Bitcoin Forum
August 19, 2018, 02:12:42 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 [308] 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 »
  Print  
Author Topic: MtGox withdrawal delays [Gathering]  (Read 857233 times)
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 01, 2014, 06:38:41 PM
 #6141

One important question that I have yet to see answered is how the claims are to be computed.

Many clients seem to assume that the amount they can claim is simply the BTC and currency balances in their MtGOX account, by the time the site was shut down (or at some earlier date).

However, some people who claim to be familiar with bankruptcy cases have claimed that the standard procedure in such cases is to ignore the balances (which are fictitious anyway, since they are the result of trading coins and money that did not exist), and define a client's claim instead as being only the amounts he deposited minus the amounts he withdrew, summed over all time, converting BTC to JPY by the market price at the moment of deposit or withdrawal.

Obviously the two methods will give very different results.  A client who has a huge claim under one interpretation may be excluded under the other, and vice-versa.

Was any information offered recently about which method will be followed by Mr. Kobayashi?

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
1534687962
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534687962

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534687962
Reply with quote  #2

1534687962
Report to moderator
1534687962
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534687962

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534687962
Reply with quote  #2

1534687962
Report to moderator
1534687962
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534687962

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534687962
Reply with quote  #2

1534687962
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1534687962
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534687962

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534687962
Reply with quote  #2

1534687962
Report to moderator
1534687962
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534687962

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534687962
Reply with quote  #2

1534687962
Report to moderator
DrApricot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 01, 2014, 08:47:06 PM
 #6142

One important question that I have yet to see answered is how the claims are to be computed.

Many clients seem to assume that the amount they can claim is simply the BTC and currency balances in their MtGOX account, by the time the site was shut down (or at some earlier date).

However, some people who claim to be familiar with bankruptcy cases have claimed that the standard procedure in such cases is to ignore the balances (which are fictitious anyway, since they are the result of trading coins and money that did not exist), and define a client's claim instead as being only the amounts he deposited minus the amounts he withdrew, summed over all time, converting BTC to JPY by the market price at the moment of deposit or withdrawal.

Obviously the two methods will give very different results.  A client who has a huge claim under one interpretation may be excluded under the other, and vice-versa.

Was any information offered recently about which method will be followed by Mr. Kobayashi?

I can see the merit of this means of accounting were it a proven fact that Mt. Gox was running a fractional reserve. However, if there never were more than the 200,000 or so coins currently admitted to have been found in the old-format wallet, then all trades were actually based on "real" coins and never fake ones.

Many of these kinds of issues could be resolved merely by releasing the addresses of the alleged rouge traders or whomsoever supposedly made off with bitcoins from Mt. Gox. Then customers can trace them for themselves and see what happened.

Also, I'm curious how the bankruptcy court would deal with bitcoinbuilder's claims? Gox/btc were auctioned off and transferred to him in exchange for withdrawing real btc through his web site. Would these Gox/btc that he holds be considered "real"? Since no new coins were ever deposited to Mt. Gox by bitcoinbuilder, then it would appear under this procedure that virtually all his claims are void and so are those of his clients.
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 01, 2014, 09:15:31 PM
 #6143

One important question that I have yet to see answered is how the claims are to be computed.

Many clients seem to assume that the amount they can claim is simply the BTC and currency balances in their MtGOX account, by the time the site was shut down (or at some earlier date).

However, some people who claim to be familiar with bankruptcy cases have claimed that the standard procedure in such cases is to ignore the balances (which are fictitious anyway, since they are the result of trading coins and money that did not exist), and define a client's claim instead as being only the amounts he deposited minus the amounts he withdrew, summed over all time, converting BTC to JPY by the market price at the moment of deposit or withdrawal.

Obviously the two methods will give very different results.  A client who has a huge claim under one interpretation may be excluded under the other, and vice-versa.

Was any information offered recently about which method will be followed by Mr. Kobayashi?

I can see the merit of this means of accounting were it a proven fact that Mt. Gox was running a fractional reserve. However, if there never were more than the 200,000 or so coins currently admitted to have been found in the old-format wallet, then all trades were actually based on "real" coins and never fake ones.

There are philosophical argumens for and against both methods of counting claims, and of course each client will find one of them fair.  The question is which one will Mr. Kobayashi use.   Some people claim what he has no choice given the laws and precedents, some claim that he may choose either one.

