If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by wise crypto holders
Crypto holders does not need to keep their crypto at an exchange.
Topic: BTC-e hacked ?? - page 39. (Read 199718 times)
Crypto holders does not need to keep their crypto at an exchange.
If there is one thing we all know is that socalism sucks diseased horse cock. Socialising funds is just as bad. FIat holder shouldnt be bailed out by wise crypto holders
+1
Totally agree. I was in exactly the same position as you.
People talk about fiat holders but we are dealing with a trading scenario and for most it was probably just a question of timing as to whether we were in coin or fiat. There is no such thing as a "fiat holder" in the context of a crypto exchange.
I disagree, when you trade BTC for fiat each coin can have only one owner at a time else there would be an imbalance. eg. for BTC/USD there must be one BTC holder and one USD holder at completion of the trade. The IOUs created in the trading database can each only have one recipient, and must be honored as they were at the time of the last trade (or rolled back to the last backup snapshot which would be worse) You can't have two people claiming ownership of the same crypto coin or the same fiat which is what you are trying to do by disregarding the holding, timing is everything.
Converting balances based on available funds doesn't leave multiple people claiming ownership of the same coin. BTC-e didn't segregate user coin accounts (they pooled wallets). Bitfinex even socialized losses as mentioned above despite segregating user Bitcoin accounts.
The point is to create solvency on the books. It makes sense to denominate the losses in a common currency, then redistribute based on the lost amount. The tokens need to be denominated in that common currency (eg USD). They don't need functioning fiat capabilities to redeem the USD token value. They can do that in other coins at the time of each distribution. And since it will be based on current market value at each distribution, users would be fine with that. Just like Bitfinex.
The trouble, of course, is that they have to reconcile a lot of accounts. And they need to do something with the shitcoins that are socialized. That does make this tough.
+1
Totally agree. I was in exactly the same position as you.
People talk about fiat holders but we are dealing with a trading scenario and for most it was probably just a question of timing as to whether we were in coin or fiat. There is no such thing as a "fiat holder" in the context of a crypto exchange.
I disagree, when you trade BTC for fiat each coin can have only one owner at a time else there would be an imbalance. eg. for BTC/USD there must be one BTC holder and one USD holder at completion of the trade. The IOUs created in the trading database can each only have one recipient, and must be honored as they were at the time of the last trade (or rolled back to the last backup snapshot which would be worse) You can't have two people claiming ownership of the same crypto coin or the same fiat which is what you are trying to do by disregarding the holding, timing is everything.
I just wish that BTC-e would do right by fiat holders. Bitfinex overall did a good job evening out the haircut. There's no easy answer; every outcome will leave some people pissed off. But ideally, I think they should be freezing asset values at the time of server downage and denominating everything in USD value, then distributing crypto assets on an equal loss basis, based on available funds. There should be a clear formula that puts all creditors in the same boat. I'm a BTCUSD trader and I happened to be waiting out the dip. Sucks that the people on the other side of the BTCUSD trade seem so much better off.
+1
Totally agree. I was in exactly the same position as you.
People talk about fiat holders but we are dealing with a trading scenario and for most it was probably just a question of timing as to whether we were in coin or fiat. There is no such thing as a "fiat holder" in the context of a crypto exchange.
The success or failure of such a strategy, will ultimately depend on BTC-e's ability to convince people of it's long term viability.
First an foremost is the placement of their servers out of FBI reach so they don't get shutdown again. This is not as easy as it sounds, but it it not impossible either. There are many countries that wouldn't let the FBI do anything on their soil. If BTC-e can convince me that their servers are safe, I would give them the benefit of the doubt and trade on them again.
And there my believes also kick in. If you compare the Russian user base to the Westerners it seems that the Westerners are the minority here and the Russians react very differently to USA threats than Westerners. So, my best guess is, that the btce is offering some withdrawal/deposit in RUR, relaxing the KYC for Russians and they will flow back to the exchange.
About the servers, yeah, you are right. There are many jurisdictions where the USA can't steal anything. It is also very easy to setup reverse proxy and route ssl secured traffic through multiple locations. The domain should be .su just for the reenactment fun of cold war.
Yes, Bitfinex has set how a trading platform can really recovered from a devastating scenario like hacking. They decided against shutting down the exchange and bet they could pull out of the mess. By offering at least 64% returns for customers, they are relieved by this effort by Bitfinex. However, by offering tokens to the customers, 36 percent that was taken from their accounts. Management promised the tokens would eventually be exchanged for cash or equity in Bitfinex’s parent company. Initially, the price of each token plunged. Eventually, a cycle kicked in. As the tokens rose in value, confidence swelled and traders returned, boosting earnings from transaction fees and the likelihood of a successful turnaround is seen. While it’s not clear whether Bitfinex’s recovery strategy is one that will be adopted for another crisis, the idea of using tradeable tokens is catching on. And I personally think that if BTC-e wants to recover and pay this customers back, they can used this strategy that Bitfinex has managed to pull.
The success or failure of such a strategy, will ultimately depend on BTC-e's ability to convince people of it's long term viability.
First an foremost is the placement of their servers out of FBI reach so they don't get shutdown again. This is not as easy as it sounds, but it it not impossible either. There are many countries that wouldn't let the FBI do anything on their soil. If BTC-e can convince me that their servers are safe, I would give them the benefit of the doubt and trade on them again.
How else would it be possible to pay back remaining 45%? If there is no fiat or new crypto in the system, btce token cannot be bought, thus no 45% debt re-payment. Very simple. Also, if btce tokens can be traded with crypto it will result that crypto holders will make big bucks whereas fiat holders will be double fucked. So, from the 55% for everybody POV it makes sense btce tokens can only be traded with fiat.
There could be new crypto in the system. After the Bitfinex token scenario, I wouldn't put anything past the greater fools in this market. What I mean is, I think that if withdrawals are flowing, the site is stable, and there is some level of trading (likely no fees for some time), some fools may actually enter the exchange to buy up the tokens.
For another thing, I suspect BTC-e is pocketing a good deal of funds here. Maybe they plan to provide liquidity. Combined with verification tiers / limited withdrawals, people are forced to trade. The exchange could also manipulate the token prices as well (I certainly suspect Bitfinex did).
I just wish that BTC-e would do right by fiat holders. Bitfinex overall did a good job evening out the haircut. There's no easy answer; every outcome will leave some people pissed off. But ideally, I think they should be freezing asset values at the time of server downage and denominating everything in USD value, then distributing crypto assets on an equal loss basis, based on available funds. There should be a clear formula that puts all creditors in the same boat. I'm a BTCUSD trader and I happened to be waiting out the dip. Sucks that the people on the other side of the BTCUSD trade seem so much better off.
I have a Russian friend who is actually quite happy to get fiat denominated value and thinks that if the exchange relaunches, that it will rebuild trust quickly. That sounds insane to me, but I was also amazed at the Bitfinex recovery last year.
Yes, Bitfinex has set how a trading platform can really recovered from a devastating scenario like hacking. They decided against shutting down the exchange and bet they could pull out of the mess. By offering at least 64% returns for customers, they are relieved by this effort by Bitfinex. However, by offering tokens to the customers, 36 percent that was taken from their accounts. Management promised the tokens would eventually be exchanged for cash or equity in Bitfinex’s parent company. Initially, the price of each token plunged. Eventually, a cycle kicked in. As the tokens rose in value, confidence swelled and traders returned, boosting earnings from transaction fees and the likelihood of a successful turnaround is seen. While it’s not clear whether Bitfinex’s recovery strategy is one that will be adopted for another crisis, the idea of using tradeable tokens is catching on. And I personally think that if BTC-e wants to recover and pay this customers back, they can used this strategy that Bitfinex has managed to pull.
How else would it be possible to pay back remaining 45%? If there is no fiat or new crypto in the system, btce token cannot be bought, thus no 45% debt re-payment. Very simple. Also, if btce tokens can be traded with crypto it will result that crypto holders will make big bucks whereas fiat holders will be double fucked. So, from the 55% for everybody POV it makes sense btce tokens can only be traded with fiat.
There could be new crypto in the system. After the Bitfinex token scenario, I wouldn't put anything past the greater fools in this market. What I mean is, I think that if withdrawals are flowing, the site is stable, and there is some level of trading (likely no fees for some time), some fools may actually enter the exchange to buy up the tokens.
For another thing, I suspect BTC-e is pocketing a good deal of funds here. Maybe they plan to provide liquidity. Combined with verification tiers / limited withdrawals, people are forced to trade. The exchange could also manipulate the token prices as well (I certainly suspect Bitfinex did).
I just wish that BTC-e would do right by fiat holders. Bitfinex overall did a good job evening out the haircut. There's no easy answer; every outcome will leave some people pissed off. But ideally, I think they should be freezing asset values at the time of server downage and denominating everything in USD value, then distributing crypto assets on an equal loss basis, based on available funds. There should be a clear formula that puts all creditors in the same boat. I'm a BTCUSD trader and I happened to be waiting out the dip. Sucks that the people on the other side of the BTCUSD trade seem so much better off.
I have a Russian friend who is actually quite happy to get fiat denominated value and thinks that if the exchange relaunches, that it will rebuild trust quickly. That sounds insane to me, but I was also amazed at the Bitfinex recovery last year.
Working out your financial situation from a google translate of Russian legal talk... so much lol
What you're saying is that instead of converting the USD balances to crypto directly, they will instead give people USD tokens, and BTC-e will list the remaining crypto on the exchange. The only way that model makes sense is that the crypto listed by BTC-e would only be redeemable for USD, and not BTE. The USD could not be used on the exchange for anything but redeeming from BTC-e themselves
I think the plan is, that the btce token is only tradable with USD/EUR/RUR (based on the statement that they say the token can be "freely traded but only maximum at $1 face value"). They stated that everybody gets 45% btce token based on their currency value (today's value as far as I understand), regardless if crypto or fiat holder. And I doubt that there will be tether for each crypto. Only USDT/EURT/RURT, maybe even only USDT.
So, fiat holders have fiat + btce tokens and with the fiat, they can buy crypto at the exchange from anybody who is willing to sell crypto, including btce themselves, or buy, of course, more btce tokens. The crypto holders have their coins + btce tokens and can either withdraw their coins (limits, verification) or trade against other crypto or fiat. And the btce tokens can only be traded with fiat.
How else would it be possible to pay back remaining 45%? If there is no fiat or new crypto in the system, btce token cannot be bought, thus no 45% debt re-payment. Very simple. Also, if btce tokens can be traded with crypto it will result that crypto holders will make big bucks whereas fiat holders will be double fucked. So, from the 55% for everybody POV it makes sense btce tokens can only be traded with fiat.
They have most of their coins. It's the 45% (or whatever percentage they still have after giving coin holders 55% of their coins) of coins (which calculating to 55% fiat) btce initially wanted to distribute to fiat holders in different coins, thus they are hopefully going to create fiat buy orders with their remaining coins for market prices and we in fiat can then buy them.
This still doesn't reconcile with what they have been saying. They have said several times that fiat funds are being converted to cryptocurrencies. There's no possible way they can process fiat (at least in this time frame of 2 weeks). "Fiat money" then would be no different than BTE tokens.
Ostensibly, they are relaunching as an altcoin exchange. No fiat money, at least in the mid term.
Yes, they changed everything with the last update. The idea of giving fiat holders a basket of coins is overruled by last update. Indeed, fiat funds are virtually created however they are backed (very vaguely) by the coins btce still hold after they gave 55% coins back.
First I thought there is a difference between btce tokens and fiat, e.g. that they selling the remaining coins (btc, ltc, eth, nmc, nvc, ppc) at the new exchange's launch at market prices. Thus, you could buy these coins at market price with your fiat. But, as 1 btce token will be 1 USD, probably everybody can buy the remaining coins with their btce tokens. Maybe they allow btce tokens only be traded to fiat?
For now, the refund of fiat holders is more looking like a scam. I hope they will fix it so fiat holders will ge indeed the 55%. Next week they will publish a FAQ containing most asked questions.
About fiat withdrawal: There are many different possibilities, they even could send out gold by courier. I remember also that they offered "cash by cab" (or something like that) in Moscow.
I understand how you are interpreting the new update, but I don't believe this will be the case. You and I both agree that BTC-e has a basket of coins taken from crypto balances being used to reimburse fiat holders. What you're saying is that instead of converting the USD balances to crypto directly, they will instead give people USD tokens, and BTC-e will list the remaining crypto on the exchange. The only way that model makes sense is that the crypto listed by BTC-e would only be redeemable for USD, and not BTE. The USD could not be used on the exchange for anything but redeeming from BTC-e themselves.
If that were the case, then the USD tokens could buy coins at the market rate and I guess it would be a better solution than giving people a basket of 7 cryptos. But they'd need to somehow peg the value of the cryptos to a market price on another exchange. Then they'd need to "burn" the USD tokens after use. Then you run into a situation.. How long does BTC-e maintain this USD-crypto conversion program? Until BTE=1 USD?
This scenario above would work but I think BTC-e wants to dump the shitcoins on people. That's part of their incentive forcing people into taking the basket. I guess it depends how much shitcoin they're holding in comparison to BTC. They'll do whatever ends up making them more money. But one thing I really don't think will happen is creating both BTE and USD tokens which can be used freely on the exchange, especially for the repurchase of BTC-e supplied crypto.
If BTC-e supplied crypto is listed at all it's for USD tokens only. If they opened it for both BTE and USD, they would need to list their own crypto above market rates, which means they are not actually repaying the fiat users 55%.
About fiat withdrawal: There are many different possibilities, they even could send out gold by courier. I remember also that they offered "cash by cab" (or something like that) in Moscow.
If they can manage to get some actual fiat withdrawal options like this, maybe fiat markets are still possible. No one will trade on them, though, until it's clear that the fiat is flowing. I remember at one point, they had cash couriers in the US. I used to play on an online poker site that did the same thing.
As long as the money is flowing to some extent, some confidence could return regarding the premium paid to escape BTC-E fiat obligations. I wonder if they will still have their BTC-E code economy? I think that's one of the things that kept the price so low on BTC-E. Codes were so liquid that customers could use them instead of buying cryptocurrencies to exit the exchange.
Yes, to elaborate on the new structure, you can trade crypto to crypto (BTC/ETH for example), or BTC/BTE (crypto for BTC-e debt token). So in the mid term, if they look like they'll be repaying the BTE tokens, the BTE will approach 1:1 USD. As it approaches further and further, it could effectively become another "Tether" style crypto which is intended to follow the USD. If they can pull that off, they will effectively have replaced the need for USD with their own token which they control.
With a fully crypto exchange, BTC-e would be stronger than ever because the need to hold/handle fiat was the main point of failure this go around. Couple that with more secure hot wallets which can survive a similar server seizure situation, and move the servers to more secure locations, suddenly BTC-e becomes the closest thing out there to an invincible exchange.
With a fully crypto exchange, BTC-e would be stronger than ever because the need to hold/handle fiat was the main point of failure this go around. Couple that with more secure hot wallets which can survive a similar server seizure situation, and move the servers to more secure locations, suddenly BTC-e becomes the closest thing out there to an invincible exchange.
There is no reason why they can't do eventually handle other fiat, eg. RUR and let the USD people organize there own conversion from one to the to the other outside of the BTC-e exchange. That's how USDT works.
I can't speak to the RUR situation. Presumably there aren't the same risks as there are for USD and EUR. So maybe some limited liquidity fiat markets are possible, eventually. As for Tether, it works because the house of cards hasn't tumbled down yet. Hundreds of millions of dollars are locked in Bitfinex/Tether, and no one can get it out. That doesn't seem like a sustainable situation, long term.
Short term, no one cares, because crypto is in a bubble; people need Tether to move USD value among exchanges, and Tether stays equal to or even more valuable than real USD because of inability for Bitfinex to receive deposits. If/when all the money stops flowing into crypto, I think we will start to see this situation break down considerably.
The sad part about all this is there are exchanges that handled the USD to and from BTC-e eg. OKPAY who are the ones that the FBI should have put up against the wall for money laundering, not BTC-e as they were mostly dealing with the fiat from OKPAY etc. not the end customer.
I think this is what the exchange's legal team believed. It's what most users likely believed. KYC is the problem of the actual fiat transmitter, right? But I guess that's not how the FBI sees things...
