BTC-e hacked ??

[YesLOST]

The success or failure of such a strategy, will ultimately depend on BTC-e's ability to convince people of it's long term viability.
First an foremost is the placement of their servers out of FBI reach so they don't get shutdown again. This is not as easy as it sounds, but it it not impossible either. There are many countries that wouldn't let the FBI do anything on their soil. If BTC-e can convince me that their servers are safe, I would give them the benefit of the doubt and trade on them again.

And there my believes also kick in. If you compare the Russian user base to the Westerners it seems that the Westerners are the minority here and the Russians react very differently to USA threats than Westerners. So, my best guess is, that the btce is offering some withdrawal/deposit in RUR, relaxing the KYC for Russians and they will flow back to the exchange.

About the servers, yeah, you are right. There are many jurisdictions where the USA can't steal anything. It is also very easy to setup reverse proxy and route ssl secured traffic through multiple locations. The domain should be .su just for the reenactment fun of cold war.

[1715190348]

1715190348

[cryptomole]

I just wish that BTC-e would do right by fiat holders. Bitfinex overall did a good job evening out the haircut. There's no easy answer; every outcome will leave some people pissed off. But ideally, I think they should be freezing asset values at the time of server downage and denominating everything in USD value, then distributing crypto assets on an equal loss basis, based on available funds. There should be a clear formula that puts all creditors in the same boat. I'm a BTCUSD trader and I happened to be waiting out the dip. Sucks that the people on the other side of the BTCUSD trade seem so much better off.

+1

Totally agree. I was in exactly the same position as you.
People talk about fiat holders but we are dealing with a trading scenario and for most it was probably just a question of timing as to whether we were in coin or fiat. There is no such thing as a "fiat holder" in the context of a crypto exchange.

[erk]

+1

Totally agree. I was in exactly the same position as you.
People talk about fiat holders but we are dealing with a trading scenario and for most it was probably just a question of timing as to whether we were in coin or fiat. There is no such thing as a "fiat holder" in the context of a crypto exchange.

I disagree, when you trade BTC for fiat each coin can have only one owner at a time else there would be an imbalance. eg. for BTC/USD there must be one BTC holder and one USD holder at completion of the trade. The IOUs created in the trading database can each only have one recipient, and must be honored as they were at the time of the last trade (or rolled back to the last backup snapshot which would be worse) You can't have two people claiming ownership of the same crypto coin or the same fiat which is what you are trying to do by disregarding the holding, timing is everything.

[squatter]

+1

Totally agree. I was in exactly the same position as you.
People talk about fiat holders but we are dealing with a trading scenario and for most it was probably just a question of timing as to whether we were in coin or fiat. There is no such thing as a "fiat holder" in the context of a crypto exchange.

I disagree, when you trade BTC for fiat each coin can have only one owner at a time else there would be an imbalance. eg. for BTC/USD there must be one BTC holder and one USD holder at completion of the trade. The IOUs created in the trading database can each only have one recipient, and must be honored as they were at the time of the last trade (or rolled back to the last backup snapshot which would be worse) You can't have two people claiming ownership of the same crypto coin or the same fiat which is what you are trying to do by disregarding the holding, timing is everything.

Converting balances based on available funds doesn't leave multiple people claiming ownership of the same coin. BTC-e didn't segregate user coin accounts (they pooled wallets). Bitfinex even socialized losses as mentioned above despite segregating user Bitcoin accounts.

The point is to create solvency on the books. It makes sense to denominate the losses in a common currency, then redistribute based on the lost amount. The tokens need to be denominated in that common currency (eg USD). They don't need functioning fiat capabilities to redeem the USD token value. They can do that in other coins at the time of each distribution. And since it will be based on current market value at each distribution, users would be fine with that. Just like Bitfinex.

The trouble, of course, is that they have to reconcile a lot of accounts. And they need to do something with the shitcoins that are socialized. That does make this tough.

[bonker]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

[bj9k]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

Crypto holders does not need to keep their crypto at an exchange.

[bonker]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

Crypto holders does not need to keep their crypto at an exchange.

Elite A-tier gold-star pro-traders have to keep their crypto on exchanges as their bots trade 24x7

In fact even bots should be re-imbursed for stress

In fact anyone not trading with a bot should forfit their crypto

[mayax]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

Crypto holders does not need to keep their crypto at an exchange.

Elite A-tier gold-star pro-traders have to keep their crypto on exchanges as their bots trade 24x7

In fact even bots should be re-imbursed for stress

In fact anyone not trading with a bot should forfit their crypto

then don't whine and beg for your funds.  BTC-e will never give any shit back LOL

it's amazing how many "believers" are on this forum  

you don't have any logic, nothing. how can a shit anonymous company refund your funds while 50% from its funds are seized? they have a warrant on their names and they will never be able to open any exchanger website.

I am wondering how you can still breath

[YesLOST]

I am wondering how you can still breath

Are you waiting to receive my limp penis?

[romani245]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

Holding crypto on centralized exchanges has historically been a great way to lose all your funds.

Fiat holders could have (and did) say the same thing when Bitfinex lost 120,000 bitcoins. They said "screw the BTC holders, let them have their losses and give me my money." If Bitfinex gave BTC holders 100% of their loss and USD holders no losses, much of their userbase would have left the exchange.