Since there have been no comments about this issue (and surely there will be, whatever the choice), It seems that either no one thought of asking that question at the meeting, or it was asked and he refused to answer.

Quote
Also, I'm curious how the bankruptcy court would deal with bitcoinbuilder's claims? Gox/btc were auctioned off and transferred to him in exchange for withdrawing real btc through his web site. Would these Gox/btc that he holds be considered "real"? Since no new coins were ever deposited to Mt. Gox by bitcoinbuilder, then it would appear under this procedure that virtually all his claims are void and so are those of his clients.

If bitcoinbuilder's CEO believes that he is the current legal owner of some GOXCoins, because he bought the rights to them off-exchange from MtGOX clients, I suppose that he should  submit a claim with proof of those purchases, and it will be evaluated like the other claims.  Under one interpretation, I suppose that he would claim to be the rightful owner of a certain number of BTC in the balances of those clients' MtGOX's accounts.  Under the other interpretation, he would claim to be entitled to (some fraction of) whatever those clients deposited, minus whatever they withdrew, over their history at MtGOX.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
OhShei8e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1018



View Profile
September 01, 2014, 09:17:17 PM
 #6144

One important question that I have yet to see answered is how the claims are to be computed.

Many clients seem to assume that the amount they can claim is simply the BTC and currency balances in their MtGOX account, by the time the site was shut down (or at some earlier date).

However, some people who claim to be familiar with bankruptcy cases have claimed that the standard procedure in such cases is to ignore the balances (which are fictitious anyway, since they are the result of trading coins and money that did not exist), and define a client's claim instead as being only the amounts he deposited minus the amounts he withdrew, summed over all time, converting BTC to JPY by the market price at the moment of deposit or withdrawal.

Obviously the two methods will give very different results.  A client who has a huge claim under one interpretation may be excluded under the other, and vice-versa.

Was any information offered recently about which method will be followed by Mr. Kobayashi?


No, nothing, so far as I know. We have already discussed this point on Gox Self-help some time ago. It has been shown that probably a majority favor the "last balance" solution. This also fits well with your assessment. We had agreed so far:

"The remaining assets in Bitcoins should be distributed to creditors
proportionately to their final Bitcoin balance (as seen on mtgox.com).
The remaining assets in legal currency (FIAT) should be distributed to
creditors proportionately to their final currency balance (as seen on
mtgox.com)."

https://wiki.olivere.de/goxwiki/ClaimsGoxSelfHelp
(Auth needed)

There are a lot pro and cons but overall - I think - every other solution would be much more complicated and would be perceived as unfair by the most people. That will not fly by. People want the 200,000 coins divided fair. People want there money and Bitcoin is money.  

I had my Bitcoins almost two years on Gox. I was a Newbie and Gox was my wallet. I was happy with Gox, because they had very early a Yubikey and a very good HMAC based API. And they were big. And they were organized in the Bitcoin Foundation, were I'm also became a lifetime member. So I felt save even if I had only little knowledge about Bitcoin in this time. Gox gave me a feeling of guaranty in an uncertain environment. Sure, I was naive. So I lost nearly 200 coins. Nearly all I had. Gox was simply my main wallet. By trading and some panic (yes, I was a lousy trader) I had even lost coins. However, not much, maybe 20%. But that was completely okay for me, because it was really my fault and I've learned a lot from it about myself and about trading. In FIAT currency I have lost nothing. I think many have a similar position. But the lost Bitcoins hurt me very much. I'll fight like a tiger for my coins. You'll see.

JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 01, 2014, 10:03:52 PM
 #6145

We have already discussed this point on Gox Self-help some time ago. It has been shown that probably a majority favor the "last balance" solution. This also fits well with your assessment. We had agreed so far:

"The remaining assets in Bitcoins should be distributed to creditors
proportionately to their final Bitcoin balance (as seen on mtgox.com).
The remaining assets in legal currency (FIAT) should be distributed to
creditors proportionately to their final currency balance (as seen on
mtgox.com)."

https://wiki.olivere.de/goxwiki/ClaimsGoxSelfHelp
(Auth needed)

There are a lot pro and cons but overall - I think - every other solution would be much more complicated and would be perceived as unfair by the most people. That will not fly by. People want the 200,000 coins divided fair. People want there money and Bitcoin is money.

