(08-04-2016 12:29 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  In some sense there may be some overlap with bitcoin and these various other cryptos, especially for example when we think about earlier this year as Ether prices were rising and while there were multiple proclamations from the Ethereum proponents concerning the supposed demise of bitcoin and ethereum as the supposed bitcoin 2.0... Even though I think some of those talking points were quite bullshit, these kinds of spreading of public ideas do cause market movements that can cause the reality that is being projected.

The existence of gold doesn't make silver useless. A person who says ether is going to conquer bitcoin is an ether maximalist like there are tons (heh) of gold maximalists. Right now they have the whole HF mess to worry about, so "replacing bitcoin" is a big-ass LOL.

(08-05-2016 02:13 PM)SunW Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 12:29 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  In some sense there may be some overlap with bitcoin and these various other cryptos, especially for example when we think about earlier this year as Ether prices were rising and while there were multiple proclamations from the Ethereum proponents concerning the supposed demise of bitcoin and ethereum as the supposed bitcoin 2.0... Even though I think some of those talking points were quite bullshit, these kinds of spreading of public ideas do cause market movements that can cause the reality that is being projected.

The existence of gold doesn't make silver useless. A person who says ether is going to conquer bitcoin is an ether maximalist like there are tons (heh) of gold maximalists. Right now they have the whole HF mess to worry about, so "replacing bitcoin" is a big-ass LOL.

I agree that there was a lot of hyperbole in there, and I believe that some folks truly were beginning to believe some of that pie in the sky fantasy rhetoric, because it was frequently coupled with assertions that bitcoin cannot scale and ethereum can and bitcoin has governance issues while ethereum does not, etc, etc.

When a bitcoin HODLer would call bullshit on the Ethereum arguments, and assert that Ethereum was a pump and dump, they would be accused of failing to recognize value in Ethereum.

I personally believe that you can accuse an asset of being a pump and dump and also assert that it is likely over valued and flawed in various ways while at the same time recognizing that the other asset has its place and contributes to the space in a variety of ways. Currently, I am getting more and more of the sense that over time, ETC and ETH are going to move towards parity - but surely, there is so much going on in that space, that it is very tough to know for sure how all of it is going to play out.

And, also your overall point regarding relationship, there is likely some relationship of this Ethereum forking issue to bitcoin as well, and in support of that I have been seeing quite a few discussions regarding the forking of bitcoin in light of the ethereum fork, and really I think that it is nonsense concerning those discussions that attempt to argue that ethereum provides a positive model for bitcoin in that regard. Those folks proclaim to be pushing for the advancement of bitcoin, but in the end, those kinds of efforts seem to be balanced in favor of undermining attempts rather than advancing attempts.

Actually, even though Bitfinex has proclaimed to be coming out with some kind of FAQ today and maybe even a bit of a roadmap regarding where they plan to go, they have also been accused of stalling - including assertions that every day Bitfinex is asserting "tomorrow" they will reveal more.. blah blah blah.

I think that it is understandable that both specifying the proposed plan and possibly figuring out the extent of the damage and the ability to fix the matter (assuming that the whole matter is not fabricated) can take some time.

Nonetheless, Bitfinex did post a couple of updates today on their blog (one regarding phishing emails). Previously, I had not known about their blog.

http://blog.bitfinex.com/uncategorized/w...ng-emails/


http://blog.bitfinex.com/uncategorized/update/

Know nothing about this except that a girl I was shagging in Bristol was the mistress of this Bitcoin scammer who owed £2million. The police net was gradually tightening around him and they were even harassing her as his bit on the side. She posted a 4 way video chat on YouTube where he was basically lying his ass off and stalling.
Through her I learnt he was a pathological liar and con man who was trying to evade serious trouble ie: the law.

(08-05-2016 03:17 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  Know nothing about this except that a girl I was shagging in Bristol was the mistress of this Bitcoin scammer who owed £2million. The police net was gradually tightening around him and they were even harassing her as his bit on the side. She posted a 4 way video chat on YouTube where he was basically lying his ass off and stalling.
Through her I learnt he was a pathological liar and con man who was trying to evade serious trouble ie: the law.

Are you trying to suggest that there is some kind of connection with scummery and bitcoin? I really doubt that there is any higher proportion of scummery in bitcoin than any other area of life - although bitcoin does facilitate payments and transfers of money in various ways - and not having to make those payments in person or through some of the legacy financial systems.