The same logic probably applies here. The exchange needs to try to please the most people; they can't do that by leaving crypto holders mostly whole and screwing fiat holders.

[richardsNY]

it's amazing how many "believers" are on this forum  

How is that so amazing? People at this point have nothing anymore to lose, but from this point everything (or more precisely said, at least something) to gain. You are just making fun of people having lost large sums of money, and that's a disgusting practice. I seriously don't understand why you still keep replying to this thread -- just go spend your time a bit more productive elsewhere. People are literally done with you....

[cryptomole]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

"Wise Crypto Holders"
What does that mean? If you remember, there was a well anticipated dip at the time the exchange went down. Many were in fiat in anticipation of this and were mid way through what would have turned out to be a good trade. So whats your point?
Are you saying trading is unwise and that holding coin is wise? If thats the case - why hold coin on an exchnge?

[figmentofmyass]

If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by  wise crypto holders

"Wise Crypto Holders"
What does that mean? If you remember, there was a well anticipated dip at the time the exchange went down. Many were in fiat in anticipation of this and were mid way through what would have turned out to be a good trade. So whats your point?
Are you saying trading is unwise and that holding coin is wise? If thats the case - why hold coin on an exchnge?

it's just the expected talk from crypto holders on btc-e, same as there was from USD holders on bitfinex last year. holding any assets on a centralized exchange is obviously a risk, because any event like this (including a hack of crypto wallets) can make an exchange insolvent. everybody just wants to lose as little as possible. the fact is that this is somewhat of a force majeure, and some effort should be made by btc-e to minimize losses for all.

there is also the question of the BCH.....any word on that? they should certainly be adding markets for that, and adding it to the basket of coins.

[mayax]

it's amazing how many "believers" are on this forum  

How is that so amazing? People at this point have nothing anymore to lose, but from this point everything (or more precisely said, at least something) to gain. You are just making fun of people having lost large sums of money, and that's a disgusting practice. I seriously don't understand why you still keep replying to this thread -- just go spend your time a bit more productive elsewhere. People are literally done with you....

the "point have nothing anymore to lose" is not an excuse to be brainwashed or without common sense.  I am not making fun of anybody even they would deserve it. There were MANY warnings about BTC-e as they are about Poloniex, Kraken and Bitfinex.   Mark my words literally : all these exchangers will be closed soon. I said the same about BTC-e and literally it was like that

today, many are still using these exchangers despite the high risks and they will come whining that some "authority" seized their funds (like they are doing with BTC-e now ).  

yes, this thing is amazing.

[Lionel]

There were MANY warnings about BTC-e as they are about Poloniex, Kraken and Bitfinex.   Mark my words literally : all these exchangers will be closed soon. I said the same about BTC-e and literally it was like that

today, many are still using these exchangers despite the high risks and they will come whining that some "authority" seized their funds (like they are doing with BTC-e now ).  

yes, this thing is amazing.

Are you forecasting closure for Bitstamp , Coinbase, Bittrex as well even though they're regulated ?

[mayax]

There were MANY warnings about BTC-e as they are about Poloniex, Kraken and Bitfinex.   Mark my words literally : all these exchangers will be closed soon. I said the same about BTC-e and literally it was like that

today, many are still using these exchangers despite the high risks and they will come whining that some "authority" seized their funds (like they are doing with BTC-e now ).  

yes, this thing is amazing.

Are you forecasting closure for Bitstamp , Coinbase, Bittrex as well even though they're regulated ?

Bittrex is NOT regulated so it can be closed anytime.

[bj9k]

Bittrex is NOT regulated so it can be closed anytime.

Yesterday I have received fake Bittrex notification about my account to be frozen because of inactivity. After inspecting their link that link was actually for bittrex.CAM instead of .COM

But anyway I have never opened account on Bittrex anyway. Seems that this phishing issue is based on BTC-e stolen data couple of years ago.

[RealKariverson]

Bittrex is NOT regulated so it can be closed anytime.

Yesterday I have received fake Bittrex notification about my account to be frozen because of inactivity. After inspecting their link that link was actually for bittrex.CAM instead of .COM

lol might as well been bittrex.SCAM xD

[ahmedjadoon]

So, no more actual refund for fiat holders? They will be paid 100% in shit tokens?
This is unfair as I never actually deposited fiat. I deposited bitcoin and converted it to USD for trading purpose.

Fiat holders will get a mix of 7 cryptos for 55% of their balance, BTE tokens for other 45%

No, after last update it is clear, everybody gets his "balance currency". E.g. Coin holder gets 55% coins and Fiat holder gets 55% fiat. Then you can do whatever you want or what is possible with your balance.

They didn't clearly mention that they have aborted the plan to give fiat users mix of seven coin but one of their post seems to suggest what you are saying.
I think if they are able to pay in fiat by some means it would be better. As ALT could easily crash and Fiat users end up losing more.

[erk]

They didn't clearly mention that they have aborted the plan to give fiat users mix of seven coin but one of their post seems to suggest what you are saying.
I think if they are able to pay in fiat by some means it would be better. As ALT could easily crash and Fiat users end up losing more.

How are they going to pay fiat when the fiat accounts are what was seized?

Perhaps they can conjure fiat out of thing air like central banks do?