Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 32471. (Read 26471408 times)
August 07, 2013, 09:01:15 AM
August 07, 2013, 08:01:11 AM
August 07, 2013, 07:01:44 AM
August 07, 2013, 06:14:02 AM
Tuesday evening and clark moody is telling me 11k total volume... I believe that is for past 24 hours. Not possible. My eyes are lying. Can anyone confirm?
Indeed, Gox has seen incredibly low volume lately.
Does anyone know of a site / service that tracks overall exchange volume, including services like Coinbase? I'm not sure they even release numbers, come to think of it.
Mt Gox is now significantly delaying deposits of incoming wire transfers (link). I can't buy bitcoin there even if I want to despite sending a wire over a week ago. Seems like you can't get anything in or out of there. I suggest they change the name to Fort Gox...
https://support.mtgox.com/entries/21692589-Changes-to-Deposit-Transfer-Procedures-
This would be a PERFECT time for Coinsetter to open its doors. I would hate for them to put it off just a little longer to polish things up only for gox to then go "k guys, everythings back to normal" and Coinsetter becomes another exchange to spend half a day on the front page of reddit and then never be heard from again. From what I hear it's in closed Beta, so even just making it an open Beta would capitalize on this glorious opportunity.
I think they're honestly just waiting for the most opportune time (ie when MtGox is hurting the most) to roll it out. They could sweep up a huge chunk of the marketshare if they launched at the perfect time.
Quote from: email on July 29
Hey Anthony,
We’re launching in a friends and family beta this week, and we hope to open up our platform to international users by the end of the month. Where are you based out of?
Best,
Jaron Lukasiewicz
CEO | Coinsetter
We’re launching in a friends and family beta this week, and we hope to open up our platform to international users by the end of the month. Where are you based out of?
Best,
Jaron Lukasiewicz
CEO | Coinsetter
August 07, 2013, 06:11:40 AM
Sooo little volume, yet so much trading engine lag.
Edit: OK, looks like the trade engine is simply down right now.
Edit: OK, looks like the trade engine is simply down right now.
Bots setting something up. Probably gonna release their oppressive gravity downward so we can spike to $300+ by this evening.
i can't wait until wals is eventually right
August 07, 2013, 06:10:34 AM
I'm getting more and more interested about this:
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions-excluding-popular
It excludes MtGox, SD and other similar sites. So where is the traffic coming from? Real-world usage like in Argentina and M-Pesa?
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions-excluding-popular
It excludes MtGox, SD and other similar sites. So where is the traffic coming from? Real-world usage like in Argentina and M-Pesa?
this is really interesting.
transaction volume is relatively low http://blockchain.info/de/charts/estimated-transaction-volume
trade volume in the meantime is nearly as low as before the bubble http://blockchain.info/charts/trade-volume
(by the way is there a chart solely with trading volume on localbitcoins.com?
I'd love to see the volume there in different countries)
could be a sign that economy around btc gets time to catch up with more transactions on smaller volume,
while big exchanges take some rest?
not sure though if that's the right conclusion to draw... just my half asleep approach where i may have mixed up some things
First , thre is no such thing as Mpesa is just Kipochi , which is not affiliated by any means with mpesa , even their faq says so
Second , those are more likely to be the reasons for the uptrend in number of transactions :
the one chinese guy:
https://blockchain.info/address/15Z4XmorKSN51ndyPrZ2EtL7Nnksb88888
and some others
https://blockchain.info/de/charts/n-transactions?address=1BpenLeGL2jV9KPrPrMoWMLMHPrPG7ETyR
August 07, 2013, 06:01:29 AM
August 07, 2013, 05:01:29 AM
August 07, 2013, 04:01:45 AM
August 07, 2013, 03:01:52 AM
August 07, 2013, 02:01:04 AM
August 07, 2013, 01:44:31 AM
In other news, litecoin on a slide.
all the altcoins are going down.
except PrimeCoin, which is rallying.
August 07, 2013, 01:01:12 AM
August 07, 2013, 12:52:53 AM
gov't legal opinion is a matter of convenience sometime, this time, it favors them to argue bitcoin is money. Next time, they'll argue bitcoin is ..... (whatever you want to fill in) if it suits them.
Correct. It also could set a precedent that Bitcoin is nothing more than a competing currency and open up a whole new can of worms.
August 07, 2013, 12:44:27 AM
gov't legal opinion is a matter of convenience sometime, this time, it favors them to argue bitcoin is money. Next time, they'll argue bitcoin is ..... (whatever you want to fill in) if it suits them.
August 07, 2013, 12:29:49 AM
Bitcoin officially a security under US law: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-court-sec-bitcoin-idUSBRE97517G20130806
Will this have an impact on market movement?
Quote
(Reuters) - U.S. regulators got the green light from a federal judge to proceed with their lawsuit against a Texas man accused of running a Ponzi scheme using Bitcoin, the virtual online money system.
