Controling the BitCoin marked?

[Pyrus]

In december 2011 I saw 3 transactions on http://www.bitcoinmonitor.com/, over 3 days, just around 500K BTC each.

This means:
- that at least one single person sits on 6-7% of the total amount of Bitcoins out there - probably even more.
- In relation to the marked depth last 24 hours, it is total control

 
Any comments on this?


As a sidenote:
You really have to trust the "system" to transfer that many "money" in one single transaction.

[1715024514]

1715024514

[1715024514]

1715024514

[1715024514]

1715024514

[jixapori]

It means that creators of every digital currency control their currency and possess currency and convince other people to believe that currency is decentralized (without central authority).
beside it, the main exchanger, mtgox, is surely in possession of creator and mtgox is 80% of all exchanges (the same like central authority) and they demand ID, it means that currency is not anonymous.

so, in the beginning, all creations have idealistic aims, but during the time creations adapt itself in capitalist market (and in the law) and proclaimed aims are just theory which is abandoned. all things which are created for the mass of people are in the end usurped/overtaken by small number of people:) and mass of people are still under control: they believe everything is like at the beginning, with idealistic aims...
great ideas stay just great ideas, in realization of ideas, many things are not like in theory.

creator of Bitcoin possess millions of Bitcoins and consequently he has influence on value of currency, the same is with dollars: banks and rich individuals and the states decide what is value of dollars and not people (users of dollars). even if gov let people to mine dollars (better said peaces of dollars), it is still so small amount of dollars in hands of individuals that users can't get influence on value of currency.

so, all people would do the same as creator of BTC, they would keep most of their currency for themselves, to become rich if their idea become popular, they would create the main exchanger (to be in their possession) with aim to control value of currency, and so on. their wish to be accepted by the law push them to abandon first ideas (about anonymity) because the law about finances (banks and transaction and taxes) don't allow anonymous savings and transactions.
so, due popularity and problems with the law, currency loose ideas from beginning, profit become more important for creator than ideas from beginning. in the name of profit, mtgox demand ID. in the name of profit, bitcoin become like ideology (ideological people speak one thing but they do other thing, they control minds of other people with aim to create profit for themselves). and it is solely responsibility of creators who possess millions of BTC, their need for profit bring BTC to become typical currency (with ideological convincing of people in this or that).

as Freddie Mercury said: show must go on.

[RodeoX]

Or it means one of the exchanges is moving money around their pool-wallets.
I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC. I don't own a fortune in them, but I have profited insanely. Just as I don't quit using dollars because of how many Warren Buffet has.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Or it means one of the exchanges is moving money around their pool-wallets.
I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC. I don't own a fortune in them, but I have profited insanely. Just as I don't quit using dollars because of how many Warren Buffet has.

Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! 

[DeathAndTaxes]

Or it means one of the exchanges is moving money around their pool-wallets.
I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC. I don't own a fortune in them, but I have profited insanely. Just as I don't quit using dollars because of how many Warren Buffet has.

Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! 

And mutually assured financial destruction ensures large Bitcoin holders can't/don't either.

[Pyrus]

I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC.

It's is not about who has more or less or if you have earned a lot of money speculating. It is about if one single person or a very few can control the price on the "free" marked. If they can and nobody knows, it puts them in a position where they can manipulate the price for their own benefit, and that is not a free marked.

The way it's done is by trading with yourself or a partner to unrealistic high prices. When the price is satisfying, you sell them to other people who believes the price is natural. When you then leave the marked, the price will fall again. People go to prison  for such things if it is shares. It is stealing. And it is one of the reasons why share holders owning significant parts of the shares in a company, in most contries always will be known.

Question is of cause if we should see BitCoins as just a way of gambling or as a currency. If it is just for gambling, oh well..... If it is a currency people wants to do real business with, it's an other matter.

[J.C.]

Or it means one of the exchanges is moving money around their pool-wallets.
I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC. I don't own a fortune in them, but I have profited insanely. Just as I don't quit using dollars because of how many Warren Buffet has.

Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! 

And mutually assured financial destruction ensures large Bitcoin holders can't/don't either.

Could you explain this a little better. What would prevent someone from doing some large transactions with themselves in order to manipulate the price?

[Pyrus]

Or it means one of the exchanges is moving money around their pool-wallets.
I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC. I don't own a fortune in them, but I have profited insanely. Just as I don't quit using dollars because of how many Warren Buffet has.

Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! 

And mutually assured financial destruction ensures large Bitcoin holders can't/don't either.

Could you explain this a little better. What would prevent someone from doing some large transactions with themselves in order to manipulate the price?

Seems not. Not really surprising

[DeathAndTaxes]

Or it means one of the exchanges is moving money around their pool-wallets.
I never understand why everyone is focused on who has more or less BTC. I don't own a fortune in them, but I have profited insanely. Just as I don't quit using dollars because of how many Warren Buffet has.

Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! 

And mutually assured financial destruction ensures large Bitcoin holders can't/don't either.

Could you explain this a little better. What would prevent someone from doing some large transactions with themselves in order to manipulate the price?

Seems not. Not really surprising

The statement was

"Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! "

Neither can large Bitcoin holders, not without destroying their own wealth.  Even if Warren Buffet wanted to crash the dollar he wouldn't if most of his wealth was illiquid and tied up in dollars. 

[Pyrus]

The statement was

"Warren Buffet can't crash the value of a USD in an instant either! "

Neither can large Bitcoin holders, not without destroying their own wealth.  Even if Warren Buffet wanted to crash the dollar he wouldn't if most of his wealth was illiquid and tied up in dollars. 

Ahhh - sorry, misunderstood you. Thought you ment there was some kind of protection.

Their interest is not to crash anything. They just want to trade up the value and then sell everything. After that BTC will fall to the natural value it should have been traded to all the time and all the foolish people who thought it was a fair game can lick their wounds