The problem is that the client's opinion may not be relevant, if there are laws/precedents that determine how claims are assessed.  If the law says to use method X, and one client tells Kobayashi that he prefers method X, it will almost certainly be method X.  Even if all clients say that they prefer method Y, Kobayashy may say, "sorry, I must follow the law and use method X; thereafter you get together and re-distribute the spoils among yurselves as you like".

That question should be posed to Japanese bankruptcy lawyers and/or to Mt. Kobayashi.  Didn't any clients retain Japanese lawyers to advise/represent them at the meeting?

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
gonzx
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 01, 2014, 11:20:42 PM
 #6146


"A día de hoy no se sabe el porcentaje de recuperación, como tampoco se sabe la forma en la que se devolverán las cantidades (dinero de curso legal o BTC). Con todo, hay que tener en cuenta que la ley japonesa obliga a la devolución en yenes, aunque el Juez respondió que dadas las peculiaridades del caso quizás se pueda realizar de otra forma."

Google translate:

"Today is not the recovery rate is known, nor the way in which the quantities (legal tender or BTC) is known be returned. However, keep in mind that Japanese law compels the return yen, although the judge responded that given the peculiarities of the case perhaps can be made otherwise."

http://afectadosmtgox.blogspot.com.ar/
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 12:01:45 AM
 #6147

"Today is not the recovery rate is known, nor the way in which the quantities (legal tender or BTC) is known be returned. However, keep in mind that Japanese law compels the return yen, although the judge responded that given the peculiarities of the case perhaps can be made otherwise."

http://afectadosmtgox.blogspot.com.ar/
I saw that detail in several other posts.  However I believe that he actually said something closer to "we may look into it".  But in Japanese culture (the old-fashioned one at least)  a flat-out "no" is considered too rude, and that phrase could be just a polite way of avoiding to say "we do not intend to" (which would probably have elicited some angry responses from the crowd).

Anyway, that is not the question I asked.  The question is how the claims of each client are to be computed: by the balances in the final MtGOX ledger, or by deposits minus withdawals.  Whether the recovered amounts are returned in BTC or yen is an independent decision.

From the point of the courts, using the MtGOX ledger seems dicey.  One problem is that there may be no way to ensure that the ledger has not been tampered with, or even that the accounts belong to the claimants.  Whereas, the money deposits and withdrawals can be certified by the banks, and those in BTC can be partially verified in the blockchain.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
TheFootMan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 02, 2014, 12:17:04 AM
 #6148

"Today is not the recovery rate is known, nor the way in which the quantities (legal tender or BTC) is known be returned. However, keep in mind that Japanese law compels the return yen, although the judge responded that given the peculiarities of the case perhaps can be made otherwise."

http://afectadosmtgox.blogspot.com.ar/
I saw that detail in several other posts.  However I believe that he actually said something closer to "we may look into it".  But in Japanese culture (the old-fashioned one at least)  a flat-out "no" is considered too rude, and that phrase could be just a polite way of avoiding to say "we do not intend to" (which would probably have elicited some angry responses from the crowd).

Anyway, that is not the question I asked.  The question is how the claims of each client are to be computed: by the balances in the final MtGOX ledger, or by deposits minus withdawals.  Whether the recovered amounts are returned in BTC or yen is an independent decision.

From the point of the courts, using the MtGOX ledger seems dicey.  One problem is that there may be no way to ensure that the ledger has not been tampered with, or even that the accounts belong to the claimants.  Whereas, the money deposits and withdrawals can be certified by the banks, and those in BTC can be partially verified in the blockchain.


Also it's hillarious that previous customers needs to identify themselves to get access to their funds. Lots of accounts are already verified. God knows where all the ID-papers are today...
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 02:28:04 AM
 #6149

Also it's hillarious that previous customers needs to identify themselves to get access to their funds. Lots of accounts are already verified. God knows where all the ID-papers are today...

I don't see why it is hilarious.  How could the court return the spoils to the clients, without knowing who they are?

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1023


Activity: 9001 == OP


View Profile WWW
September 02, 2014, 05:56:20 AM
 #6150

Also it's hillarious that previous customers needs to identify themselves to get access to their funds. Lots of accounts are already verified. God knows where all the ID-papers are today...

I don't see why it is hilarious.  How could the court return the spoils to the clients, without knowing who they are?

Asking them to sign a message with a known Bitcoin deposit address perhaps
If the court has access to the deposit logs in user accounts should be possible to get that done

BITEX
            ███     ███     ███
              ███     ███     ███
                ███     ███     ███
                  ███     ███     ███
                    ███     ███     ███
                      ███     ███     ███
                        ███     ███     ███
                          ███     ███     ███
                            ███     ███     ███
                              ███     ███     ███
                            ███     ███     ███
                          ███     ███     ███
                        ███     ███     ███
                      ███     ███     ███
                    ███     ███     ███
                  ███     ███     ███
                ███     ███     ███
              ███     ███     ███
            ███     ███     ███

The First Locally-Embedded, Yet Global, Crypto-Bank
TELEGRAM    FACEBOOK   TWITTER    YOUTUBE    LINE

                  ███     ███     ███
                ███     ███     ███
              ███     ███     ███
            ███     ███     ███
          ███     ███     ███
        ███     ███     ███
      ███     ███     ███
    ███     ███     ███
  ███     ███     ███
███     ███     ███
  ███     ███     ███
    ███     ███     ███
      ███     ███     ███
        ███     ███     ███
          ███     ███     ███
            ███     ███     ███
              ███     ███     ███
               ███     ███     ███
                 ███     ███     ███

WHITEPAPER | ANN
50% discount pre-ICO NOW!
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 02, 2014, 06:14:16 AM
 #6151

Asking them to sign a message with a known Bitcoin deposit address perhaps
If the court has access to the deposit logs in user accounts should be possible to get that done
Why would the court want to send money (or bitcoins) to someone without knowing his identity?

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
iikun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1051
Merit: 1002


View Profile
September 02, 2014, 07:36:01 PM
 #6152

Asking them to sign a message with a known Bitcoin deposit address perhaps
If the court has access to the deposit logs in user accounts should be possible to get that done
Why would the court want to send money (or bitcoins) to someone without knowing his identity?


Yeah, this will never happen in Japan. You need to remember this is a country where a signature is valued less than a rubber stamp (yes, which anyone can order to be made), I can't see the authorities ever allowing identification to be on anything other than physical paper. Japan seems high tech from the outside but Govt offices & banks seriously live in the 70s/80s with regards to record keeping.
Despite Kobayashi's inferences I also think there will be difficulty in distributing BTC under the legal system unless a claimants BTC address is included on the claim form. Only in that case could I possibly see some hope for that. Otherwise we may well see an auction similar to Silk Road, and a yen or USD figure then attached to claimants BTC holdings as at the time of bankruptcy filing or Gox's final trade. (most likely bankruptcy filing).
OhShei8e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1018



View Profile
September 03, 2014, 06:50:32 PM
 #6153

We have already discussed this point on Gox Self-help some time ago. It has been shown that probably a majority favor the "last balance" solution. This also fits well with your assessment. We had agreed so far:

"The remaining assets in Bitcoins should be distributed to creditors
proportionately to their final Bitcoin balance (as seen on mtgox.com).
The remaining assets in legal currency (FIAT) should be distributed to
creditors proportionately to their final currency balance (as seen on
mtgox.com)."

https://wiki.olivere.de/goxwiki/ClaimsGoxSelfHelp
(Auth needed)

There are a lot pro and cons but overall - I think - every other solution would be much more complicated and would be perceived as unfair by the most people. That will not fly by. People want the 200,000 coins divided fair. People want there money and Bitcoin is money.

The problem is that the client's opinion may not be relevant, if there are laws/precedents that determine how claims are assessed.  If the law says to use method X, and one client tells Kobayashi that he prefers method X, it will almost certainly be method X.  Even if all clients say that they prefer method Y, Kobayashy may say, "sorry, I must follow the law and use method X; thereafter you get together and re-distribute the spoils among yurselves as you like".

That question should be posed to Japanese bankruptcy lawyers and/or to Mt. Kobayashi.  Didn't any clients retain Japanese lawyers to advise/represent them at the meeting?

Some have done this, but I have no contact. I'm not interested in sophisticated confrontations like this. In this game we will always lose. I'm sure. We have other (legal) weapons, because we are a very big group. If they will embezzle the available Coins, we are going to track these coins. I personally will not accept them as payment and I'm sure many other victims will do the same. Even if only some of the victims are not accepting these coins they became more and more worthless, because people will avoid to mix these coins with their good money. There are many, many victims who don't like to accept their own money as payment. Bankruptcy lawyers and other people are used to deal with fungible values and things they can hide​​. If they try to deduct us, they will learn their lesson for sure. We do not need lawyers for this.

