Mt. Gox

MtGox, the oldest and once-largest bitcoin exchange, appears to have a serious problem.

MtGox, the oldest and once-largest bitcoin exchange, appears to have a serious problem. submitted by blackswanmx to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Vitalik Buterin: Bitcoin Scalability Problem Worse than MtGox Hack

Vitalik Buterin: Bitcoin Scalability Problem Worse than MtGox Hack submitted by grittygatorr to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

MtGox problems transferring Bitcoin

Seems as though any transfer out request of more than 2 Btc is stuck in MtGox. The coins leave my account but don't enter the Blockchain. Transactions of 2 Btc or under seem to go just fine.
As usual MtGox support takes 4 days just to assign someone to assist with my ticket.
submitted by bitdogecoin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Will MTGOX Bitcoin Problems Lead To A Difference In The Skill of Competition on Seals With Clubs?

submitted by Freshman_Freakingout to poker [link] [comments]

Problems with MtGox are because "the entire bitcoin system is build on a foundation of sand" (LA Times)

Problems with MtGox are because submitted by meoschwitz to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Problem withdrawing bitcoins out of MtGox into wallet

I am new to using bitcoins. I recently made a purchase on MtGox of approximately 0.74 BTC. I have been trying to withdraw those bitcoins out of MtGox and put them in my wallet on SR. When I click to confirm this withdrawal, it tells me my account is pending review and needs to be verified. I thought that I should be able to withdraw up to 100 BTC without having to verify my account. Can anyone explain what I could be doing wrong? I saw that MtGox was down earlier today, but I don't think they said there were any problems with withdrawals. Thanks in advance.
submitted by fourrestgump to SilkRoad [link] [comments]

MtGox Withdrawal limits for Bitcoin make sense to avoid a 'bank run' but also indicate that they have liquidity problems.

If it was true that...
Amount of Bitcoin MtGox owns = Amount of Bitcoin MtGox's customers own
...there would be no need for still limiting withdrawals.
So lets hear the next statement on Thursday.
Source: https://www.mtgox.com/img/pdf/20140217-Announcement.pdf
submitted by FT_clox_metoo to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I just sent some bitcoins from electrum on to Mtgox and the transaction got sent twice for some reason! Problem is Mtgox says there is a new address for every transaction. Will my second one go through?

submitted by anarcoin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

#CryptoCurrencyCat: "From #meow on whenever something goes wrong-it's #Goxed" #MtGox #Gox#Bitcoin #BitcoinExchange #BTC #Problems #Backstage #Delay

#CryptoCurrencyCat: submitted by CryptoCurrencyCat to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Problem withdrawing bitcoins out of MtGox into wallet

I am new to using bitcoins. I recently made a purchase on MtGox of approximately 0.74 BTC. I have been trying to withdraw those bitcoins out of MtGox and put them in a wallet address I have. When I click to confirm this withdrawal, it tells me my account is pending review and needs to be verified. I thought that I should be able to withdraw up to 100 BTC without having to verify my account. Can anyone explain what I could be doing wrong? I saw that MtGox was down earlier today, but I don't think they said there were any problems with withdrawals. Thanks in advance.
submitted by fourrestgump to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

MtGox withdrawal problem survey for /r/Bitcoin users! Asks about your experience with withdrawals in light of the recent problems!

MtGox withdrawal problem survey for /Bitcoin users! Asks about your experience with withdrawals in light of the recent problems! submitted by dnivi3 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

MtGox Hacked: Is It a Bitcoin Problem? - 0.02 BTC

MtGox Hacked: Is It a Bitcoin Problem? - 0.02 BTC submitted by undev to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Technical: A Brief History of Payment Channels: from Satoshi to Lightning Network

Who cares about political tweets from some random country's president when payment channels are a much more interesting and are actually capable of carrying value?
So let's have a short history of various payment channel techs!

Generation 0: Satoshi's Broken nSequence Channels

Because Satoshi's Vision included payment channels, except his implementation sucked so hard we had to go fix it and added RBF as a by-product.
Originally, the plan for nSequence was that mempools would replace any transaction spending certain inputs with another transaction spending the same inputs, but only if the nSequence field of the replacement was larger.
Since 0xFFFFFFFF was the highest value that nSequence could get, this would mark a transaction as "final" and not replaceable on the mempool anymore.
In fact, this "nSequence channel" I will describe is the reason why we have this weird rule about nLockTime and nSequence. nLockTime actually only works if nSequence is not 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. final. If nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF then nLockTime is ignored, because this if the "final" version of the transaction.
So what you'd do would be something like this:
  1. You go to a bar and promise the bartender to pay by the time the bar closes. Because this is the Bitcoin universe, time is measured in blockheight, so the closing time of the bar is indicated as some future blockheight.
  2. For your first drink, you'd make a transaction paying to the bartender for that drink, paying from some coins you have. The transaction has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, and a starting nSequence of 0. You hand over the transaction and the bartender hands you your drink.
  3. For your succeeding drink, you'd remake the same transaction, adding the payment for that drink to the transaction output that goes to the bartender (so that output keeps getting larger, by the amount of payment), and having an nSequence that is one higher than the previous one.
  4. Eventually you have to stop drinking. It comes down to one of two possibilities:
    • You drink until the bar closes. Since it is now the nLockTime indicated in the transaction, the bartender is able to broadcast the latest transaction and tells the bouncers to kick you out of the bar.
    • You wisely consider the state of your liver. So you re-sign the last transaction with a "final" nSequence of 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. the maximum possible value it can have. This allows the bartender to get his or her funds immediately (nLockTime is ignored if nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF), so he or she tells the bouncers to let you out of the bar.
Now that of course is a payment channel. Individual payments (purchases of alcohol, so I guess buying coffee is not in scope for payment channels). Closing is done by creating a "final" transaction that is the sum of the individual payments. Sure there's no routing and channels are unidirectional and channels have a maximum lifetime but give Satoshi a break, he was also busy inventing Bitcoin at the time.
Now if you noticed I called this kind of payment channel "broken". This is because the mempool rules are not consensus rules, and cannot be validated (nothing about the mempool can be validated onchain: I sigh every time somebody proposes "let's make block size dependent on mempool size", mempool state cannot be validated by onchain data). Fullnodes can't see all of the transactions you signed, and then validate that the final one with the maximum nSequence is the one that actually is used onchain. So you can do the below:
  1. Become friends with Jihan Wu, because he owns >51% of the mining hashrate (he totally reorged Bitcoin to reverse the Binance hack right?).
  2. Slip Jihan Wu some of the more interesting drinks you're ordering as an incentive to cooperate with you. So say you end up ordering 100 drinks, you split it with Jihan Wu and give him 50 of the drinks.
  3. When the bar closes, Jihan Wu quickly calls his mining rig and tells them to mine the version of your transaction with nSequence 0. You know, that first one where you pay for only one drink.
  4. Because fullnodes cannot validate nSequence, they'll accept even the nSequence=0 version and confirm it, immutably adding you paying for a single alcoholic drink to the blockchain.
  5. The bartender, pissed at being cheated, takes out a shotgun from under the bar and shoots at you and Jihan Wu.
  6. Jihan Wu uses his mystical chi powers (actually the combined exhaust from all of his mining rigs) to slow down the shotgun pellets, making them hit you as softly as petals drifting in the wind.
  7. The bartender mutters some words, clothes ripping apart as he or she (hard to believe it could be a she but hey) turns into a bear, ready to maul you for cheating him or her of the payment for all the 100 drinks you ordered from him or her.
  8. Steely-eyed, you stand in front of the bartender-turned-bear, daring him to touch you. You've watched Revenant, you know Leonardo di Caprio could survive a bear mauling, and if some posh actor can survive that, you know you can too. You make a pose. "Drunken troll logic attack!"
  9. I think I got sidetracked here.
Lessons learned?

Spilman Channels

Incentive-compatible time-limited unidirectional channel; or, Satoshi's Vision, Fixed (if transaction malleability hadn't been a problem, that is).
Now, we know the bartender will turn into a bear and maul you if you try to cheat the payment channel, and now that we've revealed you're good friends with Jihan Wu, the bartender will no longer accept a payment channel scheme that lets one you cooperate with a miner to cheat the bartender.
Fortunately, Jeremy Spilman proposed a better way that would not let you cheat the bartender.
First, you and the bartender perform this ritual:
  1. You get some funds and create a transaction that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig between you and the bartender. You don't broadcast this yet: you just sign it and get its txid.
  2. You create another transaction that spends the above transaction. This transaction (the "backoff") has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, plus one block. You sign it and give this backoff transaction (but not the above transaction) to the bartender.
  3. The bartender signs the backoff and gives it back to you. It is now valid since it's spending a 2-of-2 of you and the bartender, and both of you have signed the backoff transaction.
  4. Now you broadcast the first transaction onchain. You and the bartender wait for it to be deeply confirmed, then you can start ordering.
The above is probably vaguely familiar to LN users. It's the funding process of payment channels! The first transaction, the one that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig, is the funding transaction that backs the payment channel funds.
So now you start ordering in this way:
  1. For your first drink, you create a transaction spending the funding transaction output and sending the price of the drink to the bartender, with the rest returning to you.
  2. You sign the transaction and pass it to the bartender, who serves your first drink.
  3. For your succeeding drinks, you recreate the same transaction, adding the price of the new drink to the sum that goes to the bartender and reducing the money returned to you. You sign the transaction and give it to the bartender, who serves you your next drink.
  4. At the end:
    • If the bar closing time is reached, the bartender signs the latest transaction, completing the needed 2-of-2 signatures and broadcasting this to the Bitcoin network. Since the backoff transaction is the closing time + 1, it can't get used at closing time.
    • If you decide you want to leave early because your liver is crying, you just tell the bartender to go ahead and close the channel (which the bartender can do at any time by just signing and broadcasting the latest transaction: the bartender won't do that because he or she is hoping you'll stay and drink more).
    • If you ended up just hanging around the bar and never ordering, then at closing time + 1 you broadcast the backoff transaction and get your funds back in full.
Now, even if you pass 50 drinks to Jihan Wu, you can't give him the first transaction (the one which pays for only one drink) and ask him to mine it: it's spending a 2-of-2 and the copy you have only contains your own signature. You need the bartender's signature to make it valid, but he or she sure as hell isn't going to cooperate in something that would lose him or her money, so a signature from the bartender validating old state where he or she gets paid less isn't going to happen.
So, problem solved, right? Right? Okay, let's try it. So you get your funds, put them in a funding tx, get the backoff tx, confirm the funding tx...
Once the funding transaction confirms deeply, the bartender laughs uproariously. He or she summons the bouncers, who surround you menacingly.
"I'm refusing service to you," the bartender says.
"Fine," you say. "I was leaving anyway;" You smirk. "I'll get back my money with the backoff transaction, and posting about your poor service on reddit so you get negative karma, so there!"
"Not so fast," the bartender says. His or her voice chills your bones. It looks like your exploitation of the Satoshi nSequence payment channel is still fresh in his or her mind. "Look at the txid of the funding transaction that got confirmed."
"What about it?" you ask nonchalantly, as you flip open your desktop computer and open a reputable blockchain explorer.
What you see shocks you.
"What the --- the txid is different! You--- you changed my signature?? But how? I put the only copy of my private key in a sealed envelope in a cast-iron box inside a safe buried in the Gobi desert protected by a clan of nomads who have dedicated their lives and their childrens' lives to keeping my private key safe in perpetuity!"
"Didn't you know?" the bartender asks. "The components of the signature are just very large numbers. The sign of one of the signature components can be changed, from positive to negative, or negative to positive, and the signature will remain valid. Anyone can do that, even if they don't know the private key. But because Bitcoin includes the signatures in the transaction when it's generating the txid, this little change also changes the txid." He or she chuckles. "They say they'll fix it by separating the signatures from the transaction body. They're saying that these kinds of signature malleability won't affect transaction ids anymore after they do this, but I bet I can get my good friend Jihan Wu to delay this 'SepSig' plan for a good while yet. Friendly guy, this Jihan Wu, it turns out all I had to do was slip him 51 drinks and he was willing to mine a tx with the signature signs flipped." His or her grin widens. "I'm afraid your backoff transaction won't work anymore, since it spends a txid that is not existent and will never be confirmed. So here's the deal. You pay me 99% of the funds in the funding transaction, in exchange for me signing the transaction that spends with the txid that you see onchain. Refuse, and you lose 100% of the funds and every other HODLer, including me, benefits from the reduction in coin supply. Accept, and you get to keep 1%. I lose nothing if you refuse, so I won't care if you do, but consider the difference of getting zilch vs. getting 1% of your funds." His or her eyes glow. "GENUFLECT RIGHT NOW."
Lesson learned?

CLTV-protected Spilman Channels

Using CLTV for the backoff branch.
This variation is simply Spilman channels, but with the backoff transaction replaced with a backoff branch in the SCRIPT you pay to. It only became possible after OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (CLTV) was enabled in 2015.
Now as we saw in the Spilman Channels discussion, transaction malleability means that any pre-signed offchain transaction can easily be invalidated by flipping the sign of the signature of the funding transaction while the funding transaction is not yet confirmed.
This can be avoided by simply putting any special requirements into an explicit branch of the Bitcoin SCRIPT. Now, the backoff branch is supposed to create a maximum lifetime for the payment channel, and prior to the introduction of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY this could only be done by having a pre-signed nLockTime transaction.
With CLTV, however, we can now make the branches explicit in the SCRIPT that the funding transaction pays to.
Instead of paying to a 2-of-2 in order to set up the funding transaction, you pay to a SCRIPT which is basically "2-of-2, OR this singlesig after a specified lock time".
With this, there is no backoff transaction that is pre-signed and which refers to a specific txid. Instead, you can create the backoff transaction later, using whatever txid the funding transaction ends up being confirmed under. Since the funding transaction is immutable once confirmed, it is no longer possible to change the txid afterwards.

Todd Micropayment Networks

The old hub-spoke model (that isn't how LN today actually works).
One of the more direct predecessors of the Lightning Network was the hub-spoke model discussed by Peter Todd. In this model, instead of payers directly having channels to payees, payers and payees connect to a central hub server. This allows any payer to pay any payee, using the same channel for every payee on the hub. Similarly, this allows any payee to receive from any payer, using the same channel.
Remember from the above Spilman example? When you open a channel to the bartender, you have to wait around for the funding tx to confirm. This will take an hour at best. Now consider that you have to make channels for everyone you want to pay to. That's not very scalable.
So the Todd hub-spoke model has a central "clearing house" that transport money from payers to payees. The "Moonbeam" project takes this model. Of course, this reveals to the hub who the payer and payee are, and thus the hub can potentially censor transactions. Generally, though, it was considered that a hub would more efficiently censor by just not maintaining a channel with the payer or payee that it wants to censor (since the money it owned in the channel would just be locked uselessly if the hub won't process payments to/from the censored user).
In any case, the ability of the central hub to monitor payments means that it can surveill the payer and payee, and then sell this private transactional data to third parties. This loss of privacy would be intolerable today.
Peter Todd also proposed that there might be multiple hubs that could transport funds to each other on behalf of their users, providing somewhat better privacy.
Another point of note is that at the time such networks were proposed, only unidirectional (Spilman) channels were available. Thus, while one could be a payer, or payee, you would have to use separate channels for your income versus for your spending. Worse, if you wanted to transfer money from your income channel to your spending channel, you had to close both and reshuffle the money between them, both onchain activities.

Poon-Dryja Lightning Network

Bidirectional two-participant channels.
The Poon-Dryja channel mechanism has two important properties:
Both the original Satoshi and the two Spilman variants are unidirectional: there is a payer and a payee, and if the payee wants to do a refund, or wants to pay for a different service or product the payer is providing, then they can't use the same unidirectional channel.
The Poon-Dryjam mechanism allows channels, however, to be bidirectional instead: you are not a payer or a payee on the channel, you can receive or send at any time as long as both you and the channel counterparty are online.
Further, unlike either of the Spilman variants, there is no time limit for the lifetime of a channel. Instead, you can keep the channel open for as long as you want.
Both properties, together, form a very powerful scaling property that I believe most people have not appreciated. With unidirectional channels, as mentioned before, if you both earn and spend over the same network of payment channels, you would have separate channels for earning and spending. You would then need to perform onchain operations to "reverse" the directions of your channels periodically. Secondly, since Spilman channels have a fixed lifetime, even if you never used either channel, you would have to periodically "refresh" it by closing it and reopening.
With bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels, you may instead open some channels when you first begin managing your own money, then close them only after your lawyers have executed your last will and testament on how the money in your channels get divided up to your heirs: that's just two onchain transactions in your entire lifetime. That is the potentially very powerful scaling property that bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels allow.
I won't discuss the transaction structure needed for Poon-Dryja bidirectional channels --- it's complicated and you can easily get explanations with cute graphics elsewhere.
There is a weakness of Poon-Dryja that people tend to gloss over (because it was fixed very well by RustyReddit):
Another thing I want to emphasize is that while the Lightning Network paper and many of the earlier presentations developed from the old Peter Todd hub-and-spoke model, the modern Lightning Network takes the logical conclusion of removing a strict separation between "hubs" and "spokes". Any node on the Lightning Network can very well work as a hub for any other node. Thus, while you might operate as "mostly a payer", "mostly a forwarding node", "mostly a payee", you still end up being at least partially a forwarding node ("hub") on the network, at least part of the time. This greatly reduces the problems of privacy inherent in having only a few hub nodes: forwarding nodes cannot get significantly useful data from the payments passing through them, because the distance between the payer and the payee can be so large that it would be likely that the ultimate payer and the ultimate payee could be anyone on the Lightning Network.
Lessons learned?

Future

After LN, there's also the Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels (DMC). This post is long enough as-is, LOL. But for now, it uses a novel "decrementing nSequence channel", using the new relative-timelock semantics of nSequence (not the broken one originally by Satoshi). It actually uses multiple such "decrementing nSequence" constructs, terminating in a pair of Spilman channels, one in both directions (thus "duplex"). Maybe I'll discuss it some other time.
The realization that channel constructions could actually hold more channel constructions inside them (the way the Decker-Wattenhofer puts a pair of Spilman channels inside a series of "decrementing nSequence channels") lead to the further thought behind Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer channel factories. Basically, you could host multiple two-participant channel constructs inside a larger multiparticipant "channel" construct (i.e. host multiple channels inside a factory).
Further, we have the Decker-Russell-Osuntokun or "eltoo" construction. I'd argue that this is "nSequence done right". I'll write more about this later, because this post is long enough.
Lessons learned?
submitted by almkglor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I'm Mark Karpelès, ex-CEO of bankrupt MtGox. Ask me anything.

Dear community,
Many of you know or remember me, especially recently since the MtGox bankruptcy has been allegedly linked with Bitcoin price drops in December 2017 to February 2018. Since taking over the most active Bitcoin exchange in 2011, I ran MtGox until filing for civil rehabilitation on February 28th 2014 (which became bankruptcy less than 2 months later) because a large amount of Bitcoins went missing. Since then, four years have passed, and MtGox is still in bankruptcy today. I’ve been arrested, released under bail after a little less than one year, and am now trying to assist MtGox getting into civil rehabilitation.
I did my best trying to grow the ecosystem by running the biggest exchange at the time. It had big problems but still managed to hang in there. For a while. A quite long while, even, while the rest of the ecosystem caught up. At the end of the day, the methods I chose to try to get MtGox out of its trouble ended up being insufficient, insufficiently executed, or plain wrong.
I know I didn't handle the last, stressful days of the outdrawn and painful Gox collapse very well. I can only be humble about that in hindsight. Once again, I’m sorry.
Japanese bankruptcy law has a particularly nasty outcome here, and I want to address this up front. As creditors claims were registered, those claims were registered in the valuation of Japanese Yen on the bankruptcy date. That's the only way Japanese bankruptcy law can work (most bankruptcy laws around the world operate this way for that matter). This means that the claims can be paid back in full, and there will still be over 160,000 bitcoin and bitcoin cash in assets in the Gox estate. The way bankruptcy law works is that if there are any assets remaining after the creditors have been paid in full, then those assets are distributed to shareholders as part of the liquidation.
That's the only way any bankruptcy law can reasonably work. And yet, in this case, it produces an egregiously distasteful outcome in that the shareholders of MtGox would walk away with the value of over 160,000 bitcoin as a result of what happened.
I don't want this. I don't want this billion dollars. From day one I never expected to receive anything from this bankruptcy. The fact that today this is a possibility is an aberration and I believe it is my responsibility to make sure it doesn’t happen. One of the ways to do this would be civil rehabilitation, and as it seems most creditors agree with this, I am doing my best to help make it happen. I do not want to become instantly rich. I do not ask for forgiveness. I just want to see this end as soon as possible with everyone receiving their share of what they had on MtGox so everyone, myself included, can get some closure.
I’m an engineer at heart. I want to build things. I like seeing what I build being useful, and people being happy using what I build. My drive, from day one, has been to push the limits of what is technically possible, and this is the main reason I liked and have been involved with Bitcoin in the first place. When I took over MtGox, I never imagined things would end this way and I am forever sorry for everything that’s taken place and all the effect it had on everyone involved.
Hopefully, I can make what I’ve learned in this experience useful to the community as a whole, so there can at least be something positive in the end.
Ask me anything you like.
EDIT: With this coming to all there have been an overwhelming number of messages, questions etc. I will continue responding for a little while but probably won't be able to respond to new questions (it is starting to be late here and I've been spending the last few hours typing). Thank you very much to everyone.
submitted by MagicalTux to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I've been in since May 2017, lessons learned, and some real talk.

I've only been in the crypto game since mid 2017. I remember back then when I was assessing the market, BTC was below $1k a few months earlier, LTC was around $4 that January and by the time I finally got in BTC had more than doubled to around $2,500 and LTC was $30. I thought ETH and XRP (and everything else) were just shitcoins because I didn't know shit and I just listened to the herd (Back then the argument was "Bitcoin is digital gold and LTC is digital silver and everything else is a scam.") Now, I'm pretty invested in several coins, because this market is anything but rational.
Screw off if you think otherwise. Try to think logically in this market, and you're going to get smacked in the face.
After exchanging my first fiat for crypto, in the next couple of months the market "crashed" and I was fearful. By crashed, I mean BTC went from $2,800 to $1,800. I just decided to let my cryptos ride. I pretended that money was gone, but I'd check prices every day for whatever damn reason.
I wasn't even putting that much in. Hell, I would spend more eating out and going to the bars every weekend with friends or work colleagues than I was dropping into BTC. It was pretty common that I'd drop $100 a night on sushi, beers, and Sake Bombs. But, when money you could get back loses value, it makes you feel dumb for putting money in. Logic is out the window when I can't get that $100 back from my sushi and drink purchases, but my crypto dropped 30% that week, so I was dumb for investing in crypto but not for my $500+ per month on eating out and drinking with friends.
Several weeks later, I was back to even on my crypto investments. Well shit, that was fast. Then I was suddenly up 25%. "Fuck it, I'm just putting money in. I'm not missing out."
By the the winter of 2017, I was up over 10x with my crypto speculation. My initial LTC went from $30 to over $350; my BTC went from $2,500 to $20,000. I also just threw $300-$1,000 here and there on random sub-200 market cap coins only to see them 6x in a few weeks.
I remember thinking how stupid I was for not buying during that dip down to $1,800, but how good of an investor I was because my gains. What a fucking dope I was.
I was sitting there looking at my account on December 10th, 2017. I was about to sell because I could have paid off my car and 50% of my student loans. I wasn't even using my car because I was in another country traveling.
"Nah, I can't sell. This is just the beginning; let's wait until I can pay off all my student loans" my delusional self said.
I never cashed out. I remember sitting there with a dude who had his GDAX account open after BTC "crashed" from $20k to $13k two weeks later. We just got back from surfing.
He was still sitting at $250,000 in his account and was nervous as shit. "What should I do?" he asked rhetorically. Then immediately answered himself, "It will rebound," he said, "it always does." This guy had been through the MTGOX hack and gave me plenty of advice while we surfed.
And I listened as if he was prophetic.
What a fucking dope I was.
When hopium is in the air, we all get irrational.
I still wonder about that guy and his cryptos. He went north back home for the Christmas holiday, while I headed south for more traveling, and I've never seen him again.
February 2018 was both euphoric and scary as shit. "Holy shit! BTC is under $10k I never thought it would be down here again. But it could keep dropping. But it was just $20k a month ago."
I was skeptical that it wouldn't keep dropping so I waited. Then, I didn't want to miss out. BTC was making a run from $6,500 up to testing $10k. "If it breaks $10k, I'm getting back in."
A short time later, it did break $10k, only to be hit a wall at $12k, then again...then, the inevitable crash to $6,200 happened where it fluctuated in August - November of 2018 up until, what, November 10th-ish when BCH shitfork shat out and then BTC-Shit-Vision and BTC-LMNOP started paying miners to mine their forked fork of BTC and everyone shat themselves as the market tanked yet again.
That was it for me. That was the day I stopped caring. I remember thinking how stupid I was to invest so much time in this.
You can't predict this shit.
I didn't regret investing in crypto, I regret all the time spent looking at my portfolio, trying to time the market, pretending I was some guru in my head because I threw $300 at POE when it was less than a penny and weeks later it was selling for $0.21 and could buy another trip to whatever country I wanted.
Sure, you can use TA to see what support or resistance is there, but it's still a 50-50 chance whether Fake Satoshi is going to spoof trade or some rando is going to drop three 7,000 BTC market buys to break through resistance.
So, what did I learn through this whole experience?
Other than what I've already stated (You have no way to predict whether it's breaking through resistance or crashing through support).
I just remember the main thing that has persisted this last two years. "I wish I could go back in time to when BTC was around $3,000 and LTC was $30."
When BTC dropped below, $4k that was heaven. I never thought it would get back to when I was buying when I first got into the market in 2017.
So, I bought, and I bought hard.
This time around, I have strong buy strategies and sell strategies.
They are set; no question.
For me, I'm not selling until two weeks before the LTC halving in August.
Even then, I'm only selling my LTC for BTC. Then I'll sell 25% of my BTC for fiat 2 weeks before the BTC halving in 2020.
I will never have less than my preferred number of BTC's, ETH's, LTC's and a few others.
Don't follow my advice here, I'm just saying I know what I want and what my strategy is.
You need to have a strategy to buy and strategy to sell. Be reasonable. I previously had a "strategy." It was once I could pay off my student loans with all of my crypto gains minus taxes, I would sell. Yeah, well, looking back if I would have just sold when could pay off my car and 50% of my student loans, I would have been able to invest even more when BTC was down in $3,xxx range and LTC was $22-$35, etc from December 2018 through March 2019.
DCAing is the way to go. No question. You don't need to do TA, you don't need to check your portfolio, you don't need to do shit but either 1) setup an automatic buy order with your exchange or 2) login and buy whatever you want.
You have your buy strategy (DCA at x interval) and you have your sell strategy.
Figure it out. Don't pretend you're gonna time the market. Don't pretend you're some guru.
Those people, like me, learn the hard way.
No TA, no waiting for google searches of BTC to increase, no waiting for BAKKT, no waiting for Faktoshi to shut the fuck up.
Before November 2018, I would only throw money when BTC was on a run. "Oh, we're finally on the way up. It's time to buy!" Like when it went from $2,800 up to $6,200 in the summer 2017, then from $10k to $20k in late 2017. Or when it went from $6,200 back up to $10,000 then to $11,900 in February of 2018.
I would think I could time the market. What a pathetic loser, right?
Some people grow up in this market like the cable version of themselves only to transition to the directv version. Listen to us dopes that have been there and done that.
Learn from our mistakes, but also don't think that we have all the damn answers.
Anyone that comes in here acting like the 2nd coming of Craig Wright's dumpster twin, you can be rest assured they are as delusional as Justin Sun. The problem is, even if they are delusional, this market is anything but rational, so they might just be proven right enough for you to think you should follow their advice.
This shit is crazy. Stop acting like you've got it figured out.
Nobody does, but it feels good to have confidence in this random speculation, right?
I'm here to tell you this. My life has drastically improved since November 2018 when I started viewing Crypto investments like a bill. Every two weeks, I would send money from my paycheck to my exchange. Then, I'd buy a certain amount every single week after it had cleared.
That money, is all but "gone." It was a "bill" I paid.
When the market is going down, I send more fiat and I buy more crypto. When it is rising, I still buy, but not as much; I pull back. You may say I'm trying to catch a falling knife. I just learned that the way I was investing before was bad practice. I'd rather people think I'm trying to catch a falling knife than to feel that FOMO and only buy when the market is up.
Right now for example, I'm not buying this week. Not because I think I know what hell is going to happen, but because it's my strategy to not chase a run, and to spend more when it drops.
I'll wait until next weekend and see what the market is doing.
What happens in between now and next weekend, I don't give a shit.
Could I miss out on another run? Sure, but I don't give a shit. Maybe it's because I'm 2 years in and I've seen this shit before, or maybe it's because I've been buying BTC when it was around $3,000 both in 2017 and just about a month ago, so I feel fortunate to have gotten another chance at BTC at $3,xxx.
I also learned my lesson that fakeouts happen. I've been burned enough to not give a shit about being BTC going from $3500 to $5,200 in the last, what, 5 weeks?
Been here, done it, don't give a shit.
I don't know if this helps anyone, but seeing the last two years of this shit, I don't care about some random 30% pump. I also don't care that BCH is up 86%, or ADA is up whatever it is. I'm not into them, but if you made gains, I'm happy for you.
I'm serious too.
Maybe you're new to this game, or maybe you've only been in since $20k. If so, you're still here, and there are plenty others like you. I'm not a BTC maximalist, I don't think LTC is the truth, I don't think only ETH is the dApp platform.
I don't know shit. I'm just some speculator that is speculating on some of this sit.
There are also plenty of people that were like me in 2017 that are waiting in the wings, only to buy when the market is on the rise. There are plenty more that buy when it's rising then set stop losses that whales will fish for only to wreck the market in a day then to see a bounce back even stronger while those people FOMO back in.
Also, the turd version of satoshi could start shitting in public this week and the media could write about how Satoshi is literally shitting on a physical Bitcoin as we speak and some shitcoin creator then posts a Twitter video that goes viral about how the hashrate and energy consumption of the satoshi shit-pile is not sustainable and then some whale market sells down to below the new TA shit-support level of $4,400 and then all the dopes with stop losses in that range get shit fucked only to see a spoof limit order set at $4,400 of 10,000 BTC and everyone's dick shrinks into their stomach as they hurry to Tether as BTC drops back down to $3,500 before whale #2 shit fucks your emotions with a $1,500 green dildo in a 15 minute span sees the "sell wall" disappear which starts the next FOMO run on up to $6,200 a few weeks later while TAers say "We broke out on great volume" then other TAers agree and the self-fulling prophecy starts another run only to get hit with more whale fuckers.
You can't predict this shit. Give it up.
Market goes up, market goes down, can't explain that.
With the LTC halving in August, the BTC halving in May 2020, I think we are about to get into the 2017 euphoria again though. We are getting closeTM to the point you could just thrown money at any coin and get 10x your investment.
What does "close" mean? I have no idea. Eff anyone that thinks they know. Someone could predict it is this week, next month, or after this current fakeout bull run, or in December, or next Spring, and someone will be right.
The only advice I have is to do your best to not get emotional about your money or crypto. It's going to do the exact opposite of what you think it will. Even when you try to do the opposite, crypto will shit-fuck you in your sleep.
If you believe that the sentiment is changing, and let's be real, we are in speculation phase and this is all based on hopium and belief, then DCA at certain intervals.
This isn't some cult. It's all based on sentiment. If you think people are starting to get interested, then that is a sign speculation is about to be in our favor.
If you are putting money in that needs to be rent money, do yourself a favor and just walk into a casino and put it all on red. If you win, then put your winnings in crypto. If you lose, I saved you the anguish of checking your portfolio every hour only wish you would have done the opposite of what you did.
You're welcome...
Or, do the opposite. Check the market every hour for the next 12 months only to look back and realize that you kept buying on the way up, got scared and sold on the way down, and then FUD yourself in your sleep because of your stop loss sells were triggered while whales were fishing for fear.
So, there are all of my shit thoughts. What are yours?
What are your strategies?
There are plenty of people that have been in longer than me, what are your strategies?
Are we heading for a the next bull run? Is the bottom in? Do we still have a massive, short-lived capitulation event coming?
Let's chat.
TL;DR: You can't predict this shit, just DCA, live your life, get a buy strategy, choose a sell point, make this shit as simple as possible. If you try to complicate things by predicting the next run, the next drop, the next consolidation, then you're probably going to be wrong like 99% of people. And don't be that guy that ends up $250,000 in your account in the next bull run only to see it drop down $67,000 literally a week later.
submitted by KnownCoder to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

NEW! Roger Ver (Bitcoin.com CEO) Talks Bitcoin Hard-Fork, Bitcoin Cash, & Altcoins w/ Crypt0!

NEW! Roger Ver (Bitcoin.com CEO) Talks Bitcoin Hard-Fork, Bitcoin Cash, & Altcoins w/ Crypt0! submitted by DarkestChaos to btc [link] [comments]

I'm Mark Karpelès, ex-CEO of bankrupt MtGox. Ask me anything.

Dear community,
Many of you know or remember me, especially recently since the MtGox bankruptcy has been allegedly linked with Bitcoin price drops in December 2017 to February 2018. Since taking over the most active Bitcoin exchange in 2011, I ran MtGox until filing for civil rehabilitation on February 28th 2014 (which became bankruptcy less than 2 months later) because a large amount of Bitcoins went missing. Since then, four years have passed, and MtGox is still in bankruptcy today. I’ve been arrested, released under bail after a little less than one year, and am now trying to assist MtGox getting into civil rehabilitation.
I did my best trying to grow the ecosystem by running the biggest exchange at the time. It had big problems but still managed to hang in there. For a while. A quite long while, even, while the rest of the ecosystem caught up. At the end of the day, the methods I chose to try to get MtGox out of its trouble ended up being insufficient, insufficiently executed, or plain wrong.
I know I didn't handle the last, stressful days of the outdrawn and painful Gox collapse very well. I can only be humble about that in hindsight. Once again, I’m sorry.
Japanese bankruptcy law has a particularly nasty outcome here, and I want to address this up front. As creditors claims were registered, those claims were registered in the valuation of Japanese Yen on the bankruptcy date. That's the only way Japanese bankruptcy law can work (most bankruptcy laws around the world operate this way for that matter). This means that the claims can be paid back in full, and there will still be over 160,000 bitcoin and bitcoin cash in assets in the Gox estate. The way bankruptcy law works is that if there are any assets remaining after the creditors have been paid in full, then those assets are distributed to shareholders as part of the liquidation.
That's the only way any bankruptcy law can reasonably work. And yet, in this case, it produces an egregiously distasteful outcome in that the shareholders of MtGox would walk away with the value of over 160,000 bitcoin as a result of what happened.
I don't want this. I don't want this billion dollars. From day one I never expected to receive anything from this bankruptcy. The fact that today this is a possibility is an aberration and I believe it is my responsibility to make sure it doesn’t happen. One of the ways to do this would be civil rehabilitation, and as it seems most creditors agree with this, I am doing my best to help make it happen. I do not want to become instantly rich. I do not ask for forgiveness. I just want to see this end as soon as possible with everyone receiving their share of what they had on MtGox so everyone, myself included, can get some closure.
I’m an engineer at heart. I want to build things. I like seeing what I build being useful, and people being happy using what I build. My drive, from day one, has been to push the limits of what is technically possible, and this is the main reason I liked and have been involved with Bitcoin in the first place. When I took over MtGox, I never imagined things would end this way and I am forever sorry for everything that’s taken place and all the effect it had on everyone involved.
Hopefully, I can make what I’ve learned in this experience useful to the community as a whole, so there can at least be something positive in the end.
Ask me anything you like.
EDIT: With this coming to all there have been an overwhelming number of messages, questions etc. I will continue responding for a little while but probably won't be able to respond to new questions (it is starting to be late here and I've been spending the last few hours typing). Thank you very much to everyone.
submitted by MagicalTux to btc [link] [comments]

Roger Ver's $220M ethereum ICO tomorrow - slew of red flags.

Roger Ver's $220M ethereum ICO tomorrow - slew of red flags. submitted by snasps to ethtrader [link] [comments]

My protest at MtGox Offices - 5 to 7th February 2014, Tokyo, Japan.

Day 1 – Wednesday 5 February
After repeated and failed attempts to withdraw my BTC from MtGox, I decided to jump on a plane and pay them a visit in Tokyo.
After a 16 hr. flight from Australia I went straight to their offices, arriving at around 4pm. The receptionist in the lobby told me there was no one available to meet me and I should arrange an appointment.
I refused to leave and after about 15 mins or so, the receptionist handed me the telephone to speak with a member of MtGox support. The support person referred me to their website. After a ‘lively’ conversation I told him I wasn’t gong anywhere, I didn’t travel 16 hrs to read a website I could have read at home. I would wait for Mark Karpeles to come down.
Same thing happened 15 mins later, another call, more non-sense about technical issues, and a suggestion the authorities might have to be called. I told him great, I could lodge an official complaint against MtGox while they were here.
After some hours had passed, the building cleared out and the receptionists left for the night. I was alone in the lobby. Then at approximately 8 pm, I was suddenly greeted by Gonzague Gay-Bouchery, Manager Business Development, and Mark Karpeles right hand man.
I recognized him from some news articles. I thought great, and straight away put some burning questions to him:
Q1. What is causing the withdrawal delays?
• Well, because Gox is the best known of all the exchanges, we have been under the regulatory spotlight.
• This has created problems with government agencies, and also with our banking partners.
• There are also some ongoing investigations, which we cannot talk about.
Q.2 Sure, and this would explain the FIAT delays, but what about the BTC delays; you can’t blame that on anyone else.
• The BTC withdrawal issue is a technical one, and one that has previously affected the MtGox system, our engineers are working hard to resolve the problem.
• As of now, some BTC withdrawals were going through
• For those transactions that remain broken for a week, the balance of BTC will be returned to a customers MtGox account.
Q3. A great way to buy time for a liquidity problem?
• No, it’s a technical issue.
Q4. So why are so many of the input addresses feeding into transactions in the queue coming up empty?
• This is a complex technical issue to which neither of us know the answer
Q5. Try to explain it to me.
• Its technical
Q6. There are over 40,000 BTC in the withdrawal queue, isn’t that the electronic equivalent of a bank run?
• The 40,000 figure is not correct, and the goxreport isn’t accurate.
Q.7 But I actually obtained this data from Delerium’s website who is a gox employee / contractor / associate.
• I will have to look into that.
Q8. Why doesn’t Gox prove they are solvent by transferring a large quantity of BTC between two internal wallets like Mark previously did. Then we can all check it out on the blockchain and be reassured?
• The overwhelming majority of BTC are held in cold storage. Logistically and legally in would be difficult to replicate the transfer “trick” Mark previously employed at Gox to prove their solvency.
Q9. Try me, how hard is it, what exactly is involved?
• Obviously I can’t go into too much detail for security reasons, but it would involve physically obtaining them from 6 or more locations.
Q10. Well, why don’t u do it, isn’t this a critical situation?
• It’s not that straight foreword.
Q11. You do realize no-one believes the technical excuses for the delay in BTC?
• Mt Gox has the coins, it is a technical issue and we need people to be patient.
Q12. What is you view on the poll recently published by Coindesk on Mt Gox?
• Coindesk have a vendetta against MtGox.
Q13. But they one of the most trusted sources of news in the Bitcoin community.
• Some people have it out for Mt Gox.
Q14. How do you explain the vastly different prices that appear on Gox compared with other exchanges? It recently went to 25%.
• Some traders were responsible for the manufacturing the differential in an attempt to financially benefit from arbitrage.
Q15. But people exploiting the arbitrage opportunity would actually reduce the price differential, not widen it.
[I can’t recall receiving a response to this particular point]
Q16. Is MtGox manipulating the price by directly purchasing Bitcoins on their own exchange?
• No, MtGox is not permitted to do this.
[coincidently, almost immediately after this meeting the price on MtGox tanked]
Q17. People have a lot of money tied up in your exchange, and they don’t believe your excuses. All the evidence suggests something more serious going on at gox. You are playing with people’s lives here.
• All the coins are safe; this is merely a technical issue.
When I left the office that night, I wanted to believe that everything was indeed fine, and these were indeed some temporary technical glitches, but this view was somewhat influenced by the fact I still have BTC on their exchange. All the evidence appears to suggest something more serious.
For the record, I gave Gonzague an advance copy of this transcript and offered him the opportunity to have any of his answers amended if he felt I misrepresented him in any way. A member of his support team replied by stating he did not have any comment on my version of the conversation.
Day 2 – Thursday 6 February 2014
I arrived at MtGox early, approximately 8am, and stood outside with a sign reading “MtGox, where has my money gone”. I got some curious looks, and a lot of questions from passersby about my protest.
Then at approximately 9.20 am, Mark Karpeles himself came along carrying a large, and very fancy coffee in his hand that could have passed as a dessert. I immediately confronted him and told him we needed a chat. So he stopped to hear me out.
I told him he was playing with people’s lives, and some people stood to lose their entire savings. Like Gonzague told me the night before, he mentioned technical issues, and that he would look into my case.
Then 20mins later at around 9.40am Gonzague arrived. “Good news” he said, we have sorted out your account, go and check it online. After I got Wi-Fi connection back the hotel I discovered my failed BTC withdrawal transactions had been cancelled and all my BTC were put back in the one place in the world I didn’t want them: The MtGox website. Back to joining the queue of 40,000 other BTCs.
I think this was some sort of ironic joke. I quickly tried to withdraw them again; but surprise, surprise, stuck again.
By late evening, the majority of the other workers in the MtGox building had heard of my protest and were bringing me out sandwiches and beer, and inviting me to lunch. As it turns out, Japan is probably one of the better countries in the world to protest. Everyone is so friendly; I can see why the Goxies choose to set up shop here.
As the evening drew on, it looked like I would have do a late one to catch Mark again on the way out. However, at around 7.30pm, I was approached by a law professor from a local university who has written widely on bitcoin legal issues. He was on his way to a bitcoin “meet-up” and asked me to come along to tell my story to the other bitcoin enthusiasts. I was reluctant to leave the protest but was interested in what other Tokyo resident’s thought of MtGox.
When I arrived, everyone was very interested in hearing my story. There was a general consensus amongst the participants that MtGox was finished as an exchange. They acknowledged that MtGox had played an important role in propelling Bitcoin to what it is today, but its decline and ultimate closure was inevitable.
However, there was some divergent views on the reason for this, most people, including myself are of the view that bad business decisions and incompetence were primarily to blame, while others held the view that government restriction, and secret investigations were hampering MtGox’s ability to function efficiently. Who knows what the truth is, maybe it is a bit of both.
At the end of the day 2, there was a very worrying development, the data feed for the goxreport, and delerium’s MtGox transaction failure website were cut. Perhaps a final act of MtGox’s desperation to hide the truth.
Day 3 – Friday 7 February
I started my protest a little later today in the knowledge that most of the Goxies don’t start work until after 9am. Then there was an unexpected twist; another person showed up looking for Mark. He was an emissary of an early adopter and well known member of the bitcoin community, and was there to collect an eye watering amount of money.
My emotions were mixed on seeing this person; on one hand I was glad to see another protester to fight the good cause. On the other hand, my heart sank in the knowledge that if Mark isn’t paying off his old friends in the bitcoin community then what chance do small fry like me have?
As the emissary and I chatted, Mark Karpeles arrived, and we both confronted him, the conversation went on for some time and most of it conducted in French which I had trouble understanding. However I did mange to record the whole thing on video.
The episode only came to a halt when Gonzague appeared in the lobby and rescued Mark. Very soon after this point, MtGox released a statement announcing that all BTC withdrawals were suspended.
In conclusion, I think i just witnessed MtGox die today. I didn’t get my bitcoin, but glad I came and tried.
submitted by CoinSearcher to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Roger, in your apology for the "everything is fine" MtGox video you made, you cite poor programming skills as the root cause of Gox's collapse. Do you want to make another one of those videos when people start losing money because of the software you are recommending?

submitted by supermari0 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitstamp: Bitcoin withdrawal processing suspended

submitted by hazekBTC to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Mtgox - Need infos

Hi,
I need info on Mtgox, it's been a long time since I was interested in bitcoin, and at the time I had some money on Mtgox. Since I left that aside, and now that I'm interested again, I realize that there has been a problem with this platform. Can someone tell me if I still have the possibility to recover my btc that is on it? Thank you
submitted by UnknownCitizen7 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Roger Ver on MTGOX Bankruptcy and Bitcoin What Happened With Mt. Gox and Why Did It Fall? Mt. Gox: Solving the Mystery of Bitcoin’s Biggest Disaster I Fortune Peter Vessenes: The Cause Of MtGox 202k Bitcoin Payout Delay Insider BTC: Josh Jones of BitcoinBuilder.com talks Mt. Gox

Mt. Gox was a cryptocurrency exchange that operated between 2010 and 2014. Mt. Gox once accounted for over 70% of all bitcoin transactions. In 2014, Mt. Gox was hacked and declared bankruptcy. Bitcoin climbed to new highs during the past 12 months. However, there are still many concerns, threats and problems which it has to overcome to excel further. Recently, Tuur Demeester (Economist & investor, Editor in Chief at Adamant Research. Mostly Bitcoin), shared a tweet and pointed out his discussion with Mike Hearn about the biggest […] A years-old $75 million lawsuit against Mt Gox by US company CoinLab is delaying payouts to creditors, the Japanese bankruptcy trustee revealed today. Mt. Gox, called "Mount Gox" or simply "Gox", was the most widely used bitcoin currency exchange market from shortly after its inception in 2010 to its insolvency late 2013. The market was closed February 25, 2014 and has since filed for bankruptcy protection in Japan and the United States, after losing 640 thousand bitcoins.. A registrant on Mt. Gox had at least two sub-accounts: one for The problems of the Japanese exchange were initiated in late 2011 after the theft of 850,000 Bitcoin, then worth $450 million. Though the victims’ woes were lessened in 2018 as a Japanese court changed the status of the exchange from bankruptcy to civil rehabilitation, the rehabilitator failed to compensate them even after years.

[index] [7953] [21861] [31065] [18291] [23188] [10602] [3270] [18913] [22999] [12503]

Roger Ver on MTGOX Bankruptcy and Bitcoin

Transcript: Hello, I'm Roger Ver, long time Bitcoin proponent. About 7 months ago, purely as a favor to Mtgox, I made a video stating that their fiat withdrawal problems were not being caused by a ... Mt. Gox’s Mark Karpelès is dedicating his life to righting the wrongs of his company’s collapse in 2014. ... Mt. Gox: Solving the Mystery of Bitcoin’s Biggest Disaster I Fortune Fortune ... -----2015 Update----- This video was made 7 months before the collapse of MTGOX. At that time, MTGOX was experiencing no delays with Bitcoin. Their only problems at that time were with fiat ... Steve Wozniak interview: Blockchain technology, AI, Crypto, Bitcoin BTC Halving 2020 Wozniak Foundation 10,289 watching Live now Mark Karpelès on the Collapse of Mt. Gox - Duration: 1:36:04. As far as the news goes, lots of people are talking about Mt Gox and saying how horrible it was and how it is the death toll for Bitcoin, but they are not explaining what happened at Mt Gox and ...

Flag Counter