So this scummy scam guy is still free from the law? Is he a kind of computer whiz that is able to hide his bitcoin holdings? What else is happening with his bitcoin besides the assertion that he might own £2million-ish of them?

Within the past couple of hours we seemed to have gotten a bit of a more specific update from Bitfinex... Sure it is missing some specifics, but it is specific enough in order to provide some better ideas regarding what they are thinking. Here's a Reddit post description, but there is also a specific notice from them on their website.


http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments...ate_users/

In essence, the haircut for all users and all asset classes is a shade over 36%, and I was a bit surprised by the spreading the loss across all asset classes, but upon further reflection, it does seem to be a more fair way to keep the amount down to a lower amount while creating a system that seems to allow for the sucking in of all users into having a vested interest into the positive future performance of bitfinex by creating a bitfinex token that will likely be able to be traded in the future, but also have the potential of causing complete reimbursement in the future (kind of takes advantage of the gambling and trading tendencies of anyone who would be inclined to hold assets in a Bitfinex account)...


At this point, doesn't seem to be a dumb plan, and even seems a bit more bullish than other scenarios that could have played out.

A nice short news interview (less than 4 minutes) regarding the status of three ETF filings (two for bitcoin and one for ETH).


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/201...etf-market

Found the links!

Mate I have no idea about bit coin or its users , and the size/ scale of it as an asset. Fuck I don't even know the correct words I should be using here. I'm not shagging the chick anymore so I'm not gonna ask her out of the blue "oh yeah what happened there?"

I DID think some of you would find it interesting since it is to do with bit coin.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xzkt74Tvy68

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WTT5B4EhHDw

http://bitcoinsource.net/moolah-ceo-mint...n-kennedy/

http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/02/24/former...rested-uk/

What you make of it all is up to you but I reckon it must be of some interest given its Bitcoin territory. ( I didn't understand anything discussed in these links ? but I reckoned some of you would )

(08-06-2016 03:59 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  Found the links!

Mate I have no idea about bit coin or its users , and the size/ scale of it as an asset. Fuck I don't even know the correct words I should be using here. I'm not shagging the chick anymore so I'm not gonna ask her out of the blue "oh yeah what happened there?"

I DID think some of you would find it interesting since it is to do with bit coin.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xzkt74Tvy68

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WTT5B4EhHDw

http://bitcoinsource.net/moolah-ceo-mint...n-kennedy/

http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/02/24/former...rested-uk/

What you make of it all is up to you but I reckon it must be of some interest given its Bitcoin territory. ( I didn't understand anything discussed in these links ? but I reckoned some of you would )

I don't understand what value there would be to click on four random and supposedly bitcoin-related links, if you do not even know what they mean, or you do not know if they are valuable, and you don't even have any questions or comments about any of the underlying material(s).

In that regard, there is all kinds of bitcoin information on the internet, and what differentiates your supposedly bitcoin related links from any other random links on the internet - except for perhaps your mere representation that you believe those links to be possibly related to bitcoin, but you are not sure.

(08-04-2016 03:50 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  Recently, a thread has been created on Reddit to attempt to crowd-source information pertaining to Bitfinex - and we can see that some of their information is NOT very public.... and accordingly, it is possible that some of their agents could fairly easily disappear off the face of the earth, if they wanted to either run away with bitcoins or run away from liabilities...


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comment...corporate/

The link to the below US government document was posted in another bitcoin forum thread, which kind of relates to my above post - attempting to gather formal factual (and maybe even legal) information about Bitfinex.

http:[email protected]..060216.pdf

Both Bitstamp and Kraken use Bitgo, and at least Bitstamp asserts that they are going to continue with the use of Bitgo.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/aft...1470669567


Yesterday, Bitfinex went back online in a read only capacity, which allowed account holders to verify balances in their accounts, and to see the extent to which their Bitfinex accounts were affected.

I had an account there with funds in dollars, BTC and ETC. They did about a 36% reduction in each of my accounts, and issued me the equivalent value of BFX Omni coins, which they valued at $1 per coin. It remains a bit unclear how that BFX Omni coins is going to be treated in the future, and for my own account accounting purposes, I gave it about a $.01 value per coin. It is likely in the coming days that Bitfinex is going to go back live, and we will find out more information at that time regarding how they are going to treat the BFX coin and their initial restrictions on trading, deposits and withdrawals or any additional incentives that they may create.

Alright you fucking little dipshit,

They're not >random< links, they're all on the same topic -surprise surprise- or I wouldn't have posted them.

You're not the only person who reads these threads although interestingly enough you seem to be the only the one who sees the value in responding to your own comments...

I was asked for clarification so I did the best I could. It may not interest you, but the fact that the guy was able to rip off $2million using Bitcoin could have been of interest to others.

I'm currently in Thailand, October in Australia, November in the Uk / Northern Europe. You wanna meet in any of those places I'm more than happy to. Pm me or let's organise it on the open forum. On the slim outside chance that someone as snide as you is actually harder than me then you'll find I can take a beating with the best of them. Or you can keep hiding behind your keyboard making your snarky comments.

Enjoy your peanut head/ lard ass/ pencil neck day (delete as applicable).

You soft little faggot.

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  Alright you fucking little dipshit,

That's a good start to demonstrate that you are in control of your reasoning and emotions.

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  They're not >random< links, they're all on the same topic -surprise surprise- or I wouldn't have posted them.

Yes. I stand by my earlier comment. Unless you have actually reviewed the links that you provided and you have some kind of question or description of what you are providing, the actual substance of the links remain "random" and non substantiated, even if they all "randomly" relate to something that could kind of seem like a bitcoin topic.

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  You're not the only person who reads these threads although interestingly enough you seem to be the only the one who sees the value in responding to your own comments...

More or less, I agree with this point, especially if you were to modify the comment to "mostly" rather than expressing absolutes.

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  I was asked for clarification so I did the best I could. It may not interest you, but the fact that the guy was able to rip off $2million using Bitcoin could have been of interest to others.

Sure, there was potentially some value in some of your comments, and it could have been even better if you had described some of the links that you provided or at least expressed some kind of focus (such as questions or concerns).

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  I'm currently in Thailand, October in Australia, November in the Uk / Northern Europe. You wanna meet in any of those places I'm more than happy to. Pm me or let's organise it on the open forum.

For what reason would we want to meet?

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  On the slim outside chance that someone as snide as you is actually harder than me then you'll find I can take a beating with the best of them. Or you can keep hiding behind your keyboard making your snarky comments.

You are suggesting some kind of physical confrontation? hahahahaha Seems a bit much regarding some comments from me on a thread regarding your lack of substantive comment or questions, no? And, even this post from you seems to have little to no substantive discussion.

(08-08-2016 11:23 PM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  Enjoy your peanut head/ lard ass/ pencil neck day (delete as applicable).

You soft little faggot.

Even if what you are saying were true, what does this have to do with anything in connection with our previous discussion that was bitcoin related, no?

We live in different worlds my friend.

I won't put up with shit like that in person so I'm not gonna put up with it on the internet either.
And no, I don't have control of my emotions etc. in a lot of circumstances.

But someone who brings everything down to logical questions rather than fuck you this/ fuck you that and refuses to rise to my insults actually seems pretty harmless/ easy to get along with.

I just don't understand any of this Bitcoin stuff so I wasn't gonna comment more - it's just a personal anecdote that might lead people saying 'oh that bloke, ah yeah he was related to .. x, it shows that Bitcoin security is in danger from ..y

But the fact that I haven't got the first clue about Bitcoin doesn't mean the material isn't of interest : I thought if they looked at the links it would be of interest to others who, presumably, would understand it easily.

But now I'm repeating myself. I don't mind my comments being ignored or even disbelieved .. It just boils my piss when they're ridiculed.

(08-09-2016 03:07 AM)Adv8nturous Wrote:  We live in different worlds my friend.

I won't put up with shit like that in person so I'm not gonna put up with it on the internet either.
And no, I don't have control of my emotions etc. in a lot of circumstances.

But someone who brings everything down to logical questions rather than fuck you this/ fuck you that and refuses to rise to my insults actually seems pretty harmless/ easy to get along with.

I just don't understand any of this Bitcoin stuff so I wasn't gonna comment more - it's just a personal anecdote that might lead people saying 'oh that bloke, ah yeah he was related to .. x, it shows that Bitcoin security is in danger from ..y

But the fact that I haven't got the first clue about Bitcoin doesn't mean the material isn't of interest : I thought if they looked at the links it would be of interest to others who, presumably, would understand it easily.

But now I'm repeating myself. I don't mind my comments being ignored or even disbelieved .. It just boils my piss when they're ridiculed.

If you take my earlier comments as ridicule, then that is likely on you.

I already pretty much stated that I have no intention to click on random bitcoin related links if there does not seem to be any question, concern or contextualization of any of the links.

To the extent that you are reading about bitcoin or paying attention to it, potentially you will have some kind of head start on a large number of folks who do not look into it at all.

By now, many folks have hear a variety of things about bitcoin, but do not take any further actions. I know folks like that.

Actually in about August/September 2013, I was researching into various investment mechanisms, and I came across some bitcoin information. Initially, I did not read about it at all or look into it, and more or less October/November 2013, I had committed to a variety of other investment strategies (non bitcoin investments).

In mid-to-late November 2013, I came across bitcoin again, and at that point, I decided to research further into bitcoin which caused me to create an initial investment plan including slowly dollar cost average investing (with some attempts at front loading to get some stake in the game), begin to invest while I continued to research into the matter. Six months later in about mid 2014, I tweaked my bitcoin investment plans, and since then, I have continued investing, periodically tweaking my plans and accumulating bitcoins.

Anyhow, if in the future, you continue to look into bitcoin and you want to discuss, feel free to post in this thread, and if you prefer someone besides me chime in, then just phrase your question, "anybody but JJG," and I will attempt to refrain from responding, but as you suggested earlier, if you were to phrase your question in such a "anybody but JJG" way, then you may run the risk, in this thread, of not get any response at all. hahahahaha

7 day ban for Adv8nturous. We don't allow name calling.

Even though the analysis of the below linked post was released by Bitmex ( a competitor exchange), it provides some decent explanation concerning what the official explanation of what happened at Bitfinex and decent numbers concerning how Bitmex believes that bitfinex arrived at its socialized loss numbers of 36%.

https://blog.bitmex.com/youve-been-buttfinessed/


I think in the end of the article Bitmex goes a bit too far in their denigration of Bitfinex, their assessment of the bitfinex coin and their assessment of the future trading value and risk of Bitfinex.

Actually, even though Bitmex seems to imply that there could have been some internal shenanigans going on at Bitfinex, they do not go into any direct accusations of internal shenanigans or any attempt at explaining internal shenanigans.

https://www.finextra.com/finextra-downlo...851711.pdf

135 page report that Credit Suisse put together. TLDR: BTC and especially the blockchain has some interesting potential, but it has an uphill struggle and they don't expect it to displace the huge industry players any time soon if at all.

Think it's important to try and ferret out what institutional players as well as everyday people think about cryptocurrency rather than fall into confirmation bias where I keep on looking for info to support my existing beliefs. I've been listening to Trace Mayer and Andreas Antonopolous a lot lately. Both extremely smart and persuasive champions of bitcoin, but it's easy to fall into the rabbit hole of drinking the admittedly delicious Kool-aid that they're selling without maintaining some perspective.

I'm bullish on BTC, but when I read accounts of how it's going to eventually rival the market cap of gold ($7 Trillion USD), I shake my head and wonder how that's ever going to happen. Gold's been around for thousands of years as an instrument of value/currency, it seems highly unlikely that BTC is going to mimic the value of something so ingrained in millenia of human culture in just a few years. Still, I guess people could never foresee the advent of the personal computer or the Internet, so I think there's a very small non-zero chance that something like this might happen.

After doing my due diligence, I'm banking much more on an eventual niche adoption of BTC - especially for remittances, contracts and P2P payments - that will hopefully take the market cap to something like an Intel or Cisco. Shiet, if it got to Apple's current market cap, we'd be sitting pretty at something like $37,000/BTC which would make this guy very, very happy. Could fall to scraps too if there are concerted efforts by the government to stymie the growth or promulgation of cryptos. Interesting times...

(08-11-2016 12:05 PM)booshala Wrote:  https://www.finextra.com/finextra-downlo...851711.pdf

135 page report that Credit Suisse put together. TLDR: BTC and especially the blockchain has some interesting potential, but it has an uphill struggle and they don't expect it to displace the huge industry players any time soon if at all.

Think it's important to try and ferret out what institutional players as well as everyday people think about cryptocurrency rather than fall into confirmation bias where I keep on looking for info to support my existing beliefs. I've been listening to Trace Mayer and Andreas Antonopolous a lot lately. Both extremely smart and persuasive champions of bitcoin, but it's easy to fall into the rabbit hole of drinking the admittedly delicious Kool-aid that they're selling without maintaining some perspective.

I'm bullish on BTC, but when I read accounts of how it's going to eventually rival the market cap of gold ($7 Trillion USD), I shake my head and wonder how that's ever going to happen. Gold's been around for thousands of years as an instrument of value/currency, it seems highly unlikely that BTC is going to mimic the value of something so ingrained in millenia of human culture in just a few years. Still, I guess people could never foresee the advent of the personal computer or the Internet, so I think there's a very small non-zero chance that something like this might happen.

After doing my due diligence, I'm banking much more on an eventual niche adoption of BTC - especially for remittances, contracts and P2P payments - that will hopefully take the market cap to something like an Intel or Cisco. Shiet, if it got to Apple's current market cap, we'd be sitting pretty at something like $37,000/BTC which would make this guy very, very happy. Could fall to scraps too if there are concerted efforts by the government to stymie the growth or promulgation of cryptos. Interesting times...

Thanks a lot Booshla for the link to that article and your pointing out significant portions of it.

I agree with your point that getting some outside assessment can be valuable to recognize how bitcoin (or any other technology for that matter) may be playing out in the other circles.

Personally, I don't want to spend considerable time reading in detail a 135 page document, yet I did focus a little bit in on their identification of 13 barriers to bitcoin's mass adoption (starting on page 33), and the large majority of those criticisms were given much more weight than they deserve with little evidence to back them up.

I do believe however that about three and a half of their criticisms have some merit, and those are the points raised as 3, 8, 10, 11 & 12. O.k. Yeah, I list 5 points here;however, points 11 & 12 are only worth about half of a point together (therefore 3.5 points).

I'm not going to go through an analysis regarding what I believe to be wrong with the majority of their points, except to suggest that overall in their other lame criticisms they seem to fail/refuse to sufficiently recognize the value that is being brought to the space and the trade offs and developing that is ongoing.

Point 3) Regarding the extreme weakness of third-party risk and centralization. I agree that this is a problem with bitcoin, and likely to continue to be an ongoing problem, yet in some sense it is not really a problem with bitcoin the technology itself, merely the practice of entrusting third parties with bitcoin.

point 8) Regarding internal conflict and inertia. Sure, this is going to remain a problem with bitcoin for a while because in some sense it is a feature of bitcoin in being decentralized, and some of the internal conflict and inertia issues will be created on purpose by malicious parties. This is not going to go away for a while, and maybe their could be solutions at some point in the recognition and education of folks regarding difficulties in making changes to bitcoin without first going through the motions of persuading and achieving consensus, which admittedly is not easy in decentralized systems, and such strife issues is not likely to go away anytime soon..

Point 10) regarding regulatory risk. Yep, sure, various governments can act at any time to become hostile to bitcoin and with disparate enforcement. They kind of concede that currently the bag is regulatory risk is mixed, and surely, i will concede that this is likely to be an ongoing, shifting and contradictory aspect of bitcoin, especially when concedingly the bitcoin phenomenon itself remains disruptive.


Points 11 & 12) regarding irrecoverability and irreversibility - in my thinking, these are really the same point about lack of centralization. I don't really consider these to be much of a point.. and we could say a feature rather than a bug..

(08-11-2016 12:05 PM)booshala Wrote:  I'm bullish on BTC, but when I read accounts of how it's going to eventually rival the market cap of gold ($7 Trillion USD), I shake my head and wonder how that's ever going to happen. Gold's been around for thousands of years as an instrument of value/currency, it seems highly unlikely that BTC is going to mimic the value of something so ingrained in millenia of human culture in just a few years. Still, I guess people could never foresee the advent of the personal computer or the Internet, so I think there's a very small non-zero chance that something like this might happen.

Mortgage backed securities involving subprime mortgages originated because wall street didn't like the profits from the mortgage securities that were higher rated with lower profits. Their desire for more led to a flood of interest and investment in these securities.

Look at some of these instruments like Bitcoin and Ether. Not too long ago Ether was 40 cents and bitcoin was a dollar and there have been others. Wall street is going to have a hard time ignoring these returns if they continue. Imagine if just one half of one percent of the total world's wealth moved into to these currencies? That would be over one trillion dollars invested. The current market cap of all of them is around 12 billion.

People won't buy these because they like them, like people weren't buying web companies because they liked them; they'll buy them because of the potential for gain.

I feel were only seeing the beginning for many of these.

Do you guys think this is smart?

It's a pain in the ass take RMB and send it to your US bank accounts. China is very aggravating in that regard.

I was thinking of buying BC using it as a medium to transfer money to my USA accounts when I need them.

I'm a total newb, so if that sounds stupid just let me know.

(08-11-2016 07:12 PM)Fortis Wrote:  Do you guys think this is smart?

It's a pain in the ass take RMB and send it to your US bank accounts. China is very aggravating in that regard.

I was thinking of buying BC using it as a medium to transfer money to my USA accounts when I need them.

I'm a total newb, so if that sounds stupid just let me know.

From your comment, I gather that you are in China and you are earning RMB.

If you are new to anything, you have to kind of learn the ropes.

Bitcoin has a lot of mechanism in which you can create account and then hold the value in either bitcoin or dollars. If you are holding in dollars, however, you may be subjecting yourself to some third party risk. I personally do not mind experiencing some of the third party risk as long as I can experience some of the mobility of bitcoin - and maybe lessen some of the volatility risk by holding parts of the accounts in dollars (or converting back and forth to the extent that I feel comfortable)... and also so far, bitcoin is largely without currency controls because once you transfer bitcoins into a bitcoin account, it can be quite unclear where those coins are because you could likely have access to the same wallet and account anywhere in the world, so long as you have an internet connection.

I would recommend getting started by just setting up some accounts, and then figuring some of it out with small amounts, and then attempt to learn about bitcoin while you are setting up the accounts in order that you can tailor the amount of your investment towards your views of the future of it and to figure out how much you feel comfortable holding in bitcoin, rather than in some other currency such as dollars.

Have you figured out yet, from where you would buy the bitcoins and what kind of premium you would be paying in order to buy them in RMB?

Sooner or later, it seems that these various news segments regarding buying pressures will result in additional upwards BTC price movements. The below news concerns increased buying in Japan.



http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments..._in_japan/

There may be some concerns in the bitcoin market about the fate of Bitfinex.

It appears that they have not even resumed margin trading, yet.

Or maybe I just cannot see it because of being a US customer?

Also, I had thought that they should implement some kind of fee incentives, such as zero fee trading for a period of time, but what do I know?


http://www.coindesk.com/bitfinex-bitcoin...tle-rages/


Edit:

Since it is still within the hour, let me add another link here, too (all related to discussion of the effect of the Bitfinex situation on the current bitcoin market).

This is a new reddit thread that is asserting evidence of an inside job and asserting shenanigans by Bitfinex.

I don't have any kind of problem with feeling skepticism of Bitfinex's official story, yet I do not find the claim that they admit that two of their managers are amongst the top BFX coin holders as convincing that there is any inside job going on. Maybe managers should not be trading because of potential conflicts of interest in their using their knowledge to trade, but that is not the exact claim at the moment.

I do find that Bitfinex admitting that a couple of their managers are amongst high level BFX coin holders merely means that Bitfinex managers were involved in trading and they had lost some money due to the hack.. and I suppose Bitfinex wants to use that kind of information to mean that Bitfinex did not engage in an inside job because some of their managers lost some of their money, too.

I came across another interesting article too.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments...d_for_now/


It appears that we got a few months reprieve on any attempt to implement a bitlicense bill in California...

And, from what I understand, in some of my earlier readings of the situation, some of the crypto currency enthusiastic folks felt that they had gotten screwed over by California legislators - because the crypto enthusiastic folks had gone through some cooperative process, and then the language of what was being proposed in the later implementations got much more burdensome, onerous and hostile to bitcoin.

The battle in California is likely not over, and maybe there can be some organizing attempts to keep the legislation somewhat bitcoin friendly or at least neutral?