DrApricot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 03, 2014, 10:11:59 PM
 #6154

One important question that I have yet to see answered is how the claims are to be computed.
In FIAT currency I have lost nothing. I think many have a similar position. But the lost Bitcoins hurt me very much. I'll fight like a tiger for my coins. You'll see.
From the point of the courts, using the MtGOX ledger seems dicey.  One problem is that there may be no way to ensure that the ledger has not been tampered with, or even that the accounts belong to the claimants.  Whereas, the money deposits and withdrawals can be certified by the banks, and those in BTC can be partially verified in the blockchain.
If they try to deduct us, they will learn their lesson for sure. We do not need lawyers for this.
I admire the questioning attitude regarding the ledger, and the "we don't need no stinkin' lawyers" fighting spirit. However, what is the elephant hiding in the room? It's not whether there are tainted gox coins or not, or whether "the spoils" are to be distributed in Yen or bitcoins. It's the proportional amount.

How do you calculate a proportion? If 200K out of 850K BTC have been found, then you need to divide the first number by the second one and get .235 or 23.5%.

We only have the word of the original Mt. Gox bankruptcy filing at the end of February, 2014 that there were ever 850,000 bitcoins. This filing also blamed the collapse on the transaction malleability bug, which at this point is more or less a proven lie. So, my question is why do we trust this filing so far as the improbably large number of bitcoins supposedly held?

Mark Karpels has stated in June, that he does not believe any more than the 200,000 bitcoins will ever be recovered. The only way he could be so certain is if he knows there were never more than 200,000 bitcoins. If this is the case, the proportion is 100%, not 23.5%, and the bitcoins could be returned more or less immediately to the original owners.

The story about hackers or rogue traders making off with 650K bitcoins is completely unsubstantiated. gox-self-helpers need to pressure the authorities to document any supposed bitcoin losses in order to know whether or not they are valid.
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 03, 2014, 11:33:12 PM
 #6155

The problem is that the client's opinion may not be relevant, if there are laws/precedents that determine how claims are assessed.  If the law says to use method X, and one client tells Kobayashi that he prefers method X, it will almost certainly be method X.  Even if all clients say that they prefer method Y, Kobayashy may say, "sorry, I must follow the law and use method X; thereafter you get together and re-distribute the spoils among yurselves as you like".

That question should be posed to Japanese bankruptcy lawyers and/or to Mt. Kobayashi.  Didn't any clients retain Japanese lawyers to advise/represent them at the meeting?

Some have done this, but I have no contact. I'm not interested in sophisticated confrontations like this. In this game we will always lose. I'm sure. We have other (legal) weapons, because we are a very big group. If they will embezzle the available Coins, we are going to track these coins. I personally will not accept them as payment and I'm sure many other victims will do the same. Even if only some of the victims are not accepting these coins they became more and more worthless, because people will avoid to mix these coins with their good money. There are many, many victims who don't like to accept their own money as payment. Bankruptcy lawyers and other people are used to deal with fungible values and things they can hide​​. If they try to deduct us, they will learn their lesson for sure. We do not need lawyers for this.

Sorry, I am not sure I understand what you mean.

The 600'000+ bitcoins that were stolen/embezzled should be considered lost, unless by some miracle the thief is identified, caught by the police, prosecuted, and persuaded to return the coins.  Kobayashi may ask the police to investigate the theft, if he has not done so; but that is not his job, and the bankruptcy proceedings will be closed well before the police investigation is complete.  If said miracle occurs and those coins are recovered, the proceedings may perhaps be reopened to distribute them; but it is no use to discuss that possibility now.

So, the best you will get back, in the foreseeable future, is 1/4 of what you have lost.

Kobayashi was appointed by the court to figure out what is left of MtGOX's assets, collect the claims by the clients, validate those claims, and distribute among them those remaining assets -- mainly 200'000+ bitcoins and a couple million dollars, that were still in possession of MtGOX and that he has now legally taken custody of.  He will obviously charge his fees for doing that non-trivial task (and for the consultants that he needs to hire), but plenty will be left over.

No one can get any of those coins without his agreement and the approval by the japanese court.   Attempts to do so would be theft and worse, so don't even think about it.

