TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Looks like things are stabilizing
ETHBTC ratio dropped during this dip, but hasn't bounced back with BTC yet. Worth noting.
Yeah looks like Eth about to test $200 yet again. I think by tomorrow morning we will be at $185 range, which I think was the previous resistance if I read the chart correctly.
I'm not getting a good read on it right now. There are signals pointing in both directions. Maybe bounce off 190 overnight and slowly recover upwards before stabilizing at 205? Not sure. A lot of people are misinterpreting the SEC news too, which could send ETH unnecessarily tumbling.
I haven't looked into the SEC news, but what has been reported?
The SEC released a notice stating that they believe the DAO (which doesn't exist anymore) was a security, and should have been subject to all U.S. securities laws. Some people are interpreting that as saying that all crypto is subject to U.S. securities legislation. Others are saying Bitcoin, for some convoluted self-serving reasons, is immune but all other crypto is a security and will be regulated.
The DAO was an investment fund operating as a smart contract on Ethereum, but was hacked, resulting in the hard fork of Ethereum that created Ethereum Classic.
My personal view is that nothing will be immune from regulation, but some crypto assets are more akin to currencies, and others securities. I think you have to examine what the crypto asset represents, what it is used for, and whether there is some sort of return involved for holding it beyond simply the value of the crypto asset itself. If Bitcoin isn't a security, then neither is Ethereum. But crypto like Augur or Iconomi might be more likely to be determined to be a security. Antshares might also become subject to regulation since you get ANC for holding ANS. Proof of stake-based crypto might also be subject to regulation for the same reasons. But really, U.S. securities law was never drafted with crypto in mind. To regulate responsibly, the U.S. government would be wise to draft new regulations specifically geared to crypto.
Any trading based on this particular bit of news I think is an overreaction, which will eventually be corrected.
If by all of us you mean we here on NeoGAF I have been aware, maybe too aware, that what I have gained and lost in crypto has been someone else's loss and gain... of course, like all the other assets, they eventually spread out and gains and losses will be incurred in smaller amount to a larger number of people, on average [while some will make billions]Thanks Brandson for this. If there are people that do not think that crypto will be regulated at some point in the future are living in some kind of bubble. As soon as the government can see what kind of money they can make off this, they won't be too far behind. Hopefully all of us can make some decent money before any kind of regulations hit making it harder for us.
Any current or upcoming ICOs looking like good bets? I'm thinking about picking up some Tezos when the coin launches (in December?) but is there anything more worthwhile coming sooner?
Not that odd. It's Bitcoin dropping. They are all connected. Unfortunately I was asleep when this movement started. ETH probably won't go below 200 unless Bitcoin breaks below 2500. It's 2518 now.
I was looking at charts in tradingview.com and the dip seemed to start on all of those at the same time. They are connected but I'm surprised at the speed of it, it was almost immediate.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitc...fline-as-laundering-theories-begin-to-surface
so, btc-e might be down because of the "sudden transaction" of 66.000 btc out of its cold storage.
Strat been hovering around 5 for a while now.
Although would it safe to assume that we're going to hit some major selloffs once the BTC-E situation is confirmed (if it's as bad as it seems)?
It appears as though big news may be about to drop that BTC-E was allegedly involved in the Mt. Gox Bitcoin exchange hacking years ago, which led to Bitcoin's first major crash.
Apparently to be confirmed shortly here: https://twitter.com/wizsecurity.
Would this news really be enough to cause some more drops in the market though? Guess anything is possible if it make people feel less confident.
Source: BTC-e hacked Mt Gox. Full report coming very soon.
In September 2011, the MtGox hot wallet private keys were stolen, in a case of a simple copied wallet.dat file. This gave the hacker access to a sizable number of bitcoins immediately, but also were able to spend the incoming trickle of bitcoins deposited to any of the addresses contained.
Over time, the hacker regularly emptied out whatever coins they could spend using the compromised keys, and sent them to wallet(s) controlled by Vinnik. This went on for long periods, but also had breaks a prominent second phase of thefts happened later in 2012 and 2013.
By mid 2013 when the funds spendable from the compromised keys had slowed to a near halt, the thief had taken out about 630,000 BTC from MtGox.
In addition, the shared keypool of the wallet.dat file lead to address reuse, which confused MtGox's systems into mistakenly interpreting some of the thief's spending as deposits, crediting multiple user accounts with large sums of BTC and causing MtGox's numbers to go further out of balance by about 40,000 BTC. None of these users seem to have reported their "sudden luck".
After the coins entered Vinnik's wallets, most were moved to BTC-e and presumably sold off or laundered (BTC-e money codes were a popular choice). In total some 300,000 BTC ended up on BTC-e, while other coins were deposited to other exchanges, including MtGox itself.
Some of the funds moved to BTC-e seem to have moved straight to internal storage rather than customer deposit addresses, hinting at a relationship between Vinnik and BTC-e.
The stolen MtGox coins were not the only stolen coins handled by Vinnik; coins stolen from Bitcoinica, Bitfloor and several other thefts from back in 2011 and 2012 were all laundered through the same wallets.
Moving coins back onto MtGox was what let us identify Vinnik, as the MtGox accounts he used could be linked to his online identity "WME". As WME, Vinnik had previously made a public outcry that coins had been confiscated from him (the coins in question coming from Bitcoinica).
There were other thefts and incidents explaining other missing funds from MtGox. More on that in later posts.
The mtgox/btc-e story is crazy.
So Karpeles might be innocent after all.
None of these users seem to have reported their "sudden luck".
I wonder if Siacoin is ever gonna go up. Hoping for at least 50 cents by next year.
I often lurk this thread and it seems to me like few people are interested in Ripple. why is that?
I'm in crypto not because of my principles... I'm not a bitcoin activist or whatever. I just want to make some dough to fund some projects (if by any chance I become rich, I would work part-time at my current job and I'd create an indie game studio).
Is it just because of the banks? I'm trying to find out if the lack of interest is due to misconceptions or something else.
I personally value actual use cases above anything else. I got out of any project that still seems to abstract...
I'm biased because I find XRP to be the most promising crypto out there and I keep increasing my stash.
Well, stability also comes from high valuation and Ripple has publicly stated that higher is better (https://www.reddit.com/r/Ripple/com..._value_and_stability_matter_to_banks/dhf71cw/). Regarding its value, XRP is just a tool, a bridge to transfer money. If you l need to transfer a trillion dollars and only 5 million XRP are available, then those XRP will have to be worth that much. Using psychological variables or metrics like the market cap are absolutely meaningless as XRP isn't a share or something representing something else. It's value is derived by how much money needs to be sent and how much XRP is available. It can be worth an absurd amount of money as long as the network has to support it.I think it's because banks expect it to be stable, so it can't explode too much.
At this point I think ANS/NEO is poised to grow the most over time, maybe Litecoin too. Maaaybe GNT and ARK if they take off in the future.
Well bitcoin is decentralized in theory but centralized in reality (otherwise we wouldn't have pools having so much weight in adopting protocol changes). XRP is getting progressively more decentralized. Here's an article: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/ripple-unveils-strategy-become-decentralized-bitcoin/ and here's David Schwartz's answer (chief crypto wiz at Ripple): https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/51316.On the move atm but one criticism I've read so far against xrp is the centralization. While others like to put up the (bank) partnerships as big pro and thus xrp only can go to the moon...
I often lurk this thread and it seems to me like few people are interested in Ripple. why is that?
I'm in crypto not because of my principles... I'm not a bitcoin activist or whatever. I just want to make some dough to fund some projects (if by any chance I become rich, I would work part-time at my current job and I'd create an indie game studio).
Is it just because of the banks? I'm trying to find out if the lack of interest is due to misconceptions or something else.
I personally value actual use cases above anything else. I got out of any project that still seems to abstract...
I'm biased because I find XRP to be the most promising crypto out there and I keep increasing my stash.
It's looking like many coins are having an upward trend the last day or so which is good. Eth just keeps moving sideways, bouncing between the $200 range. I wonder if it is due for a breakout moving upward here soon. Hoping it does get back to the 190's here today to jump back in, unless you guys see it possibly dropping with 8/1 on the horizon.
My understanding is that public XRP has no use case. The banks would all use a different private version, if they adopt Ripple. It's not clear that there would be any benefits to holding XRP.
I don't see the problem with it. Bank A can transfer to bank B without disclosing which bank accounts are concerned once the transaction goes through the XRP ledger.
Anyway, here's a link about this: https://ripple.com/insights/what-an-open-network-means-for-banks-market-makers-and-regulators/
I think this is a bad play, I doubt the forked coins will be worth very much. There might be a price spike initially, but it might be difficult to get coins on the fork sent over to exchanges before the price starts tanking too, so I wouldn't risk it.
Have to disagree. Any fork off of BTC is going to have value. I'm expecting something around 5-10% of the BTC value, which is still well worth the effort.
I would recommend people have all their BTC in a wallet where you control all the keys (not on an exchange) by July 31. On August 1st, import keys to get your BCC. Then if you don't trust BCC like me, after importing and declaring BCC coins, move all BTC to a fresh wallet.
5-10% seems likely to me as well, but I'm only speaking in regards to moving from ETH to BTC. Consider that ETH/BTC could easily jump by 20% or more after the fork, which would more or less cancel out your gains, if you moved from ETH to BTC to get the forked coins.
ETH/BTC is close to its support level right now (which has held several times) so I don't see it going much lower either. If you sold your ETH for BTC when the ratio was 0.1 or above then maybe it'd make sense to wait and see. But at this point, I think there's a high chance you'll have to get back in on ETH at a loss if you move to BTC now and plan to move back after the fork.
That's just how I see things, I could well be wrong. I do have some BTC still so will be getting some coins on the fork, but I'm just not going to sell any of my ETH for BTC.