Well it existed - doesn't that mean someone wants very hard for bitcoin to succeed?
Someone very powerful?
I see it as bullish.
Topic: For people still in denial about willy - page 3. (Read 6565 times)
Alright. Let's say we are no longer "in denial" about willy.
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'preferred clientswhales over a longer time span to minimize costs? As in: who says Willy didn't have the USD behind it?
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof". In your own words:
To conclude foul play only from the existence and activity of Willy is bullshit, by your own standards. Be consistent.
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof". In your own words:
Get out of my thread if you resort to this kind of fallacious reasoning. ...
To conclude foul play only from the existence and activity of Willy is bullshit, by your own standards. Be consistent.
Alright, it's correct that we can't conclude that Willy operated with fake funds based on it's existence and the VIP client/whale theory is a possible explanation. At last what's going for it is innocent until proven guilty and I think that's also the reason why Mark Karpeles is still a free man.
The reason why to argue for the "Bots were funded with fake USD" is the context. It could explain the withdrawal problems and the subsequent "missing" Bitcoins.
Another argument is motivation: Why should a "VIP" want to acquire Bitcoins denominated in Bitcoin amounts, not based on a certain USD budget? Why only market orders?
Here we have the "Very deep pockets, vs infinitely deep pockets." And I argue that infinitely deep pockets only has one reasonable explanation: fake funds
The motivation for GOX: Why offer such a deal instead of giving them a regular account? They had motivation to earn fees.
Regarding foul play: At least that Willy & Markus operated during Market downtimes has been established. That's foul play IMO.
It doesn't matter if the single buys taken by themselves don't take the price higher immediately.
The more buys the market gets, the bullish the market becomes. The total amount Willy and Markus purchased is a gigantic amount of coins, anyone that slowly takes that amount of coins out of the hands of traders on exchanges is gonna have a big impact on the price short medium term.
Supply/demand.
What the guy is basically saying is that only big market buys that INSTANTLY take the price higher have an effect on price.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
The more buys the market gets, the bullish the market becomes. The total amount Willy and Markus purchased is a gigantic amount of coins, anyone that slowly takes that amount of coins out of the hands of traders on exchanges is gonna have a big impact on the price short medium term.
Supply/demand.
What the guy is basically saying is that only big market buys that INSTANTLY take the price higher have an effect on price.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
Alright. Let's say we are no longer "in denial" about willy.
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'preferred clientswhales over a longer time span to minimize costs? As in: who says Willy didn't have the USD behind it?
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof". In your own words:
To conclude foul play only from the existence and activity of Willy is bullshit, by your own standards. Be consistent.
I agree with oda.krell on that one. Coexistence is not yet causation of the whole story. Mt. Gox was definitely back then the biggest BTC exchange, so many want to connect the dots too quickly. Possible yes, certain not. The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof". In your own words:
Get out of my thread if you resort to this kind of fallacious reasoning. ...
To conclude foul play only from the existence and activity of Willy is bullshit, by your own standards. Be consistent.
I actually do believe that willy may have contributed to the late 2013 bubble! The continued buying pressure, never mind how low, actually may have taken the edge off if the continuing supply of new coins being minted. But it does t account for the previous bubbles. Willy may have been activated due to the rising price, as well.
^You have me on ignore so you probably won't read this post, but whatever, here it goes:
It's possible it was a bot for wealthy clients that had favours, but many things don't add up.
Police is investigating and their findings and statements just add the the whole shadiness:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bitcoin-theft-mtgox-was-inside-job-according-police-1481599
In his article, Emin was basically saying that the willy report's findings are not a big deal and not an indication that the bot actions were manipulative. While we clearly don't have conclusive evidence, I would say we have few indications that something was not quite right.
gox could've been buying on behalf of a large whale. plus, volumes on Chinese exchanges were large at the time.
You're right, it's possible, but the whole thing is shady as hell. One of the bots was not paying fees, the other one was, one was paying with money technically not in the exchange, the other was not. The fact that the bots were active even when trading was closed to anybody else... etc.It's possible it was a bot for wealthy clients that had favours, but many things don't add up.
Police is investigating and their findings and statements just add the the whole shadiness:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bitcoin-theft-mtgox-was-inside-job-according-police-1481599
In his article, Emin was basically saying that the willy report's findings are not a big deal and not an indication that the bot actions were manipulative. While we clearly don't have conclusive evidence, I would say we have few indications that something was not quite right.
Alright. Let's say we are no longer "in denial" about willy.
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'preferred clientswhales over a longer time span to minimize costs? As in: who says Willy didn't have the USD behind it?
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof". In your own words:
To conclude foul play only from the existence and activity of Willy is bullshit, by your own standards. Be consistent.
The bot existed. Created plenty of buying pressure and drove up price.
So, how about the evidence that it wasn't a customer funded, exchange internal bot, running to split up large orders of gox'
I mean, I get it... I dislike gox as much as anyone in here. There's at least a real chance that they have been running a fractional reserve for a long time, and the last "bubble" was created without new money coming in (to a degree at least). However, "chance" is not the same as "proof". In your own words:
Get out of my thread if you resort to this kind of fallacious reasoning. ...
To conclude foul play only from the existence and activity of Willy is bullshit, by your own standards. Be consistent.
Correlation is not causation. It could just as easily be argued that it was the rise in price that caused willybot to activate.
But correlation and a red flag could usually prevent such problems to rise.
And yeah, I may be wrong. If I would be smart enough for this, I could try to do myself what I proposed
A chart says more than thousand words:
from: http://blog.wizsec.jp/2015/02/mtgox-investigation-release.html
from: http://blog.wizsec.jp/2015/02/mtgox-investigation-release.html
And what stops some smart guys to make the charts in a way that counts?
If some "areas" of the chart can be suspected - for any exchange - to inflate/deflate the price only playing with no money or rotating the same money, then the chart will show an alarm too.
Of course, we need some smart guys for that.
(And then their site will surely get enough traffic to cover the expenses for the time and effort on this.)
Correlation is not causation. It could just as easily be argued that it was the rise in price that caused willybot to activate.
A chart says more than thousand words:
from: http://blog.wizsec.jp/2015/02/mtgox-investigation-release.html
from: http://blog.wizsec.jp/2015/02/mtgox-investigation-release.html
And what stops some smart guys to make the charts in a way that counts?
If some "areas" of the chart can be suspected - for any exchange - to inflate/deflate the price only playing with no money or rotating the same money, then the chart will show an alarm too.
Of course, we need some smart guys for that.
(And then their site will surely get enough traffic to cover the expenses for the time and effort on this.)
if it was as easy as you say what's to stop anyone turning willy back on making mucho moolah?
nothing happens in a vacuum, except perhaps your synapse firings.
nothing happens in a vacuum, except perhaps your synapse firings.
Well, nothing is stopping an exchange from operating as a fractional reserve while posing as a full reserve exchange and using a buybot to cover the charade. As best I can tell that's what Krapeles was doing. Gov't regulation gives people a false sense of security IMHO. There is no effective substitue for investor and customer oversight. Caveat Emptor.
if it was as easy as you say what's to stop anyone turning willy back on making mucho moolah?
nothing happens in a vacuum, except perhaps your synapse firings.
nothing happens in a vacuum, except perhaps your synapse firings.
If you wanted to help somebody, you should of said this at $800+
Plenty did warn of Willy and Markus at much higher price ranges than Bitcoin is now at, but were invariably shouted down by the same old fucking mentally stinted bampots as are doing the shouting down even now....
Now...when Bitcoin is cleary setting itself up for another leg down.
Moving averages on the 15 min, 1 HR, 4 HR and 1 day chart are all positive. All the other EMAs are close or neutral. Six exchanges got hacked and nobody panicked. R U sure about that leg down? It's not very cleary to me.
If you wanted to help somebody, you should of said this at $800+
Plenty did warn of Willy and Markus at much higher price ranges than Bitcoin is now at, but were invariably shouted down by the same old fucking mentally stinted bampots as are doing the shouting down even now....
Now...when Bitcoin is cleary setting itself up for another leg down.
Whether this is true or not obviously nothing we do now can change it. Mt Gox is a scandal that everyone ought to put behind. More important is to look ahead.
No, I don't think so. Moving on shouldn't happen until the perps have been found, prosecuted and sentenced and it's certain that this kind of fraud can't be repeated on other so called 'exchanges' by correctly enforced regulations.I agree that bots played the cricial role in the two amazing bubbles, but they also pushed bitcoin to where it is today, so regardless of what bots did, bitcoin is now in stage to make another run,
bots or no bots.
cheers
bots or no bots.
cheers
Get out of my thread if you resort to this kind of fallacious reasoning. Your opinion that "bitcoin is now in stage to make another run," is no conclusion of anything in this sentence.
Why you mad, bro?
Whether this is true or not obviously nothing we do now can change it. Mt Gox is a scandal that everyone ought to put behind. More important is to look ahead.
I agree that bots played the cricial role in the two amazing bubbles, but they also pushed bitcoin to where it is today, so regardless of what bots did, bitcoin is now in stage to make another run,
bots or no bots.
cheers
bots or no bots.
cheers
Get out of my thread if you resort to this kind of fallacious reasoning. Your opinion that "bitcoin is now in stage to make another run," is no conclusion of anything in this sentence.
Why you mad, bro?
i've said it before and i'll say it again - the entire runup of bitcoin from a stable(ish) 100 (that 100 value was arguably heavily manipulated in the first place by artificial capital of previous fraudulent exchanges / drug money driven by the silk road) to the all time high price in the 1200s was driven by a *BILLION* non-existent dollars that MtGox used to "buy" bitcoin off of their own fraudulent exchange (which was at the time by far the highest volume exchange on the planet) ... and just to repeat that for the slow folks ... they used a *BILLION* dollars in fake capital to cause that rise in price ... and you all wonder why people think bitcoin is a scam ? ? ?
Bitcoin is a butiful piece of software and idea, now, what people are doing to abuse it is another thing. The same schemes u described happened many times with other assets over the years, but did people stop using fiat,stocks.etc? Ofc not. Your claim can only be placed on bitcoin price, that it will continue falling until a new current low is found, but please dont say stupid things like "bitcoin is a scam", because afterall, you are also here, and have a bitcoin adress in your signature, which is a bit ironic.
cheers
agreed - definitely ironic - i do possess some btc - i also value truth more than profit - that wallet is at zero today and has never received 1 donation ... can't say i'm surprised but it's out there anyway ... why not ... the referral links have proven financially beneficial - not to be overly pedantic but saying that there are people who think bitcoin is a scam is different from stating bitcoin is a scam ... but whatever ... - cheers!
i've said it before and i'll say it again - the entire runup of bitcoin from a stable(ish) 100 (that 100 value was arguably heavily manipulated in the first place by artificial capital of previous fraudulent exchanges / drug money driven by the silk road) to the all time high price in the 1200s was driven by a *BILLION* non-existent dollars that MtGox used to "buy" bitcoin off of their own fraudulent exchange (which was at the time by far the highest volume exchange on the planet) ... and just to repeat that for the slow folks ... they used a *BILLION* dollars in fake capital to cause that rise in price ... and you all wonder why people think bitcoin is a scam ? ? ?
Bitcoin is a butiful piece of software and idea, now, what people are doing to abuse it is another thing. The same schemes u described happened many times with other assets over the years, but did people stop using fiat,stocks.etc? Ofc not. Your claim can only be placed on bitcoin price, that it will continue falling until a new current low is found, but please dont say stupid things like "bitcoin is a scam", because afterall, you are also here, and have a bitcoin adress in your signature, which is a bit ironic.
cheers
Jump to: