Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1820. (Read 3313576 times)

But when was the Willy Bot active? I understand how it could guide all markets since things all started on GOX and that is where the liquidity was.
But as other markets developed good liquidity, why would they still follow GOX so closely? At the end they stopped following GOX, right as the Shizz hit the fan.
My point is, why not ANY of that before? (Outside of a small price disparity.) This is more a practical question regarding when other exchanges surfaced with their liquidity perhaps.
Perhaps GOX just had a liquidity monopoly until, it obviously no longer had one.

One easy way to reconcile this is that the coins were not stolen but just lost: private keys erased with no usable backup, either by a hacker (vandalism) or by Karpeles himself (error).


In general terms the idea he spent the money is plausible but the low level specifics don't work. He would have had to credit them with phoney fiat, not BTC. Without some other fraud, this would not affect the balance of BTC on the exchange.

I used to think some variant of Peter R's theory made the most sense. What I could never quite reconcile, though, was that there was no blockchain trail of stolen coins in 2011. So I figured that maybe the 2011 hack involved the hackers copying a bunch of code, finding exploits a while later (or having installed a backdoor), and then slowly bleeding Gox in relatively small amounts over the years.

But honestly, reading that Ashley Barr thread makes me think that the whole thing more likely has a far simpler explanation; ie, Karpeles just spent a few million of the fiat deposits that came into the bank account (which was his personal account(!)) frivolously, while crediting traders with BTC. Given prices at the time (mid-2011 through 2012), it would only have taken <$5m in lavish "corporate" spending to run up ~550,000BTC in liabilities. Unfortunately there's a long history of startups proving that it's not hard to blow a few million bucks on dumb stuff.

Agreed. Imagine the counterfactual; ie, instead of MtGox, the early Bitcoin exchange was reasonably responsible, didn't lose a ton of money, and didn't manipulate the market. What would Bitcoin's price be today? My guess is that'd it'd be the same or higher than it is today. The 4yr price chart wouldn't have spikes to the same degree, nor such an ugly bear market, in my opinion. Bitcoin has evolved tremendously in the past few years, and without the Gox mess, I think we'd see a much smoother overall uptrend.

That said, I agree with you, Smooth, regarding people likely waiting for more resolution on: the blocksize debate, regulation, killer app emergence, various other uses, etc, etc.

But this gentleman already said thanks for the pump...!

Dash, Dark, X, or whatever they're calling it this week is down while Monero is UP.

The shady Rube Goldberg budget nonsense "features" Dash is being bloated with may be responsible for this:


I don't think Otoh will have much luck finding greater fools on which to unload his bags of DigitaltrASH.   

A bit of a break out after a long flat consolidation period looks pretty bullish to me.

 
 
Holy mother of God.  This is it.  This makes sense. 
 
I don't know why I suddenly and instantly believe this theory, but it fits all the pieces so perfectly. 
 

I definitely think the next comment has to be true (that gox was net short) if the willy bot scenario is true https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fe92x/im_ashley_barr_aka_adam_turner_the_first_mtgox/ctor4f3

It's basically this, which was very insightfully written at the time:

I see the XMR/XBT exchange rate in the short to medium term to be driven by the development effort currently going on in  Monero rather than external events such the fate of Mark Karpelès. There is an ever widening gap between the "official" binaries (over 8 months old) and the current master tree on GitHub. https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero. My take is that the market has not yet fully priced this discrepancy.

How many market participants actually compile Monero on GNU/Linux from source, verses say run a compiled "official" Windows binary on Microsoft Windows 10 or even worse leave their Monero on Poloniex while trading from their iPads? I for one have compiled Monero from source on GNU/Linux (Ubuntu 15.04) and on the 100% Libre GNU/Linux distribution Trisquel 7.0. I can say that the improvement in performance memory requirements etc is easily several orders of magnitude.  Now those that are staying in the DRM infected walled gardens of Microsoft and Apple have two choices:
1) They can trust me regarding this discrepancy between the "official" binaries and the compiled source. The trouble with this is that my views are biased by the fact that I already hold a significant XMR position and stand to profit very handsomely by an increase in the XMR/XBT or XMR/USD exchange rate.. I have run my own benchmarks and there is no way I can justify selling any XMR in this market. Buying does still remain an option for me.
or what I really recommend:
2) They can cut of their Apple and Microsoft DRM chains of impoverishment, get out of the respective walled gardens and install GNU/Linux. This will allow them to compile Monero from source, run their own benchmarks, and compare them with the benchmarks of the "official" binaries and then form their own conclusions on the wisdom of buying or selling XMR in this market.  

I will point out that I have already profited handsomely from buying Bitcoin in 2011 and 2012 between 2 USD and 10 USD. During this period Apple had prohibited the iSheep form buying Bitcoin. This prohibition was enforced on IOS by the means of DRM.

Edit: Monero compiling instructions. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12033096 Thanks to GingerAle.

nope,

xcoin is the future.

(wayback machine engaged)

nope,

darkcoin is the future

Monero is the future.

We should probably thank bitcoin for getting the Silk Road and Mt. Gox scenarios out of the way for us. 
 
Now, those who use Monero to do black market deals won't create a massive black market fortress so carelessly and easily.  If Monero had come first, and the Silk Road has used it properly, it would have been a much bigger nightmare for law enforcement and Monero likely may have been outlawed. 
 
Also, the first large crypto exchange has been mismanaged and imploded.  Now that everyone can see what happens when you abuse other people's money (and it's a great precedent that we are treating the bitcoin lost as money), no one will be so foolish (hopefully) going forward.

Moving the ask down to that close to the market price certainly makes it far more likely that it is there to be bought.

In fact as I'm typing this it is being bought into .

Crypto Kingdom is going online testing, and the financial features such as gold, land and bonds trading have been ramped up.

We are thinking of allowing withdrawals. There are practical issues such as authorization - CK is big, the largest accounts are worth 10k+ XMR... If we manage the hurdles before V.4 is launched, the asset values may surge because the money is no longer trapped once invested in CK.

You should both read this comment -> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fe92x/im_ashley_barr_aka_adam_turner_the_first_mtgox/cto1383

PS: Wall moved down to 0.0022, it still remains to be seen whether it's real or not.

I definately second that the whole gox scenario matters little now. Regardless of what came before its been nearly two years since that fiasco and as far as we know nothing else like it is/has been occuring. It was a case of too big too quickly and with terrible leadership. On a fundamental level bitcoin is still cheap at this price point takinginto consideration the total market cap vs its potential utility.

Well I saw most of 2014 as a consolidation phase as we recovered from the bullshit Gox and China pump in 2013. Meanwhile venture capital poured in to start to build things that people might actually use, and by late 2014 or early 2015 it seemed utility, potential, and the rate of building might be starting to converge with price. Since then things seem kind of stable. At a fundamental level I think the market is waiting for developments, like whether the technology holds up, scalability is feasible, regulation becomes suffocating, something better pushes it aside, a killer app appears, etc. I don't think what Gox did matters much right now, but I could be wrong.

It's funny how we see same things in different color. I don't see this current rejection as very strong one. More times we will test $300 less likely it is to hold. The bounce from 300 is each time slower and shallower. It doesn't seem like bears are in full control anymore.