doesn't know much about TA but makes a living from poker.

I think TA potentially has some value. We can all see the "ringing" from major price shifts. There's clearly some money to be lapped up there. I think survivor bias also plays into things a lot though and some people are likely deluding themselves that their TA is giving them more of an edge than it actually is and are placing themselves in somewhat of a risky position.

As you are clearly aware, poker is more than just luck. But you'd be daft to risk your life savings after winning your first few hands.

Yep. That's why when people ask me what I consider to be the most important skill of a (long-term) successful poker player I say "Bankroll management". I suspect this applies to day trading as well. Things like patience, discipline and emotional balance come in second - even though they are key, as well. I have elaborated on the similarity of daytrading and poker playing before:

You have a set amount of working capital, which  you use specifically for this activity. You are trying to grow it by taking calculated risks in the form of bets in situations, where you expect that the expected value of the bet is positive. By necessity you base this decision on incomplete information so you use various means to extract accurate information (psychology, probability, statistical analysis, experience, feeling, intuition and various algorithms). You may also try to gain an advantage by sending out incorrect information about your own holdings (manipulation). You do not expect to be right and win every single time, you just need to be right enough times in comparison to the size of your bets. This means that you working capital has to be big enough in comparison to the size of your bets and their expected value to be able to withstand the variance without depleting completely. Then, if your bets have indeed mostly positive expected value, you show consistent profits over a large enough sample size.

[JorgeStolfi]

What concerns me is the Jorge brings problems, not solutions even when some of these solutions are fairly obvious or already known and only require a little imagination and deduction.

The discussion started because someone (@aminorex?) claimed flatly that bitcoins are much safer than traditiional payment methods.   That statement is at least unwarranted, because (1) there are many ways to steal bitcoins, (2) stealing bitcoins is easier, "safer", and more effective in many ways than stealing credit cards or bank keys, and (3) bitcoin theft is still a common occurrence in bitcoin businesses, which are supposedly run by computer-savy people.

AFAIK, each year about 7 trillion dollars are paid with credit cards worldwide, of which 20 billion dollars (~0.3%) are fraudulent. 

What about bitcoins? I have no idea how much is the total use of bitcoin in commerce (excluding speculation, internal shuffling, and large finance), but last year Bitpay said they paid 100 million dollars, so let's say 300 million total.  The MtGOX heist alone was at least 300 million dollars.  Even spread over 2 years, it alone would be 30% of all commercial use.  So, I think it is pretty fair to say that bitcoin theft is a much bigger problem than credit card theft, relative to total commerce.

Yes, many of those problems could be fixed in theory; but in practice many still haven''t been fixed, and others (like the irrevocability of thefts and the near impossibility of identifying the thief) do not seem to have a solution even in theory.  Others, like address phishing (tricking people to send bitcoins to the wrong address) may be done in so many ways that it seems unlikely they will have a single, simple solution.  The problem is made worse by exaggerated claims of security, since they may induce users to lower their guard. (E.g., see that site that generated vanity addresses.)

And anyway, why should I find the solutions? I am the skeptic here...

By the way, the MtGOX heist must have been the largest single digital theft of all time, not just of bitcoin. Is that true? I cannot even imagine how a hacker could steal 300 million old-fashioned dollars from a company, and walk away with it.

[xulescu]

What concerns me is the Jorge brings problems, not solutions even when some of these solutions are fairly obvious or already known and only require a little imagination and deduction.

The discussion started because someone (@aminorex?) claimed flatly that bitcoins are much safer than traditiional payment methods.   That statement is at least unwarranted, because (1) there are many ways to steal bitcoins, (2) stealing bitcoins is easier, "safer", and more effective in many ways than stealing credit cards or bank keys, and (3) bitcoin theft is still a common occurrence in bitcoin businesses, which are supposedly run by computer-savy people.

AFAIK, each year about 7 trillion dollars are paid with credit cards worldwide, of which 20 billion dollars (~0.3%) are fraudulent. 

What about bitcoins? I have no idea how much is the total use of bitcoin in commerce (excluding speculation, internal shuffling, and large finance), but last year Bitpay said they paid 100 million dollars, so let's say 300 million total.  The MtGOX heist alone was at least 300 million dollars.  Even spread over 2 years, it alone would be 30% of all commercial use.  So, I think it is pretty fair to say that bitcoin theft is a much bigger problem than credit card theft, relative to total commerce.

Yes, many of those problems could be fixed in theory; but in practice many still haven''t been fixed, and others (like the irrevocability of thefts and the near impossibility of identifying the thief) do not seem to have a solution even in theory.  Others, like address phishing (tricking people to send bitcoins to the wrong address) may be done in so many ways that it seems unlikely they will have a single, simple solution.  The problem is made worse by exaggerated claims of security, since they may induce users to lower their guard. (E.g., see that site that generated vanity addresses.)

And anyway, why should I find the solutions? I am the skeptic here...

By the way, the MtGOX heist must have been the largest single digital theft of all time, not just of bitcoin. Is that true? I cannot even imagine how a hacker could steal 300 million old-fashioned dollars from a company, and walk away with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bank_robbers_and_robberies

Admittedly not exactly "hackers stealing 300M USD from a company" but look at the orders of magnitude.

Besides, if Gox really got into full blown fractional reserve in 2011, then the heist was not 300M USD, but more like 3M?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you're very self-servingly selective in your examples.

[dreamspark]

Looks like we could be getting a sunday slump instead of a sunday pump this weekend..

[dreamspark]

He did say digital theft?

[dreamspark]

He did say digital theft?

Exactly, that's the point, he compares bitcoin with credit card fraud or other currency issues, blah blah blah.
However in this case the 'heist' must be 'digital', since otherwise his argument is not valid.
Jorge, the phony imposter professor with a fake phd does that all the time.

I see what you mean, admittedly didn't read the whole discussion.

A good point was made before though in terms of exactly when gox was 'robbed' in the future if BTC is $10,000 a piece will the heist have a dollar value of $7,500,000,000?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[JorgeStolfi]

By the way, the MtGOX heist must have been the largest single digital theft of all time, not just of bitcoin. Is that true? I cannot even imagine how a hacker could steal 300 million old-fashioned dollars from a company, and walk away with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bank_robbers_and_robberies

Admittedly not exactly "hackers stealing 300M USD from a company" but look at the orders of magnitude.

Besides, if Gox really got into full blown fractional reserve in 2011, then the heist was not 300M USD, but more like 3M?

I understand that the thief may have been Mark himself, stealing from his clients.  Either way at least 600'000 bitcoins were stolen by digital transfer, the thief cannot be identified, he is still in control of the coins (unless he lost the keys), and the coins cannot be seized and returned.

The largest cash robbery in that list seems to be "only" 1 billion dollars.  Surely the MtGOX heist would have been bigger if MtGOX had more coins in their possession.

Anyway my question was about digital theft.  I know some cases (e.g. Barings Bank, Banco Noroeste, massive botnet/virus thefts) where larger sums were stolen or lost by means of digital transfers, but they were spread out over many separate operations.

[JorgeStolfi]

Bernie Madoff

That was not "theft", but fraud (he did not take money from people without their knowledge or consent; people gave money to him, consciously), and the fraud was spread over many years.  Like Enron, Worldcom, OGX, ...

[JorgeStolfi]

He did say digital theft?

Exactly, that's the point, he compares bitcoin with credit card fraud or other currency issues, blah blah blah.
However in this case the 'heist' must be 'digital', since otherwise his argument is not valid.
Jorge, the phony imposter professor with a fake phd does that all the time.

A "phony imposter prof" is an "imposter prof" that is not actually an imposter? 

[flynn]

indeed, Lol @ double negation fail

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[KeyserSoze]

indeed, Lol @ double negation fail

When I was much younger I worked in a deli. I also wore an ear ring back then. One day a redneck came in, waited in line, then when he saw me exclaimed, "I ain't gettin' no sandwich from no boy in no deli with no ear ring on."

I was like a deer caught in headlights; not because of embarrassment, but because I was trying to parse his sentence. I just could not process this quintuple negative (and all the various grammatical implications) to figure out if he did or did not want a sandwich. I was eventually able to discern his intent via non-verbal cues such as: red face, angry gesticulations, and the fact he stormed out without ordering.

[edwardspitz]

Not much going on this Easter holiday

[molecular]

indeed, Lol @ double negation fail

When I was much younger I worked in a deli. I also wore an ear ring back then. One day a redneck came in, waited in line, then when he saw me exclaimed, "I ain't gettin' no sandwich from no boy in no deli with no ear ring on."

I was like a deer caught in headlights; not because of embarrassment, but because I was trying to parse his sentence. I just could not process this quintuple negative (and all the various grammatical implications) to figure out if he did or did not want a sandwich. I was eventually able to discern his intent via non-verbal cues such as: red face, angry gesticulations, and the fact he stormed out without ordering.

Cracked me up, thanks for a good story.

[wachtwoord]

What concerns me is the Jorge brings problems, not solutions even when some of these solutions are fairly obvious or already known and only require a little imagination and deduction.

The discussion started because someone (@aminorex?) claimed flatly that bitcoins are much safer than traditiional payment methods.   That statement is at least unwarranted, because (1) there are many ways to steal bitcoins, (2) stealing bitcoins is easier, "safer", and more effective in many ways than stealing credit cards or bank keys, and (3) bitcoin theft is still a common occurrence in bitcoin businesses, which are supposedly run by computer-savy people.

AFAIK, each year about 7 trillion dollars are paid with credit cards worldwide, of which 20 billion dollars (~0.3%) are fraudulent. 

What about bitcoins? I have no idea how much is the total use of bitcoin in commerce (excluding speculation, internal shuffling, and large finance), but last year Bitpay said they paid 100 million dollars, so let's say 300 million total.  The MtGOX heist alone was at least 300 million dollars.  Even spread over 2 years, it alone would be 30% of all commercial use.  So, I think it is pretty fair to say that bitcoin theft is a much bigger problem than credit card theft, relative to total commerce.

Yes, many of those problems could be fixed in theory; but in practice many still haven''t been fixed, and others (like the irrevocability of thefts and the near impossibility of identifying the thief) do not seem to have a solution even in theory.  Others, like address phishing (tricking people to send bitcoins to the wrong address) may be done in so many ways that it seems unlikely they will have a single, simple solution.  The problem is made worse by exaggerated claims of security, since they may induce users to lower their guard. (E.g., see that site that generated vanity addresses.)

And anyway, why should I find the solutions? I am the skeptic here...

By the way, the MtGOX heist must have been the largest single digital theft of all time, not just of bitcoin. Is that true? I cannot even imagine how a hacker could steal 300 million old-fashioned dollars from a company, and walk away with it.

It's not so much the credit card which is fraudulent (they are very prone to it but that's besides the point). It's the currency in itself which is.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[KFR]

What concerns me is the Jorge brings problems, not solutions even when some of these solutions are fairly obvious or already known and only require a little imagination and deduction.

The discussion started because someone (@aminorex?) claimed flatly that bitcoins are much safer than traditiional payment methods.   That statement is at least unwarranted, because (1) there are many ways to steal bitcoins, (2) stealing bitcoins is easier, "safer", and more effective in many ways than stealing credit cards or bank keys, and (3) bitcoin theft is still a common occurrence in bitcoin businesses, which are supposedly run by computer-savy people.

1) There are indeed.  There are many more ways to steal fiat.
2) Flat out bullshit.  Not even gonna bother.
3) It's new.  People are getting better at it.  Gold was also stolen before people learned how to defend it - should ancient man have given up on gold because it wasn't yet perfect and magically self-securing in every way imaginable?

AFAIK, each year about 7 trillion dollars are paid with credit cards worldwide, of which 20 billion dollars (~0.3%) are fraudulent.  

What about bitcoins? I have no idea how much ...

Yeah.  

Yes, many of those problems could be fixed in theory; but in practice many still haven''t been fixed, and others (like the irrevocability of thefts and the near impossibility of identifying the thief) do not seem to have a solution even in theory.  

Either use your imagination or accept that other, smarter people are doing so right now.  Like both Richy, I and others have explained to you in plain English (and on numerous occasions), even the utterly insecure yet ubiquitous credit card system has improved its flaws over time.  Still less secure than Bitcoin though - because (really tired of repeating this) credit card details are all that's required to fully authorise a payment and they are necessarily transmitted.  Private keys can be kept confidential - credit card details can't.

Others, like address phishing (tricking people to send bitcoins to the wrong address) may be done in so many ways that it seems unlikely they will have a single, simple solution.  The problem is made worse by exaggerated claims of security, since they may induce users to lower their guard. (E.g., see that site that generated vanity addresses.)

And anyway, why should I find the solutions? I am the skeptic here...

Nobody is expecting you to even suggest solutions - why would we expect a computer scientist to contribute some actual computer science?  That would be naive clearly.  We are however expecting you to be a little bit more "academic" i.e. objective in your analysis and refrain from portraying these problems as permanent, unfixable reasons for Bitcoin to be an inherently evil tool used only to destroy innocent governments and families.

By the way, the MtGOX heist must have been the largest single digital theft of all time, not just of bitcoin. Is that true? I cannot even imagine how a hacker could steal 300 million old-fashioned dollars from a company, and walk away with it.

Your lack of imagination is the reason you're still here.

You're giving hackers way too much credit.  Guinness, Madoff, Enron, Savings & Loan, Boesky, Kerviel, Minkow, Barings, Worldcom, Wall Street, Parmalat, QE, Amaranth, Long Term Capital, Brink's MAT, Breitwiser, Graff Diamonds, Dar es Salaam bank, SMBC...

D-

[aminorex]

The discussion started because someone (@aminorex?) claimed flatly that bitcoins are much safer than traditiional payment methods. 

Guilty. Also, unrepentant: Security is always relative to threat model.   I will apologize for making that comment outside of the necessary context of a well-defined threat model.  As Richy_T observed, Mt.Gox did him no harm because his use-case did not involve Mt.Gox.  As people become better educated regarding the security characteristics of btc, they will increasingly use it appropriately and losses due to silliness like flashing a private key QR code on broadcast TV will approach zero. As my threat model is biased towards seizure under color of law - overtly or covertly, robbery during transport or transmission, and theft from storage, I naturally regard btc as advantaged.  If your threat model includes exploits of your ignorance and you know that you are ignorant, it makes sense to be on high alert.  But ignorance is curable.