CEO of BTC China speaking to CNBC - page 2.

Buffer Overflow

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1016

Quote from: toknormal on December 19, 2013, 03:49:20 AM

Quote from: btbrae on December 18, 2013, 08:21:40 AM

It really annoys me when people start all their sentences with "So...". In English you BARELY EVER start a sentence with "So..." and it's even rarer to use it to answer a direct question. I mean WTF? I thought this was a quick fad but it's been going on long enough and we have to put a stop to it. I'm starting a committee or something. It drives me fucking nuts. Learn to English.

Top comment !!!

I completely agree. Starting a sentence with "so" implies some continuity of a dialogue that the listener hasn't been aware of..kind of "ah, you haven't heard about this, I'll just bring you up to date". At best it's ridiculous grammar and at worst it's an attempt to dismiss the legitimacy of the questioner's challenge and is patronising as f*ck.

It annoys the f*ck out of me as well and the Winklevoss's are the worst culprits.

On a related note, listen to them try to explain Bitcoin - instead of just saying "its peer to peer money that doesn't need a bank as a counterparty", they go on about cryptology and C++ programming !?!

http://www.businessinsider.com/winklevoss-twins-explain-what-bitcoin-is-2013-11

So it's okay to pointlessly swear in most sentences?

toknormal

legendary

Activity: 3066

Merit: 1188

Quote from: btbrae on December 18, 2013, 08:21:40 AM

It really annoys me when people start all their sentences with "So...". In English you BARELY EVER start a sentence with "So..." and it's even rarer to use it to answer a direct question. I mean WTF? I thought this was a quick fad but it's been going on long enough and we have to put a stop to it. I'm starting a committee or something. It drives me fucking nuts. Learn to English.

Top comment !!!

I completely agree. Starting a sentence with "so" implies some continuity of a dialogue that the listener hasn't been aware of..kind of "ah, you haven't heard about this, I'll just bring you up to date". At best it's ridiculous grammar and at worst it's an attempt to dismiss the legitimacy of the questioner's challenge and is patronising as f*ck.

It annoys the f*ck out of me as well and the Winklevoss's are the worst culprits.

On a related note, listen to them try to explain Bitcoin - instead of just saying "its peer to peer money that doesn't need a bank as a counterparty", they go on about cryptology and C++ programming !?!

http://www.businessinsider.com/winklevoss-twins-explain-what-bitcoin-is-2013-11

e521

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: drewster on December 18, 2013, 08:52:13 PM

Quote from: Notanon on December 18, 2013, 01:35:07 PM

http://fiatleak.com/

At the rate China are buying coins, it looks like everyone else has been duped.

Okay I'm watching FiatLeak... so what about it makes you think China is BUYING, as opposed to SELLING?

I don't understand the point behind FiatLeak now, it's showing buy orders, so what?
Does it show sell orders as well?

c933103

newbie

Activity: 10

Merit: 0

Quote from: Mjbmonetarymetals on December 18, 2013, 07:33:58 AM

So do exchanges in china need to use 3rd party payment providers ? Or can banks deal directly with exchanges ... A clear yes or no would be useful Huh

A BTC exchange in China called Huobi said to a newspaper that because all third party services are terminated, they have to handle thousands of money drawback request manually by bank transfer instead of that originally have a system in place which can help automatically process everything thus everyone in their company work till like 10 or 11 pm.

drewster

member

Activity: 74

Merit: 10

Quote from: Notanon on December 18, 2013, 01:35:07 PM

http://fiatleak.com/

At the rate China are buying coins, it looks like everyone else has been duped.

Okay I'm watching FiatLeak... so what about it makes you think China is BUYING, as opposed to SELLING?

testerx

hero member

Activity: 608

Merit: 500

Quote from: cbeast on December 18, 2013, 03:04:58 PM

while I agree with the sentiment, you give banksters too much credit. They hire quants to do that and the quants all love Bitcoin. Wall street bankers wouldn't know what to do with a bitcoin in a whorehouse.

How true, I'm friends with a de shaw quant and he's definitely into bitcoin though I don't think they've really out big money into it.

kcirazy

newbie

Activity: 53

Merit: 0

Quote from: howardb on December 18, 2013, 11:32:36 AM

Surely this also stops Chinese manufacturers accepting bitcoin? (Such as Black Arrow)

If they can't exchange it for CNY, then I don't think they want to take the risk.

StarfishPrime

sr. member

Activity: 358

Merit: 250

Quote from: btbrae on December 18, 2013, 08:21:40 AM

It really annoys me when people start all their sentences with "So...". In English you BARELY EVER start a sentence with "So..." and it's even rarer to use it to answer a direct question. I mean WTF? I thought this was a quick fad but it's been going on long enough and we have to put a stop to it. I'm starting a committee or something. It drives me fucking nuts. Learn to English.

Yes, we must all being to "learn to english"

Netnox

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1008

They are looking for alternatives, so that's a good sign

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: Melbustus on December 18, 2013, 03:04:14 PM

Call me naive, but I think it's a simpler case of individual regulators at various agencies simply trying to meet their mandates. Thus, they're enforcing AML/KYC and licensing. That's all rather to be expected. They're not in cahoots with Wall St. banks towards some amorphous goal of creating more paper debt; more generally, the regs targeting tracking of financial flows help gov keep tabs on people for taxation and crime-fighting purposes (drug war, etc).

Their mandates were written by the best-paid lobbyists who all came from Wall Street. They don't have to be conscious of the big picture effect.

Quote from: Melbustus on December 18, 2013, 03:04:14 PM

But regarding paper-BTC, we as consumers/customers of such platforms and products will simply need to demand proof. Sign a message with the private key to whatever balance. Much simpler than credibly providing audit-proof of vaults full of gold (tungsten?) bars. Customers *have* to demand this sort of accountability, though! But unlike prior vehicles, full transparency is possible with bitcoin.

Full transparency is always possible with Bitcoin. When you're dealing with third party services with accept Bitcoin deposits, however, you need an additional accounting layer to get that transparency.

Like this one: http://bitcoinism.blogspot.com/2013/12/voting-pools-how-to-stop-plague-of.html

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1014

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: justusranvier on December 18, 2013, 02:55:20 PM

Quote from: Swapster on December 18, 2013, 01:49:24 PM

Meanwhile, in the good 'ol US of A…. FinCEN sending notices to businesses that they should err on the side of caution lest they be seen as criminals. Basically, if you want to start an exchange in the US, you better register with FinCEN and get your money transmitter license in all 50 states and pay for your surety bond in each state (very expensive).

FinCEN is doing their job as the enforcement arm of the Manhattan financial crime mafia.

Wall Street wants in on Bitcoin trading, but on their terms and without needing to compete against more honest platforms run by outsiders.

Professional traders talk about how the lack of leverage and other traditional trading features as contributing to volatility. That code for, "we hate needing to ask permission to sell other people's bitcoins for them".

They want to be able to rehypothecate customer deposits, and especially want to be able to short naked.

The purpose of all this FinCEN enforcement activity is to herd bitcoin users into forthcoming platforms where you'll be dealing with "paper BTC" that's just like "paper gold" - no way to prove that you actually own what the balance in your account implies that you own.

while I agree with the sentiment, you give banksters too much credit. They hire quants to do that and the quants all love Bitcoin. Wall street bankers wouldn't know what to do with a bitcoin in a whorehouse.

Melbustus

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1004

Quote from: justusranvier on December 18, 2013, 02:55:20 PM

...
The purpose of all this FinCEN enforcement activity is to herd bitcoin users into forthcoming platforms where you'll be dealing with "paper BTC" that's just like "paper gold" - no way to prove that you actually own what the balance in your account implies that you own.

Call me naive, but I think it's a simpler case of individual regulators at various agencies simply trying to meet their mandates. Thus, they're enforcing AML/KYC and licensing. That's all rather to be expected. They're not in cahoots with Wall St. banks towards some amorphous goal of creating more paper debt; more generally, the regs targeting tracking of financial flows help gov keep tabs on people for taxation and crime-fighting purposes (drug war, etc).

But regarding paper-BTC, we as consumers/customers of such platforms and products will simply need to demand proof. Sign a message with the private key to whatever balance. Much simpler than credibly providing audit-proof of vaults full of gold (tungsten?) bars. Customers *have* to demand this sort of accountability, though! But unlike prior vehicles, full transparency is possible with bitcoin.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: Swapster on December 18, 2013, 01:49:24 PM

Meanwhile, in the good 'ol US of A…. FinCEN sending notices to businesses that they should err on the side of caution lest they be seen as criminals. Basically, if you want to start an exchange in the US, you better register with FinCEN and get your money transmitter license in all 50 states and pay for your surety bond in each state (very expensive).

FinCEN is doing their job as the enforcement arm of the Manhattan financial crime mafia.

Wall Street wants in on Bitcoin trading, but on their terms and without needing to compete against more honest platforms run by outsiders.

Professional traders talk about how the lack of leverage and other traditional trading features as contributing to volatility. That code for, "we hate needing to ask permission to sell other people's bitcoins for them".

They want to be able to rehypothecate customer deposits, and especially want to be able to short naked.

The purpose of all this FinCEN enforcement activity is to herd bitcoin users into forthcoming platforms where you'll be dealing with "paper BTC" that's just like "paper gold" - no way to prove that you actually own what the balance in your account implies that you own.

coins101

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: viajero on December 18, 2013, 12:47:19 PM

Quote from: Piper67 on December 18, 2013, 10:57:24 AM

Quote from: R2Pleasent on December 18, 2013, 10:54:10 AM

Quote from: e4xit on December 18, 2013, 10:43:56 AM

Quote from: coins101 on December 18, 2013, 10:33:32 AM

These charts show that the selling is no where near as high as the crash back in April.

http://coinregulations.com/ban-on-btc-china-taking-cash-payments-causes-bump-in-the-road/

Also, the ratio of sellers to buyers is more balanced. This talks to the increased popularity of bitcoin around the world, which is good news. Having one or two countries dominating the landscape is bad news as it causes negative spikes like we are seeing when regulators throw their toys out of the pram.

The more people around the world that use it, the greater the price stability, and it almost goes without saying that there will be greater demand keeping prices rising due to scarcity of supply.

Bitcoin just went on sale for a few weeks, thats all.

nice chart, glad I saw this!

The numbers are extremely deceiving. The primary catalyst in the April crash was the fact that everyone used the same exchange, MT Gox, and the system crashed during the sell-off. People could not put in orders. If they did put in orders, the lag was literally up to an hour.

Which, if anything, would support the view that this crash isn't as volume intensive.

sorry but no: http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/btcnCNY#rg360ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

the april crash happened mainly on gox, so lots of volume there. this crash is happening mainly in china, so lots of volume there... the gox chart is useless for todays crash!

Fair point, but prices have been falling for a few weeks now and the sudden move since yesterday hasn't caused the prices to fall back to April levels. There are still plenty of buyers meeting a reasonable number of sellers.

DoubleMyCoins!

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

I'm not sure what to make of this. He is cut off from RMB transfer, but says his exchange is considered legal Huh

viajero

member

Activity: 110

Merit: 10

Quote from: kwoody on December 18, 2013, 02:11:47 PM

so far the mtgox low for the past week was 455 usd. if it doesn't drop below that in the next few days, chances are that's the new floor.

i bet 1BTC that the price will drop below 455.00$ on gox in the next 14 days! anybody in?

kwoody

sr. member

Activity: 454

Merit: 250

Technology and Women. Amazing.

so far the mtgox low for the past week was 455 usd. if it doesn't drop below that in the next few days, chances are that's the new floor.

Buffer Overflow

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1016

Quote from: btbrae on December 18, 2013, 08:21:40 AM

It really annoys me when people start all their sentences with "So...".

So why does it annoy you?

viajero

member

Activity: 110

Merit: 10

prices will go further down. but not below 100$! it never fell below pre bubble prices in the past even when the future looked much worse. i expect another drop to less than 400$ on gox and than prices will stabilize around 300-500 before the next ascent begins.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

So, what does this mean for Bitcoin in China? I like he speak very much good engrish too.

Topic: CEO of BTC China speaking to CNBC - page 2. (Read 9035 times)