Same goes for wire transfers etc., the company sending the funds to BTC-e should be the one up for money laundering. The logic is simple, BTC-e are not a bank, they don't hold the USD like they do crypto, someone else holds the USD for them, and that someone is obliged to honor the money laundering laws. Dirty USD money should never have been allowed to get to BTC-e in the first place if the money transmitters were doing their jobs properly (unless it was physically delivered as cash).
Payment processors like OKPAY (Mayzus) launder money all day, every day. I'm actually puzzled regarding not only how Mayzus avoided being taken down with BTC-e, but how it could be that Mayzus voluntarily froze BTC-e's bank accounts, rather than having them frozen by the feds and their proxies in other countries.
They have most of their coins. It's the 45% (or whatever percentage they still have after giving coin holders 55% of their coins) of coins (which calculating to 55% fiat) btce initially wanted to distribute to fiat holders in different coins, thus they are hopefully going to create fiat buy orders with their remaining coins for market prices and we in fiat can then buy them.
This still doesn't reconcile with what they have been saying. They have said several times that fiat funds are being converted to cryptocurrencies. There's no possible way they can process fiat (at least in this time frame of 2 weeks). "Fiat money" then would be no different than BTE tokens.
Ostensibly, they are relaunching as an altcoin exchange. No fiat money, at least in the mid term.
Yes, they changed everything with the last update. The idea of giving fiat holders a basket of coins is overruled by last update. Indeed, fiat funds are virtually created however they are backed (very vaguely) by the coins btce still hold after they gave 55% coins back.
First I thought there is a difference between btce tokens and fiat, e.g. that they selling the remaining coins (btc, ltc, eth, nmc, nvc, ppc) at the new exchange's launch at market prices. Thus, you could buy these coins at market price with your fiat. But, as 1 btce token will be 1 USD, probably everybody can buy the remaining coins with their btce tokens. Maybe they allow btce tokens only be traded to fiat?
For now, the refund of fiat holders is more looking like a scam. I hope they will fix it so fiat holders will ge indeed the 55%. Next week they will publish a FAQ containing most asked questions.
About fiat withdrawal: There are many different possibilities, they even could send out gold by courier. I remember also that they offered "cash by cab" (or something like that) in Moscow.
Yes, to elaborate on the new structure, you can trade crypto to crypto (BTC/ETH for example), or BTC/BTE (crypto for BTC-e debt token). So in the mid term, if they look like they'll be repaying the BTE tokens, the BTE will approach 1:1 USD. As it approaches further and further, it could effectively become another "Tether" style crypto which is intended to follow the USD. If they can pull that off, they will effectively have replaced the need for USD with their own token which they control.
With a fully crypto exchange, BTC-e would be stronger than ever because the need to hold/handle fiat was the main point of failure this go around. Couple that with more secure hot wallets which can survive a similar server seizure situation, and move the servers to more secure locations, suddenly BTC-e becomes the closest thing out there to an invincible exchange.
There is no reason why they can't do eventually handle other fiat, eg. RUR and let the USD people organize there own conversion from one to the to the other outside of the BTC-e exchange. That's how USDT works.
The sad part about all this is there are exchanges that handled the USD to and from BTC-e eg. OKPAY who are the ones that the FBI should have put up against the wall for money laundering, not BTC-e as they were mostly dealing with the fiat from OKPAY etc. not the end customer.
Same goes for wire transfers etc., the company sending the funds to BTC-e should be the one up for money laundering. The logic is simple, BTC-e are not a bank, they don't hold the USD like they do crypto, someone else holds the USD for them, and that someone is obliged to honor the money laundering laws. Dirty USD money should never have been allowed to get to BTC-e in the first place if the money transmitters were doing their jobs properly(unless it was physically delivered as cash).
It's impossible that they give people USD. They have no way to cash out USD. If there's no way to cash out USD, it's a token. It's just money they invented, because it's impossible to remove from the platform. Explain to me how 1 USD is different from 1 BTE in this scenario.
