Bitstamp is the next MtGox...

[m3]

Bitstamp is going to become the next MtGox, they are starting to crack down on KYC procedures and are going to start holding bitcoin funds aswell, not only FIAT. Now instead of MtGox telling you that your funds got "hacked" Bitstamp will be telling you that your funds got "frozen".

Read the full story http://www.btcfeed.net/news/bitstamp-is-the-next-mtgox-and-why-its-a-threat-to-bitcoin/

[haploid23]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

[BitCoinDream]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

I'm not sure what do u mean by transparent here ? But anonymity is not a problem for Bitcoin businesses. MK was very public and non-anonymous, though it did not stop the failure of Gox. Now, as Brock Pierce, the public character taking up the pieces, it'll fall again... of course after making millions for him.

In Bitcoin world, give more focus to trustless service over transparent ones and BTC-e is fine with that.

[bryant.coleman]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

I wouldn't. BTC-E has been around for almost two years now. As an exchange, they are much older than the Bitstamp or Kraken. So far, there hasn't been a single robbery or hack within the exchange. I wouldn't worry much about the transparency of BTC-E, as long as the customers are able to maintain their anonymity and the coins are secure.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

I wouldn't. BTC-E has been around for almost two years now. As an exchange, they are much older than the Bitstamp or Kraken. So far, there hasn't been a single robbery or hack within the exchange. I wouldn't worry much about the transparency of BTC-E, as long as the customers are able to maintain their anonymity and the coins are secure.

[sumana]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

I wouldn't. BTC-E has been around for almost two years now. As an exchange, they are much older than the Bitstamp or Kraken. So far, there hasn't been a single robbery or hack within the exchange. I wouldn't worry much about the transparency of BTC-E, as long as the customers are able to maintain their anonymity and the coins are secure.

how much btc they lost with that hacking

[byt411]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

I wouldn't. BTC-E has been around for almost two years now. As an exchange, they are much older than the Bitstamp or Kraken. So far, there hasn't been a single robbery or hack within the exchange. I wouldn't worry much about the transparency of BTC-E, as long as the customers are able to maintain their anonymity and the coins are secure.

how much btc they lost with that hacking

I suggest you don't listen to him, he's a scammer that sold his account to a big fat troll.

[GogglesPisano]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

I wouldn't. BTC-E has been around for almost two years now. As an exchange, they are much older than the Bitstamp or Kraken. So far, there hasn't been a single robbery or hack within the exchange. I wouldn't worry much about the transparency of BTC-E, as long as the customers are able to maintain their anonymity and the coins are secure.

+1! I'm far more worried about "regulated" exchanges than ones which uphold the anonymity philosophy behind Bitcoin.

Any centralized exchange should only be used for conversions, not as a place to hold your funds.

[BitCoinDream]

@sumana & @byt411

Be Careful

TradeFortress is using images and you are quoting it. You never know what this images will contain one year down the line. Avoid quoting him.

[bryant.coleman]

how much btc they lost with that hacking

They never lost any BTC, and nor there were any successful hacks. BTC-E manually processes all the BTC withdrawals over BTC10 or so, and even the most renowned hackers have been unable to steal the coins from them.

[BitCoinDream]

how much btc they lost with that hacking

They never lost any BTC, and nor there were any successful hacks. BTC-E manually processes all the BTC withdrawals over BTC10 or so, and even the most renowned hackers have been unable to steal the coins from them.

Does not it make things slow for them, given the kind of volume they need to handle ?

[Cyberdyne]

how much btc they lost with that hacking

They never lost any BTC, and nor there were any successful hacks. BTC-E manually processes all the BTC withdrawals over BTC10 or so, and even the most renowned hackers have been unable to steal the coins from them.

This is false; They were hacked in the early days (almost 2 years ago now?) and lost about 4600 BTC.

BTC-e covered this from their own profits, and no members lost any funds.

[Pobre]

I would worry about btc-e more than bitstamp. Unlike bitstamp, btc-e is in Russia, ran by anonymous guys. They're lacking transparency.

Well Mark was not anonymous, but he lost it and there is nothing much you could do against him. If you are so much concerned about the transparency and if you are too afraid to deal with russians then the best website for you should be localbitcoins.com

And I think that there is no need of creating a panic about bitstamp becoming the next Gox because each of the exchange is privately owned and each of them can do something like gox, but I think Gox was an exception as it was highly mismanaged. I think that the exchanges should now start giving out private keys of the address in which its users will store their bitcoins, it would lead to the increase in trust within the customers.

[BitCoinDream]

how much btc they lost with that hacking

They never lost any BTC, and nor there were any successful hacks. BTC-E manually processes all the BTC withdrawals over BTC10 or so, and even the most renowned hackers have been unable to steal the coins from them.

This is false; They were hacked in the early days (almost 2 years ago now?) and lost about 4600 BTC.

BTC-e covered this from their own profits, and no members lost any funds.

That was relatively easy as 4600 BTC was not much 2 years ago. But, if the go through the same now... the result may be different.

[IIOII]

how much btc they lost with that hacking

They never lost any BTC, and nor there were any successful hacks. BTC-E manually processes all the BTC withdrawals over BTC10 or so, and even the most renowned hackers have been unable to steal the coins from them.

This is false; They were hacked in the early days (almost 2 years ago now?) and lost about 4600 BTC.

BTC-e covered this from their own profits, and no members lost any funds.

For me BTC-e is a trustworthy exchange. While they lack support, their platform is more secure than most of their competitors'. They are in business for quite a long time without a serious incident that wasn't resolved.

I clearly prefer an anonymous exchange from eastern Europe where bitcoin remains fully fungible over some northern american one, which invades my privacy to follow braindead KYC/AML-laws without even notifying me that they are such bootlickers before sending them money.

KYC/AML-laws are here to take away your freedom by establishing a general suspicion against innocent citizens. You should boycott every entity and isolate every single person that endorses them!

[Cyberdyne]

I clearly prefer an anonymous exchange from eastern Europe where bitcoin remains fully fungible over some northern american one, which invades my privacy to follow braindead KYC/AML-laws without even notifying me that they are such bootlickers before sending them money.

KYC/AML-laws are here to take away your freedom by establishing a general suspicion against innocent citizens. You should boycott every entity and isolate every single person that endorses them!

Absolutely.

Well-said.

[bryant.coleman]

This is false; They were hacked in the early days (almost 2 years ago now?) and lost about 4600 BTC.

BTC-e covered this from their own profits, and no members lost any funds.

Do you have any solid proof for this? Every alternate day, I am seeing a new thread posted against BTC-E, at the behest of the other exchanges. I am not going to believe anything unless proof is presented.

[Beliathon]

I wouldn't. BTC-E has been around for almost two years now. As an exchange, they are much older than the Bitstamp or Kraken. So far, there hasn't been a single robbery or hack within the exchange. I wouldn't worry much about the transparency of BTC-E, as long as the customers are able to maintain their anonymity and the coins are secure.

I agree they have an excellent track record. Just be aware that when Bitcoin starts approaching it's true value potential, all bets will be off.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

This is false; They were hacked in the early days (almost 2 years ago now?) and lost about 4600 BTC.

BTC-e covered this from their own profits, and no members lost any funds.

Do you have any solid proof for this? Every alternate day, I am seeing a new thread posted against BTC-E, at the behest of the other exchanges. I am not going to believe anything unless proof is presented.

[kokojie]

This is false; They were hacked in the early days (almost 2 years ago now?) and lost about 4600 BTC.

BTC-e covered this from their own profits, and no members lost any funds.

Do you have any solid proof for this? Every alternate day, I am seeing a new thread posted against BTC-E, at the behest of the other exchanges. I am not going to believe anything unless proof is presented.

Why the fuck are you using images to post?