IMHO, the first thing you all should do is to find out how the claims are going to be computed; if that is not decided yet, how much freedom the Japanese law allows.  (There are principles of openness and fairness to all claimants, whether bitcoins and money can be accounted separately, etc. which may constrain the method even if the law does not determine it.)  Note, again, that your preferences are not relevant, unless Kobayashi and the court choose to consider them.  Note also that, depending on the accounting method chosen, the amount you may claim may be a million dollars, or may be zero.

If you are reasonably certain that you are entitled to a large sum, I belive that it pays to hire a Japanese lawyer, at least for basic advice.  If your expected refund is not that large, maybe you should join a group and hire a lawyer as a group.  Do not try to understand the laws without a lawyer.   Heed the old saying, "he who chooses to be his own lawyer has a fool for client and an idiot for lawyer."  Think of them as medical doctors: they may be greedy bastards, but if you need them, you have to use them.

Finally, some "legal" advice: when dealing with the law or lawyers, it helps a lot to wear a decent business suit and tie.  Not a social jacket & pants, not party-animal uniform, not a young-silicon-valley-genius t-shirt, not a I'm-camping-in-the-public-park stye outdoor clothing.  It sounds stupid, I know, but the universe is an incredibly stupid place.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 03, 2014, 11:49:45 PM
 #6156

How do you calculate a proportion? If 200K out of 850K BTC have been found, then you need to divide the first number by the second one and get .235 or 23.5%.

Perhaps I did not get my point across yet. 

Joe Coiner deposited 100 BTC into MtGOX when they were worth 50$ each.   Since then, he traded them with such skill that, when MtGOX collapsed, he thought that he had 1000 BTC in his account, which at the time were worth 800$ each.

Bill Bitter, on the other hand, deposited 1000 BTC at the same time as Joe, but then traded so clumsily that he belived that he had only 100 BTC left at the end.

By method X of computing claims, Joe's claim is 100x50 = 5000$, while Bill's is 1000x50 = 50'000$.   So Bill will get 10x as much as Joe from Mr. Kobayashi.

By the other method Y, Joe's claim is 1000x800 = 800'000$, and Bill's claim is 100x800 = 80'000$.  So its is Joe who will get 10x as much as Bill.

Method X was used by the US courts when processing the claims of Madoff's victims, and someone claimed that it is the standard procedure in japan too. 

So, obviously, the first thing you all need to do is find out whether Kobayashi will use method X, method Y, or some other method.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
DrApricot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 04, 2014, 05:29:42 AM
 #6157

How do you calculate a proportion? If 200K out of 850K BTC have been found, then you need to divide the first number by the second one and get .235 or 23.5%.

Perhaps I did not get my point across yet. 

Joe Coiner deposited 100 BTC into MtGOX when they were worth 50$ each.   Since then, he traded them with such skill that, when MtGOX collapsed, he thought that he had 1000 BTC in his account, which at the time were worth 800$ each.

Bill Bitter, on the other hand, deposited 1000 BTC at the same time as Joe, but then traded so clumsily that he belived that he had only 100 BTC left at the end.

By method X of computing claims, Joe's claim is 100x50 = 5000$, while Bill's is 1000x50 = 50'000$.   So Bill will get 10x as much as Joe from Mr. Kobayashi.

By the other method Y, Joe's claim is 1000x800 = 800'000$, and Bill's claim is 100x800 = 80'000$.  So its is Joe who will get 10x as much as Bill.

Method X was used by the US courts when processing the claims of Madoff's victims, and someone claimed that it is the standard procedure in japan too. 

So, obviously, the first thing you all need to do is find out whether Kobayashi will use method X, method Y, or some other method.
I understood, and your point is quite valid. However, there is no justification for using Method X should 100% of the coins still be there, never were really gone, and the 850,000 BTC number was a complete hoax. When all the coins are accounted for, it means all of the trades of both Joe and Bill were perfectly "real", and so there is no reason at all to use the Method X for computing each depositor's share.

Madoff's case was quite different, because he was running a Ponzi. On the other hand, if you genuinely believe Mt. Gox was a Ponzi, then perhaps after all the court should favour Method X for division. How can you be sure though without some proof of how many coins Mt. Gox originally held at the time of its bankruptcy? After the known lie about the "bitcoin bug" in the bk filing, why do you accept the rest of it as being true?
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 04, 2014, 10:08:50 AM
 #6158

I understood, and your point is quite valid. However, there is no justification for using Method X should 100% of the coins still be there, never were really gone, and the 850,000 BTC number was a complete hoax. When all the coins are accounted for, it means all of the trades of both Joe and Bill were perfectly "real"
The 800'000 number is the sum of all BTC account balances in the leaked database.  It is basically the total BTC that clients deposited over MtGOX's history, minus all the BTC that they have withdrawn.

If indeed MtGOX never had the 600'000+ coins that it claims to have lost, we would have to conclude that the database has been doctored at some point; and in that case it is hard to say that the trades of non-existent coins by Joe and Bill were real.

However, most people seem to agree that the 800'000 figure is correct, and the 600'000+ coins were indeed lost.  But, even with this assumption, the trades by Joe and Bill were not quite real, since the theft or embezzlement must have happened at least a year ago.  The artificial 10% overprice that MyGOX maintained for a long time since then was at odds with its real situation, for example; so it is questionable whether the trading in that period is "real".

From the creditor meeting papers, I understand that Kobayashi has already transferred to an address of his own the 200'000+ coins that Mark "found". 

But, even now, no one seems to know when the other 600'000 disappeared, nor the addresses where they were transferred to.  Presumably Kobayashi and/or the police will get from Mark the legitimate MtGOX addresses that held the coins before they disappeared; but how could one prove that the addresses where they were transferred to did NOT belong to Mark (or any other suspect)?

Even if the 600'000+ coins were embezzled, rather than stolen by an external hacker, it will be hard to prove that (unless the embezzler was really incompetent at hiding his tracks.)  An embezzler could have written down the private keys on a slip of paper and handed it over to an external accomplice who issued the fatal transaction.  That leak would leave no trace in any logs, and it would be impossible to connect the embezzler to that transaction.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
DrApricot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 04, 2014, 04:42:35 PM
 #6159

I understood, and your point is quite valid. However, there is no justification for using Method X should 100% of the coins still be there, never were really gone, and the 850,000 BTC number was a complete hoax. When all the coins are accounted for, it means all of the trades of both Joe and Bill were perfectly "real"
The 800'000 number is the sum of all BTC account balances in the leaked database.  It is basically the total BTC that clients deposited over MtGOX's history, minus all the BTC that they have withdrawn.

If indeed MtGOX never had the 600'000+ coins that it claims to have lost, we would have to conclude that the database has been doctored at some point; and in that case it is hard to say that the trades of non-existent coins by Joe and Bill were real.

However, most people seem to agree that the 800'000 figure is correct, and the 600'000+ coins were indeed lost. 
The "leaked" database could have been doctored, while the original is still quite intact and unchanged. Perhaps a phony db was leaked out as part of the instigator's plan for covering up tracks. The takedown of Mt. Gox appears to have been well thought-out including a coordinated public relations campaign to convince the public that management had been incompetent and there is a "need" to regulate bitcoin.

Perhaps most people "agree" on the amount of 800K bitcoins, because its what they've been told to believe. The only real sources for this information are a leaked database and the bankruptcy filing which blames the problem on a "bug in the bitcoin system." This latter claim has more or less been proven false.

It's far easier for me to believe the smaller amount of bitcoins. 200K BTC are still worth in the neighborhood of $100 million. Any much larger sum of coins would seem ridiculous for a three year old company such as Mt. Gox.

Of course I am merely speculating, which is exactly my point, even the amount of bitcoins Mt. Gox held is still very much in doubt. There needs to be full disclosure of this kind of information before talking about dividing up "the spoils".
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 04, 2014, 06:36:27 PM
 #6160

Perhaps most people "agree" on the amount of 800K bitcoins, because its what they've been told to believe. The only real sources for this information are a leaked database and the bankruptcy filing which blames the problem on a "bug in the bitcoin system." This latter claim has more or less been proven false.

It's far easier for me to believe the smaller amount of bitcoins. 200K BTC are still worth in the neighborhood of $100 million. Any much larger sum of coins would seem ridiculous for a three year old company such as Mt. Gox.

You have a point there: the number "800 k" ultimately comes only from a highy suspect source, that has flatly lied to customers in the past.

But, if the actual sum of all balances was only 220'000, it means that the balances of some clients have been artificially inflated, by 600'000 BTC in total.  A malicious management would have an obvious motivation for doing that: namely, ensuring that those special clients will get awarded the lion's share of the 220'000 actual coins, at the expense of other clients.

I hope that Mr. Kobayashi is aware of that possibility, and is aware that many clients are aware of it.




Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
Pages: « 1 ... 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 [308] 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!