I don't think there is USD in the scenario. Indeed that's why BTE exists; because they can't process fiat money. I think that fiat holders must be getting cryptocurrencies + BTE, especially given what they said about conversion in their latest posts. They could only exist as a crypto-only exchange.
They have most of their coins. It's the 45% (or whatever percentage they still have after giving coin holders 55% of their coins) of coins (which calculating to 55% fiat) btce initially wanted to distribute to fiat holders in different coins, thus they are hopefully going to create fiat buy orders with their remaining coins for market prices and we in fiat can then buy them.
This still doesn't reconcile with what they have been saying. They have said several times that fiat funds are being converted to cryptocurrencies. There's no possible way they can process fiat (at least in this time frame of 2 weeks). "Fiat money" then would be no different than BTE tokens.
Ostensibly, they are relaunching as an altcoin exchange. No fiat money, at least in the mid term.
Yes, to elaborate on the new structure, you can trade crypto to crypto (BTC/ETH for example), or BTC/BTE (crypto for BTC-e debt token). So in the mid term, if they look like they'll be repaying the BTE tokens, the BTE will approach 1:1 USD. As it approaches further and further, it could effectively become another "Tether" style crypto which is intended to follow the USD. If they can pull that off, they will effectively have replaced the need for USD with their own token which they control.
With a fully crypto exchange, BTC-e would be stronger than ever because the need to hold/handle fiat was the main point of failure this go around. Couple that with more secure hot wallets which can survive a similar server seizure situation, and move the servers to more secure locations, suddenly BTC-e becomes the closest thing out there to an invincible exchange.
It's impossible that they give people USD. They have no way to cash out USD. If there's no way to cash out USD, it's a token. It's just money they invented, because it's impossible to remove from the platform. Explain to me how 1 USD is different from 1 BTE in this scenario.
I don't think there is USD in the scenario. Indeed that's why BTE exists; because they can't process fiat money. I think that fiat holders must be getting cryptocurrencies + BTE, especially given what they said about conversion in their latest posts. They could only exist as a crypto-only exchange.
They have most of their coins. It's the 45% (or whatever percentage they still have after giving coin holders 55% of their coins) of coins (which calculating to 55% fiat) btce initially wanted to distribute to fiat holders in different coins, thus they are hopefully going to create fiat buy orders with their remaining coins for market prices and we in fiat can then buy them.
This still doesn't reconcile with what they have been saying. They have said several times that fiat funds are being converted to cryptocurrencies. There's no possible way they can process fiat (at least in this time frame of 2 weeks). "Fiat money" then would be no different than BTE tokens.
Ostensibly, they are relaunching as an altcoin exchange. No fiat money, at least in the mid term.
Fiat holders are fucked or fiat holders are fucked only if they panic sell. Cannot decide yet.
I think most of the people that had whatever fiat balance there are already happy that they at least **might** get their digital tokens back to a certain extent.I personally had like $300 in my account, and have already said goodbye to these funds. I left it there to exploit some potential arbitrage opportunities, but it didn't came that far unfortunately.
I think every holder of digital tokens on that exchange should be happy that BTC-E is at least considering to make a come back ~ they could have taken the easiest way out for sure.
It's impossible that they give people USD. They have no way to cash out USD. If there's no way to cash out USD, it's a token. It's just money they invented, because it's impossible to remove from the platform. Explain to me how 1 USD is different from 1 BTE in this scenario.
I don't think there is USD in the scenario. Indeed that's why BTE exists; because they can't process fiat money. I think that fiat holders must be getting cryptocurrencies + BTE, especially given what they said about conversion in their latest posts. They could only exist as a crypto-only exchange.
They have most of their coins. It's the 45% (or whatever percentage they still have after giving coin holders 55% of their coins) of coins (which calculating to 55% fiat) btce initially wanted to distribute to fiat holders in different coins, thus they are hopefully going to create fiat buy orders with their remaining coins for market prices and we in fiat can then buy them.
Also, they are not refunding, they are relaunching their exchange resulting in people start trading again. Adding to that, they will limit withdrawals, so forcing people to trade. I believe that most of the Russian speaking people will continue to use them, because they do not have an alternative.
Fiat holders are fucked or fiat holders are fucked only if they panic sell. Cannot decide yet.
Jump to: