|
fonzie
|
 |
February 04, 2014, 12:43:18 AM |
|
There is not nearly enough bid depth for any of the alts on another exchange. Convert to BTC and withdraw, that´s the only sane way to go.
|
"To know death, Otto, you have to fuck life in the gallbladder" www.hsbc.com - The world´s local bank "These FUDsters are insane egomaniacs that just want cheap BTC" - oblivi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
keithers
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1001
This is the land of wolves now & you're not a wolf
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:45:25 AM |
|
I believe it just pertains to Russia, and to my knowledge they don't operate out of Russia, so I think the best that they could do is prevent people living in Russia to use BTC-E
|
|
|
|
|
keithers
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1001
This is the land of wolves now & you're not a wolf
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:47:46 AM |
|
With that being said, I would always recommend only leaving the amount of BTC, LTC, or whatever in there that you plan on trading. Move the rest of it to your own wallet. You can always deposit back there for free anyway...
|
|
|
|
|
keithers
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1001
This is the land of wolves now & you're not a wolf
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:48:55 AM |
|
If BTC-E will have problems, then it will also hit hard on LTC price, since it's the biggest market for LTC.
I converted my LTC to BTC and transfered to stamp. I have always been nervous on keeping money in BTC-E, because their lack of transparency. They have a great interface and engine, but sadly I don't trust people that I know very little of. So, their confidence that everything will be fine won't make me very confident. Suffered a small loss because of this move, but I think that it was necessary to avoid the risk. I'm afraid that LTC price will drop more and there will be a lot of FUD, before it's known if BTC-E is in fact in trouble.
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E... |
|
|
|
|
monger
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:53:58 AM |
|
If BTC-E will have problems, then it will also hit hard on LTC price, since it's the biggest market for LTC.
I converted my LTC to BTC and transfered to stamp. I have always been nervous on keeping money in BTC-E, because their lack of transparency. They have a great interface and engine, but sadly I don't trust people that I know very little of. So, their confidence that everything will be fine won't make me very confident. Suffered a small loss because of this move, but I think that it was necessary to avoid the risk. I'm afraid that LTC price will drop more and there will be a lot of FUD, before it's known if BTC-E is in fact in trouble.
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E... Unfortunately btc-e is not decentralized as bitcoin is. Lack of transparency is best choice for them otherwise they wouldnt last so long. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitcoinAshley
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:54:30 AM |
|
If BTC-E will have problems, then it will also hit hard on LTC price, since it's the biggest market for LTC.
I converted my LTC to BTC and transfered to stamp. I have always been nervous on keeping money in BTC-E, because their lack of transparency. They have a great interface and engine, but sadly I don't trust people that I know very little of. So, their confidence that everything will be fine won't make me very confident. Suffered a small loss because of this move, but I think that it was necessary to avoid the risk. I'm afraid that LTC price will drop more and there will be a lot of FUD, before it's known if BTC-E is in fact in trouble.
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E... No, your comparison is invalid. The Bitcoin-d/-qt code is a protocol, but BTC-e is a service. The 2 owners of BTC-e have complete control over whatever you store there. The "creator of bitcoin," if the reviews of countless coders over the last 4+ years are any indication, has no such control over your bitcoin. Apples and oranges, my friend. Keeping coins on an exchange is far riskier than keeping them in a cold wallet, or even a hot wallet provided you take appropriate security precautions (like not being a tard and using Winblows/Macinshit OS) |
|
|
|
|
kkaspar
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
banned but not broken
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:55:32 AM |
|
If BTC-E will have problems, then it will also hit hard on LTC price, since it's the biggest market for LTC.
I converted my LTC to BTC and transfered to stamp. I have always been nervous on keeping money in BTC-E, because their lack of transparency. They have a great interface and engine, but sadly I don't trust people that I know very little of. So, their confidence that everything will be fine won't make me very confident. Suffered a small loss because of this move, but I think that it was necessary to avoid the risk. I'm afraid that LTC price will drop more and there will be a lot of FUD, before it's known if BTC-E is in fact in trouble.
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E... When the bitcoin software is open sourced, then the work itself is transparent and the exact person behind it isn't as important. But with BTC-E, their work is as hidden as their personal information. Because of that I can't speculate if they did some shady deals with the criminal underworld or not. If russians can link BTC-E finance to terrorism, then the problem will go to international level and BTC-E will be in trouble. I know that all of this can just be FUD without any solid base, but I had no reason to take the risk. |
|
|
|
|
Holliday
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1010
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:56:21 AM |
|
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E...
Apples and oranges. Bitcoin is open source software, everyone can audit the code. The block chain is a distributed ledger held on thousands of computers. BTC-e is a centralized service which holds users deposits. No one can audit their accounts. |
If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins.
|
|
|
Serge
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:57:04 AM |
|
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E...
difference being, creator of Bitcoin doesn't hold your funds, while you do have to trust 3rd party which makes it a very risky exercise |
|
|
|
|
|
BitcoinAshley
|
|
February 04, 2014, 12:58:18 AM |
|
As for BTC-e's legal situation, here's my take on it... The exchange does not operate in Russia. The owners reside in Russia but are not russian citizens. As it stands, only Russia has taken action. This means that everyone else doesn't have much to worry about. It would be like if Argentina decided to ban MtGox.com. It would only affect argentinians. But, keep in mind that Russia is probably a significant memberbase for BTC-e. Now, if the Bulgarian government decided to shut down BTC-e, that would be a different issue. But show me an exchange that is 150% certain of their legal status, show me a country that has absolutely no regulatory uncertainty... On a side note, I love BTC-e's interface. Almost as much as I loved Bitfloor's interface  |
|
|
|
|
Patel
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1321
Merit: 1007
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:03:42 AM |
|
VaultofSatoshi is still there. If they made their layout similar to btc-e's, they would get alot more volume. On a side note, I love BTC-e's interface. Almost as much as I loved Bitfloor's interface Out of every exchange I ever used, Bitfloor was the best. In trading, in deposit times, in withdrawal times. |
|
|
|
|
kkaspar
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
banned but not broken
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:09:23 AM |
|
With that being said, I would always recommend only leaving the amount of BTC, LTC, or whatever in there that you plan on trading. Move the rest of it to your own wallet. You can always deposit back there for free anyway...
I use my armory wallet when I'm not behind my computer for longer then 20hours. It's always risky keeping your coins somewhere else, but I have had a lot of grief and lost money with unnaturally long confirmation times and problems with exchange depositing systems. So I prefer to keep my btc/$ active while I'm behind the computer and ready to act. |
|
|
|
|
monger
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:11:59 AM |
|
As for BTC-e's legal situation, here's my take on it... The exchange does not operate in Russia. The owners reside in Russia but are not russian citizens. As it stands, only Russia has taken action. This means that everyone else doesn't have much to worry about. It would be like if Argentina decided to ban MtGox.com. It would only affect argentinians. But, keep in mind that Russia is probably a significant memberbase for BTC-e. Now, if the Bulgarian government decided to shut down BTC-e, that would be a different issue. But show me an exchange that is 150% certain of their legal status, show me a country that has absolutely no regulatory uncertainty... On a side note, I love BTC-e's interface. Almost as much as I loved Bitfloor's interface That is not correct, the all mess with btc-e is not about ban or something. They are suspecting exchange of money laundering and terror funding, thats a big issue. I have no doubt this have to do nothing with reality of course, but in Russia no one cares. If you see news like this one, that means they want them really bad for some reason. |
|
|
|
|
Satyre_Noir (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:29:35 AM |
|
As for BTC-e's legal situation, here's my take on it... The exchange does not operate in Russia. The owners reside in Russia but are not russian citizens. As it stands, only Russia has taken action. This means that everyone else doesn't have much to worry about. It would be like if Argentina decided to ban MtGox.com. It would only affect argentinians. But, keep in mind that Russia is probably a significant memberbase for BTC-e. Now, if the Bulgarian government decided to shut down BTC-e, that would be a different issue. But show me an exchange that is 150% certain of their legal status, show me a country that has absolutely no regulatory uncertainty... On a side note, I love BTC-e's interface. Almost as much as I loved Bitfloor's interface That is not correct, the all mess with btc-e is not about ban or something. They are suspecting exchange of money laundering and terror funding, thats a big issue. I have no doubt this have to do nothing with reality of course, but in Russia no one cares. If you see news like this one, that means they want them really bad for some reason. I don't know for terrorism but the way they operate indicates some type of money laundering. Based in Bulgaria (highly corrupt EU state), cash deposits trough Egopay and other shady payment processors, minimum deposit of 2000 EUR, unknown owners (rumors Russian mafia), no KYC/AML and when you compare them to the Bitstamp it's pretty obvious. I hope everything will be fine because of huge number of Bitcoiners doing trade there but BTC-e business practice is odd at best. |
|
|
|
|
|
seriouscoin
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:37:18 AM |
|
pure FUD.... lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
seriouscoin
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:39:40 AM |
|
As for BTC-e's legal situation, here's my take on it... The exchange does not operate in Russia. The owners reside in Russia but are not russian citizens. As it stands, only Russia has taken action. This means that everyone else doesn't have much to worry about. It would be like if Argentina decided to ban MtGox.com. It would only affect argentinians. But, keep in mind that Russia is probably a significant memberbase for BTC-e. Now, if the Bulgarian government decided to shut down BTC-e, that would be a different issue. But show me an exchange that is 150% certain of their legal status, show me a country that has absolutely no regulatory uncertainty... On a side note, I love BTC-e's interface. Almost as much as I loved Bitfloor's interface That is not correct, the all mess with btc-e is not about ban or something. They are suspecting exchange of money laundering and terror funding, thats a big issue. I have no doubt this have to do nothing with reality of course, but in Russia no one cares. If you see news like this one, that means they want them really bad for some reason. I don't know for terrorism but the way they operate indicates some type of money laundering. Based in Bulgaria (highly corrupt EU state), cash deposits trough Egopay and other shady payment processors, minimum deposit of 2000 EUR, unknown owners (rumors Russian mafia), no KYC/AML and when you compare them to the Bitstamp it's pretty obvious. I hope everything will be fine because of huge number of Bitcoiners doing trade there but BTC-e business practice is odd at best. I dont know if you're brainwashed by goverment but why no KYC means money laundering? Why no direct banking means money laundering? So far your points are just as the idiots' calling bitcoin ponzi/illicit currency |
|
|
|
|
keithers
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1001
This is the land of wolves now & you're not a wolf
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:40:34 AM |
|
If BTC-E will have problems, then it will also hit hard on LTC price, since it's the biggest market for LTC.
I converted my LTC to BTC and transfered to stamp. I have always been nervous on keeping money in BTC-E, because their lack of transparency. They have a great interface and engine, but sadly I don't trust people that I know very little of. So, their confidence that everything will be fine won't make me very confident. Suffered a small loss because of this move, but I think that it was necessary to avoid the risk. I'm afraid that LTC price will drop more and there will be a lot of FUD, before it's known if BTC-E is in fact in trouble.
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E... No, your comparison is invalid. The Bitcoin-d/-qt code is a protocol, but BTC-e is a service. The 2 owners of BTC-e have complete control over whatever you store there. The "creator of bitcoin," if the reviews of countless coders over the last 4+ years are any indication, has no such control over your bitcoin. Apples and oranges, my friend. Keeping coins on an exchange is far riskier than keeping them in a cold wallet, or even a hot wallet provided you take appropriate security precautions (like not being a tard and using Winblows/Macinshit OS) I meant the personal identities of both BTC-E and bitcoin are both anonymous, also in the post right above I said the same thing about keeping the coins in a wallet rather than directly on the exchange itself |
|
|
|
|
|
seriouscoin
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:42:35 AM |
|
It would be like if Argentina decided to ban MtGox.com. It would only affect argentinians.
Indeed, if Argentina wanted to move against BTC-E, likely nothing would happen. Russia, on the other hand, is a global power, and may have the power to affect action in the relevant jurisdictions. If, for example, the US wanted to move against BTC-E, we could likely expect the domain to be seized in a relatively short amount of time. I for once think its great that Russia and China move against bitcoin. That mean U.S. can go pro-bitcoin to without worrying of "dark" plans by its enemies. |
|
|
|
|
keithers
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1001
This is the land of wolves now & you're not a wolf
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:43:00 AM |
|
It would be like if Argentina decided to ban MtGox.com. It would only affect argentinians.
Indeed, if Argentina wanted to move against BTC-E, likely nothing would happen. Russia, on the other hand, is a global power, and may have the power to affect action in the relevant jurisdictions. If, for example, the US wanted to move against BTC-E, we could likely expect the domain to be seized in a relatively short amount of time. If the domain were to be seized, it would probably be online again fairly quickly as btc-e.tv or btc-e.ru or something along those lines... |
|
|
|
|
|
seriouscoin
|
|
February 04, 2014, 01:44:46 AM |
|
If BTC-E will have problems, then it will also hit hard on LTC price, since it's the biggest market for LTC.
I converted my LTC to BTC and transfered to stamp. I have always been nervous on keeping money in BTC-E, because their lack of transparency. They have a great interface and engine, but sadly I don't trust people that I know very little of. So, their confidence that everything will be fine won't make me very confident. Suffered a small loss because of this move, but I think that it was necessary to avoid the risk. I'm afraid that LTC price will drop more and there will be a lot of FUD, before it's known if BTC-E is in fact in trouble.
Lack of transparency is kind of an invalid point, given that the creator of Bitcoin is just as anonymous as the owners of BTC-E... No, your comparison is invalid. The Bitcoin-d/-qt code is a protocol, but BTC-e is a service. The 2 owners of BTC-e have complete control over whatever you store there. The "creator of bitcoin," if the reviews of countless coders over the last 4+ years are any indication, has no such control over your bitcoin. Apples and oranges, my friend. Keeping coins on an exchange is far riskier than keeping them in a cold wallet, or even a hot wallet provided you take appropriate security precautions (like not being a tard and using Winblows/Macinshit OS) I meant the personal identities of both BTC-E and bitcoin are both anonymous, also in the post right above I said the same thing about keeping the coins in a wallet rather than directly on the exchange itself You missed the point..... of transparency, idiot /facepalm |
|
|
|
|
|