Trendon Shavers of Bitcoin Savings & Trust had challenged the Securities and Exchange Commission's case against him, saying the regulator had no jurisdiction to sue him because the Bitcoin investments he offered are not securities or subject to any U.S. regulation.
But U.S. Magistrate Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas ruled on Tuesday that his Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities."
Bitcoin exists through an open-source software program. It is not managed by any one company, it is not regulated by any central bank, and its supply is controlled through a computer algorithm. Users can buy bitcoins through exchanges that convert real money into the virtual currency.
The SEC warned investors against the dangers of potential scams involving virtual currencies like Bitcoin in an alert on July 23, the same day it filed the charges against Shavers.
Tuesday's ruling could have important implications for the still murky legal world surrounding digital currencies, which is not regulated by the United States.
Bitcoin has come under greater scrutiny after U.S. authorities in May seized two accounts linked to a major operator in the Bitcoin digital market.
The judge's decision could be important for Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins who became famous after alleging that Facebook Inc founder Mark Zuckerberg stole their website idea.
In early July, they applied to the SEC for approval to launch a Bitcoin-tracking exchange-traded product known as the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust.
The SEC alleges that Shavers essentially used money from new investors in his Bitcoin endeavor to cover withdrawals by older investors and his own personal expenses.
The agency said he raised at least 700,000 bitcoins, or $4.5 million, from investors in multiple states.
Shavers had asserted that his Bitcoin investments are not securities because Bitcoin is not money, but the SEC countered that they constituted both investment contracts and notes.
"It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money," the judge wrote. "It can be used to purchase goods or services."
Shavers could not be immediately reached for comment.
Trendon Shavers of Bitcoin Savings & Trust had challenged the Securities and Exchange Commission's case against him, saying the regulator had no jurisdiction to sue him because the Bitcoin investments he offered are not securities or subject to any U.S. regulation.
But U.S. Magistrate Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas ruled on Tuesday that his Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities."
Bitcoin exists through an open-source software program. It is not managed by any one company, it is not regulated by any central bank, and its supply is controlled through a computer algorithm. Users can buy bitcoins through exchanges that convert real money into the virtual currency.
The SEC warned investors against the dangers of potential scams involving virtual currencies like Bitcoin in an alert on July 23, the same day it filed the charges against Shavers.
Tuesday's ruling could have important implications for the still murky legal world surrounding digital currencies, which is not regulated by the United States.
Bitcoin has come under greater scrutiny after U.S. authorities in May seized two accounts linked to a major operator in the Bitcoin digital market.
The judge's decision could be important for Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins who became famous after alleging that Facebook Inc founder Mark Zuckerberg stole their website idea.
In early July, they applied to the SEC for approval to launch a Bitcoin-tracking exchange-traded product known as the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust.
The SEC alleges that Shavers essentially used money from new investors in his Bitcoin endeavor to cover withdrawals by older investors and his own personal expenses.
The agency said he raised at least 700,000 bitcoins, or $4.5 million, from investors in multiple states.
Shavers had asserted that his Bitcoin investments are not securities because Bitcoin is not money, but the SEC countered that they constituted both investment contracts and notes.
"It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money," the judge wrote. "It can be used to purchase goods or services."
Shavers could not be immediately reached for comment.
Will this have an impact on market movement?
Does that mean bitcoin itself is a security or just whatever pirate sold is a security?
It means two things:
1) Bitcoin is money
2) Pirateat40 was selling securities
1) is very significant because it is a US court ruling that Bitcoin is money. One must also keep in mind here that we have an agency of the US government arguing before the court that Bitcoin is money.
August 07, 2013, 12:04:18 AM
Bitcoin officially a security under US law: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-court-sec-bitcoin-idUSBRE97517G20130806
Will this have an impact on market movement?
Quote
(Reuters) - U.S. regulators got the green light from a federal judge to proceed with their lawsuit against a Texas man accused of running a Ponzi scheme using Bitcoin, the virtual online money system.
Trendon Shavers of Bitcoin Savings & Trust had challenged the Securities and Exchange Commission's case against him, saying the regulator had no jurisdiction to sue him because the Bitcoin investments he offered are not securities or subject to any U.S. regulation.
But U.S. Magistrate Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas ruled on Tuesday that his Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities."
Bitcoin exists through an open-source software program. It is not managed by any one company, it is not regulated by any central bank, and its supply is controlled through a computer algorithm. Users can buy bitcoins through exchanges that convert real money into the virtual currency.
The SEC warned investors against the dangers of potential scams involving virtual currencies like Bitcoin in an alert on July 23, the same day it filed the charges against Shavers.
Tuesday's ruling could have important implications for the still murky legal world surrounding digital currencies, which is not regulated by the United States.
Bitcoin has come under greater scrutiny after U.S. authorities in May seized two accounts linked to a major operator in the Bitcoin digital market.
The judge's decision could be important for Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins who became famous after alleging that Facebook Inc founder Mark Zuckerberg stole their website idea.
In early July, they applied to the SEC for approval to launch a Bitcoin-tracking exchange-traded product known as the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust.
The SEC alleges that Shavers essentially used money from new investors in his Bitcoin endeavor to cover withdrawals by older investors and his own personal expenses.
The agency said he raised at least 700,000 bitcoins, or $4.5 million, from investors in multiple states.
Shavers had asserted that his Bitcoin investments are not securities because Bitcoin is not money, but the SEC countered that they constituted both investment contracts and notes.
"It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money," the judge wrote. "It can be used to purchase goods or services."
Shavers could not be immediately reached for comment.
Trendon Shavers of Bitcoin Savings & Trust had challenged the Securities and Exchange Commission's case against him, saying the regulator had no jurisdiction to sue him because the Bitcoin investments he offered are not securities or subject to any U.S. regulation.
But U.S. Magistrate Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas ruled on Tuesday that his Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities."
Bitcoin exists through an open-source software program. It is not managed by any one company, it is not regulated by any central bank, and its supply is controlled through a computer algorithm. Users can buy bitcoins through exchanges that convert real money into the virtual currency.
The SEC warned investors against the dangers of potential scams involving virtual currencies like Bitcoin in an alert on July 23, the same day it filed the charges against Shavers.
Tuesday's ruling could have important implications for the still murky legal world surrounding digital currencies, which is not regulated by the United States.
Bitcoin has come under greater scrutiny after U.S. authorities in May seized two accounts linked to a major operator in the Bitcoin digital market.
The judge's decision could be important for Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins who became famous after alleging that Facebook Inc founder Mark Zuckerberg stole their website idea.
In early July, they applied to the SEC for approval to launch a Bitcoin-tracking exchange-traded product known as the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust.
The SEC alleges that Shavers essentially used money from new investors in his Bitcoin endeavor to cover withdrawals by older investors and his own personal expenses.
The agency said he raised at least 700,000 bitcoins, or $4.5 million, from investors in multiple states.
Shavers had asserted that his Bitcoin investments are not securities because Bitcoin is not money, but the SEC countered that they constituted both investment contracts and notes.
"It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money," the judge wrote. "It can be used to purchase goods or services."
Shavers could not be immediately reached for comment.
Will this have an impact on market movement?
Does that mean bitcoin itself is a security or just whatever pirate sold is a security?
It means two things:
1) Bitcoin is money
2) Pirateat40 was selling securities
1) is very significant because it is a US court ruling that Bitcoin is money. One must also keep in mind here that we have an agency of the US government arguing before the court that Bitcoin is money.
August 07, 2013, 12:01:04 AM
August 06, 2013, 11:56:49 PM
I'm getting more and more interested about this:
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions-excluding-popular
It excludes MtGox, SD and other similar sites. So where is the traffic coming from? Real-world usage like in Argentina and M-Pesa?
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions-excluding-popular
It excludes MtGox, SD and other similar sites. So where is the traffic coming from? Real-world usage like in Argentina and M-Pesa?
this is really interesting.
transaction volume is relatively low http://blockchain.info/de/charts/estimated-transaction-volume
trade volume in the meantime is nearly as low as before the bubble http://blockchain.info/charts/trade-volume
(by the way is there a chart solely with trading volume on localbitcoins.com?
I'd love to see the volume there in different countries)
could be a sign that economy around btc gets time to catch up with more transactions on smaller volume,
while big exchanges take some rest?
not sure though if that's the right conclusion to draw... just my half asleep approach where i may have mixed up some things
August 06, 2013, 11:19:52 PM
Tuesday evening and clark moody is telling me 11k total volume... I believe that is for past 24 hours. Not possible. My eyes are lying. Can anyone confirm?
Indeed, Gox has seen incredibly low volume lately.
Does anyone know of a site / service that tracks overall exchange volume, including services like Coinbase? I'm not sure they even release numbers, come to think of it.
Mt Gox is now significantly delaying deposits of incoming wire transfers (link). I can't buy bitcoin there even if I want to despite sending a wire over a week ago. Seems like you can't get anything in or out of there. I suggest they change the name to Fort Gox...
https://support.mtgox.com/entries/21692589-Changes-to-Deposit-Transfer-Procedures-
This would be a PERFECT time for Coinsetter to open its doors. I would hate for them to put it off just a little longer to polish things up only for gox to then go "k guys, everythings back to normal" and Coinsetter becomes another exchange to spend half a day on the front page of reddit and then never be heard from again. From what I hear it's in closed Beta, so even just making it an open Beta would capitalize on this glorious opportunity.
Jump to: