Binance hack: If bitcoin is so safe, why is it a target ...

Technical: A Brief History of Payment Channels: from Satoshi to Lightning Network

Who cares about political tweets from some random country's president when payment channels are a much more interesting and are actually capable of carrying value?
So let's have a short history of various payment channel techs!

Generation 0: Satoshi's Broken nSequence Channels

Because Satoshi's Vision included payment channels, except his implementation sucked so hard we had to go fix it and added RBF as a by-product.
Originally, the plan for nSequence was that mempools would replace any transaction spending certain inputs with another transaction spending the same inputs, but only if the nSequence field of the replacement was larger.
Since 0xFFFFFFFF was the highest value that nSequence could get, this would mark a transaction as "final" and not replaceable on the mempool anymore.
In fact, this "nSequence channel" I will describe is the reason why we have this weird rule about nLockTime and nSequence. nLockTime actually only works if nSequence is not 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. final. If nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF then nLockTime is ignored, because this if the "final" version of the transaction.
So what you'd do would be something like this:
  1. You go to a bar and promise the bartender to pay by the time the bar closes. Because this is the Bitcoin universe, time is measured in blockheight, so the closing time of the bar is indicated as some future blockheight.
  2. For your first drink, you'd make a transaction paying to the bartender for that drink, paying from some coins you have. The transaction has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, and a starting nSequence of 0. You hand over the transaction and the bartender hands you your drink.
  3. For your succeeding drink, you'd remake the same transaction, adding the payment for that drink to the transaction output that goes to the bartender (so that output keeps getting larger, by the amount of payment), and having an nSequence that is one higher than the previous one.
  4. Eventually you have to stop drinking. It comes down to one of two possibilities:
    • You drink until the bar closes. Since it is now the nLockTime indicated in the transaction, the bartender is able to broadcast the latest transaction and tells the bouncers to kick you out of the bar.
    • You wisely consider the state of your liver. So you re-sign the last transaction with a "final" nSequence of 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. the maximum possible value it can have. This allows the bartender to get his or her funds immediately (nLockTime is ignored if nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF), so he or she tells the bouncers to let you out of the bar.
Now that of course is a payment channel. Individual payments (purchases of alcohol, so I guess buying coffee is not in scope for payment channels). Closing is done by creating a "final" transaction that is the sum of the individual payments. Sure there's no routing and channels are unidirectional and channels have a maximum lifetime but give Satoshi a break, he was also busy inventing Bitcoin at the time.
Now if you noticed I called this kind of payment channel "broken". This is because the mempool rules are not consensus rules, and cannot be validated (nothing about the mempool can be validated onchain: I sigh every time somebody proposes "let's make block size dependent on mempool size", mempool state cannot be validated by onchain data). Fullnodes can't see all of the transactions you signed, and then validate that the final one with the maximum nSequence is the one that actually is used onchain. So you can do the below:
  1. Become friends with Jihan Wu, because he owns >51% of the mining hashrate (he totally reorged Bitcoin to reverse the Binance hack right?).
  2. Slip Jihan Wu some of the more interesting drinks you're ordering as an incentive to cooperate with you. So say you end up ordering 100 drinks, you split it with Jihan Wu and give him 50 of the drinks.
  3. When the bar closes, Jihan Wu quickly calls his mining rig and tells them to mine the version of your transaction with nSequence 0. You know, that first one where you pay for only one drink.
  4. Because fullnodes cannot validate nSequence, they'll accept even the nSequence=0 version and confirm it, immutably adding you paying for a single alcoholic drink to the blockchain.
  5. The bartender, pissed at being cheated, takes out a shotgun from under the bar and shoots at you and Jihan Wu.
  6. Jihan Wu uses his mystical chi powers (actually the combined exhaust from all of his mining rigs) to slow down the shotgun pellets, making them hit you as softly as petals drifting in the wind.
  7. The bartender mutters some words, clothes ripping apart as he or she (hard to believe it could be a she but hey) turns into a bear, ready to maul you for cheating him or her of the payment for all the 100 drinks you ordered from him or her.
  8. Steely-eyed, you stand in front of the bartender-turned-bear, daring him to touch you. You've watched Revenant, you know Leonardo di Caprio could survive a bear mauling, and if some posh actor can survive that, you know you can too. You make a pose. "Drunken troll logic attack!"
  9. I think I got sidetracked here.
Lessons learned?

Spilman Channels

Incentive-compatible time-limited unidirectional channel; or, Satoshi's Vision, Fixed (if transaction malleability hadn't been a problem, that is).
Now, we know the bartender will turn into a bear and maul you if you try to cheat the payment channel, and now that we've revealed you're good friends with Jihan Wu, the bartender will no longer accept a payment channel scheme that lets one you cooperate with a miner to cheat the bartender.
Fortunately, Jeremy Spilman proposed a better way that would not let you cheat the bartender.
First, you and the bartender perform this ritual:
  1. You get some funds and create a transaction that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig between you and the bartender. You don't broadcast this yet: you just sign it and get its txid.
  2. You create another transaction that spends the above transaction. This transaction (the "backoff") has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, plus one block. You sign it and give this backoff transaction (but not the above transaction) to the bartender.
  3. The bartender signs the backoff and gives it back to you. It is now valid since it's spending a 2-of-2 of you and the bartender, and both of you have signed the backoff transaction.
  4. Now you broadcast the first transaction onchain. You and the bartender wait for it to be deeply confirmed, then you can start ordering.
The above is probably vaguely familiar to LN users. It's the funding process of payment channels! The first transaction, the one that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig, is the funding transaction that backs the payment channel funds.
So now you start ordering in this way:
  1. For your first drink, you create a transaction spending the funding transaction output and sending the price of the drink to the bartender, with the rest returning to you.
  2. You sign the transaction and pass it to the bartender, who serves your first drink.
  3. For your succeeding drinks, you recreate the same transaction, adding the price of the new drink to the sum that goes to the bartender and reducing the money returned to you. You sign the transaction and give it to the bartender, who serves you your next drink.
  4. At the end:
    • If the bar closing time is reached, the bartender signs the latest transaction, completing the needed 2-of-2 signatures and broadcasting this to the Bitcoin network. Since the backoff transaction is the closing time + 1, it can't get used at closing time.
    • If you decide you want to leave early because your liver is crying, you just tell the bartender to go ahead and close the channel (which the bartender can do at any time by just signing and broadcasting the latest transaction: the bartender won't do that because he or she is hoping you'll stay and drink more).
    • If you ended up just hanging around the bar and never ordering, then at closing time + 1 you broadcast the backoff transaction and get your funds back in full.
Now, even if you pass 50 drinks to Jihan Wu, you can't give him the first transaction (the one which pays for only one drink) and ask him to mine it: it's spending a 2-of-2 and the copy you have only contains your own signature. You need the bartender's signature to make it valid, but he or she sure as hell isn't going to cooperate in something that would lose him or her money, so a signature from the bartender validating old state where he or she gets paid less isn't going to happen.
So, problem solved, right? Right? Okay, let's try it. So you get your funds, put them in a funding tx, get the backoff tx, confirm the funding tx...
Once the funding transaction confirms deeply, the bartender laughs uproariously. He or she summons the bouncers, who surround you menacingly.
"I'm refusing service to you," the bartender says.
"Fine," you say. "I was leaving anyway;" You smirk. "I'll get back my money with the backoff transaction, and posting about your poor service on reddit so you get negative karma, so there!"
"Not so fast," the bartender says. His or her voice chills your bones. It looks like your exploitation of the Satoshi nSequence payment channel is still fresh in his or her mind. "Look at the txid of the funding transaction that got confirmed."
"What about it?" you ask nonchalantly, as you flip open your desktop computer and open a reputable blockchain explorer.
What you see shocks you.
"What the --- the txid is different! You--- you changed my signature?? But how? I put the only copy of my private key in a sealed envelope in a cast-iron box inside a safe buried in the Gobi desert protected by a clan of nomads who have dedicated their lives and their childrens' lives to keeping my private key safe in perpetuity!"
"Didn't you know?" the bartender asks. "The components of the signature are just very large numbers. The sign of one of the signature components can be changed, from positive to negative, or negative to positive, and the signature will remain valid. Anyone can do that, even if they don't know the private key. But because Bitcoin includes the signatures in the transaction when it's generating the txid, this little change also changes the txid." He or she chuckles. "They say they'll fix it by separating the signatures from the transaction body. They're saying that these kinds of signature malleability won't affect transaction ids anymore after they do this, but I bet I can get my good friend Jihan Wu to delay this 'SepSig' plan for a good while yet. Friendly guy, this Jihan Wu, it turns out all I had to do was slip him 51 drinks and he was willing to mine a tx with the signature signs flipped." His or her grin widens. "I'm afraid your backoff transaction won't work anymore, since it spends a txid that is not existent and will never be confirmed. So here's the deal. You pay me 99% of the funds in the funding transaction, in exchange for me signing the transaction that spends with the txid that you see onchain. Refuse, and you lose 100% of the funds and every other HODLer, including me, benefits from the reduction in coin supply. Accept, and you get to keep 1%. I lose nothing if you refuse, so I won't care if you do, but consider the difference of getting zilch vs. getting 1% of your funds." His or her eyes glow. "GENUFLECT RIGHT NOW."
Lesson learned?

CLTV-protected Spilman Channels

Using CLTV for the backoff branch.
This variation is simply Spilman channels, but with the backoff transaction replaced with a backoff branch in the SCRIPT you pay to. It only became possible after OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (CLTV) was enabled in 2015.
Now as we saw in the Spilman Channels discussion, transaction malleability means that any pre-signed offchain transaction can easily be invalidated by flipping the sign of the signature of the funding transaction while the funding transaction is not yet confirmed.
This can be avoided by simply putting any special requirements into an explicit branch of the Bitcoin SCRIPT. Now, the backoff branch is supposed to create a maximum lifetime for the payment channel, and prior to the introduction of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY this could only be done by having a pre-signed nLockTime transaction.
With CLTV, however, we can now make the branches explicit in the SCRIPT that the funding transaction pays to.
Instead of paying to a 2-of-2 in order to set up the funding transaction, you pay to a SCRIPT which is basically "2-of-2, OR this singlesig after a specified lock time".
With this, there is no backoff transaction that is pre-signed and which refers to a specific txid. Instead, you can create the backoff transaction later, using whatever txid the funding transaction ends up being confirmed under. Since the funding transaction is immutable once confirmed, it is no longer possible to change the txid afterwards.

Todd Micropayment Networks

The old hub-spoke model (that isn't how LN today actually works).
One of the more direct predecessors of the Lightning Network was the hub-spoke model discussed by Peter Todd. In this model, instead of payers directly having channels to payees, payers and payees connect to a central hub server. This allows any payer to pay any payee, using the same channel for every payee on the hub. Similarly, this allows any payee to receive from any payer, using the same channel.
Remember from the above Spilman example? When you open a channel to the bartender, you have to wait around for the funding tx to confirm. This will take an hour at best. Now consider that you have to make channels for everyone you want to pay to. That's not very scalable.
So the Todd hub-spoke model has a central "clearing house" that transport money from payers to payees. The "Moonbeam" project takes this model. Of course, this reveals to the hub who the payer and payee are, and thus the hub can potentially censor transactions. Generally, though, it was considered that a hub would more efficiently censor by just not maintaining a channel with the payer or payee that it wants to censor (since the money it owned in the channel would just be locked uselessly if the hub won't process payments to/from the censored user).
In any case, the ability of the central hub to monitor payments means that it can surveill the payer and payee, and then sell this private transactional data to third parties. This loss of privacy would be intolerable today.
Peter Todd also proposed that there might be multiple hubs that could transport funds to each other on behalf of their users, providing somewhat better privacy.
Another point of note is that at the time such networks were proposed, only unidirectional (Spilman) channels were available. Thus, while one could be a payer, or payee, you would have to use separate channels for your income versus for your spending. Worse, if you wanted to transfer money from your income channel to your spending channel, you had to close both and reshuffle the money between them, both onchain activities.

Poon-Dryja Lightning Network

Bidirectional two-participant channels.
The Poon-Dryja channel mechanism has two important properties:
Both the original Satoshi and the two Spilman variants are unidirectional: there is a payer and a payee, and if the payee wants to do a refund, or wants to pay for a different service or product the payer is providing, then they can't use the same unidirectional channel.
The Poon-Dryjam mechanism allows channels, however, to be bidirectional instead: you are not a payer or a payee on the channel, you can receive or send at any time as long as both you and the channel counterparty are online.
Further, unlike either of the Spilman variants, there is no time limit for the lifetime of a channel. Instead, you can keep the channel open for as long as you want.
Both properties, together, form a very powerful scaling property that I believe most people have not appreciated. With unidirectional channels, as mentioned before, if you both earn and spend over the same network of payment channels, you would have separate channels for earning and spending. You would then need to perform onchain operations to "reverse" the directions of your channels periodically. Secondly, since Spilman channels have a fixed lifetime, even if you never used either channel, you would have to periodically "refresh" it by closing it and reopening.
With bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels, you may instead open some channels when you first begin managing your own money, then close them only after your lawyers have executed your last will and testament on how the money in your channels get divided up to your heirs: that's just two onchain transactions in your entire lifetime. That is the potentially very powerful scaling property that bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels allow.
I won't discuss the transaction structure needed for Poon-Dryja bidirectional channels --- it's complicated and you can easily get explanations with cute graphics elsewhere.
There is a weakness of Poon-Dryja that people tend to gloss over (because it was fixed very well by RustyReddit):
Another thing I want to emphasize is that while the Lightning Network paper and many of the earlier presentations developed from the old Peter Todd hub-and-spoke model, the modern Lightning Network takes the logical conclusion of removing a strict separation between "hubs" and "spokes". Any node on the Lightning Network can very well work as a hub for any other node. Thus, while you might operate as "mostly a payer", "mostly a forwarding node", "mostly a payee", you still end up being at least partially a forwarding node ("hub") on the network, at least part of the time. This greatly reduces the problems of privacy inherent in having only a few hub nodes: forwarding nodes cannot get significantly useful data from the payments passing through them, because the distance between the payer and the payee can be so large that it would be likely that the ultimate payer and the ultimate payee could be anyone on the Lightning Network.
Lessons learned?

Future

After LN, there's also the Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels (DMC). This post is long enough as-is, LOL. But for now, it uses a novel "decrementing nSequence channel", using the new relative-timelock semantics of nSequence (not the broken one originally by Satoshi). It actually uses multiple such "decrementing nSequence" constructs, terminating in a pair of Spilman channels, one in both directions (thus "duplex"). Maybe I'll discuss it some other time.
The realization that channel constructions could actually hold more channel constructions inside them (the way the Decker-Wattenhofer puts a pair of Spilman channels inside a series of "decrementing nSequence channels") lead to the further thought behind Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer channel factories. Basically, you could host multiple two-participant channel constructs inside a larger multiparticipant "channel" construct (i.e. host multiple channels inside a factory).
Further, we have the Decker-Russell-Osuntokun or "eltoo" construction. I'd argue that this is "nSequence done right". I'll write more about this later, because this post is long enough.
Lessons learned?
submitted by almkglor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - March 2018

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the fifteenth monthly Bitcoin news recap.
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
And a lot has happened. It's easy to forget with so much focus on the price. Take a moment and scroll through the list below. You'll find an incredibly eventful month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in March 2018
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A word of caution. All major exchanges are not even fiat gateways. The actual fiat in the system is likely grossly overestimated. Crypto is decoupled from USD. Implications.

First of all i should disclose i'm fully out of crypto since last Sunday, i'm just waiting for my EUR wire from Bitstamp as that has been my gateway since 2014. I would like to thank bitcoinmarkets for the good times, i've been around for a long time but not really participating that much, and even when I did i used throwaways. I decided to make this topic as a warning and to explain why I got out and why I think you should be very careful.
So we have a situation in which:
1) 80% or more of trading is in USDT (tether)
2) Coinmarket cap is an accomplice to Bitfinex which implies USDT-USD parity. To which degree this is intentional, irresponsibility or just incompetence I would not know. Basically conimarketplace lumps all USDT trades and prices with actual USD trades and prices. If you go there https://coinmarketcap.com/ and try to select PAIR, you get THIS. No USDT, even though most exchanges are USDT. Even if most of liquidity is USDT. Again, this is a major factor in implying parity along with what Bitfinex/Tether try to do. As if this wasn't enough, they also willingly or stupidly inflate USDT price itself. I have to remind you Coinmarketcap is THE point of reference for all cryptosphere. It's oscilating Alexa rank is 100-400. Betfair (real life gambling company) for example uses coinmarket price average for their own system. etc.
3) If/when tethebitfinex crashes, not only does bitfinex crash, it will crash all crypto pairings using USDT on all exchanges using USDT.
4) There are very few fiat gateways. Until recently I assumed the major(top) exchanges have some kind of fiat pairing. I mean.. any respectable exchange would have some way of actually getting money in and out, right? I didn't even think to check. Well, they don't. Literally all the major exchanges are USDT (and/or another stablecoin or proprietary coin) and nothing else. No USD, no EUR, no fiat whatsoever. https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/ . Only the 11th one has actual USD pairing. Didn't check lower but most exchanges don't have fiat. I did a full check on Binance myself as it's the biggest exchange and I had an account there for lulz. There is no fiat.
What does this mean? It means that an allegedly 200 BILLION market cap of all crypto has a fiat gateway of only a couple of exchanges. Most exchanges not using any fiat are not only immune to the risk, they offload risk on the much smaller exchanges that are fiat gateways. And on clients, of course. The cash side of the actual exchanges would need to have to siphon even a fraction of this are unimaginable. If any of these exchanges use crypto to evaluate their own fiat balance (it is illegal but crypto is hardly regulated or audited), they're fucked.
5) If the first four points looked bad, this one is by far the worst. The system is running on a presumed liquidity provided by Tether and on presumed USD capital. Even if tether was legit it's just 2b USD rolling 200b USD. And that 200b USD is just presumed quantity of USD that is in. We don't know how much USD is in the system, there could be and there probably is way less, as over the past 8 years or so crypto ran mostly on funny exchanges that could "provide" whatever USD value they wanted. More so, even if they went bust, people would usually get to withdraw crypto and store it on some other exchange. Even when an exchange was slowly withering, people just pulled out crypto and the exchange actual liquidity was hardly tested out. Or btc-e crashing or MtGox crashing. Their cash side crashed but "crypto" side did not crash. It was bailed out so to speak. So we have crypto running around that should've been worth 1/10 or 1/100 of it's price but it's instead running on par value with crypto on legit exchanges. This grossly inflates price.
Even if tether (or other stablecoin) is legit, it can be drained in a couple of hours. What happens to the pairings of crypto/USDT? People just trade one bitcoin at the presumable price of 6k for 6k USDT that are 100% backed but have no value because there's no USD in the treasury? Who is stupid enough to deposit USD there to get stuck waiting for another fool to bail him out by getting himself stuck?
edit: [Even if tether is 1%, it holds much more assumed/created value, which is the actual issue. Look at it this way. It only adds 1 cent to a real dollar market buy order for example. Each buy order made in a system that implies USDT:USD parity is now worth 1% more than a true USD purchase. Now repeat that buy order millions of times. It's not 1.01+1.01 times 1 million. It's more like 1.01$1.000.000 Each added value comes from USDT injection and USDT has to be liquid on the way down as well. It's added value to the market value is NOT it's market cap. That's a shitfest all "stablecoins" inject into the market, no matter how backed or audited they are.]
As I was saying, all the exchanges that are not holding any fiat are immune to any crash or actual liability. If/when cryptos fail, they'll give you back any number of cryptos/stablecoins you had, even if they're worthless. It's just entries in a database. If/when USDT fails, all it's corresponding crypto prices will go to infinity. If you're holding any USDT, you can't get out of the exchange because 1 btc will cost infinity. If you're in any margin position, no matter where your stops are you'll get margin called instead, as stops are just suggestions in high/extreme volatility. You can't get out through fiat cause there's no fiat.
Your only hope is you were actually holding crypto and they don't block withdrawals. Best case scenario you move your crypto to a fiat gateway exchange and hope to cash out there as fast as possible because it will have had become evident that cryptos were overvalued because of USDT (and even hypothetical USD in the system). Will most likely be too late as people that were already in fiat gateway exchanges already sold/cashed out. There will be enormous sell pressure. And no buyers.
The whole stablecoin issuance is idiotic and I just hope it crashes now and we won't see another bubble built on presumed capital, cause that will hurt way more people. All of this is a mess. Crypto is completely decoupled from real fiat now. The potential money that are in the crypto sphere is exponentially greater than available money to trade out of. Or maybe we should be grateful for stablecoins for finally crashing a system that would've crashed anyway in the long run.
submitted by 5ty54y5yh45 to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

So are there likely to be more Mt Gox trustee deposits?

There's 160,000 Bitcoins sitting in a trustees account somewhere.
I've read here that they cannot directly ever enter the market via this same trustee https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/831yqz/the_market_is_waiting_for_the_other_shoe_to_drop/
Or
https://www.mtgox.com/img/pdf/20180307_report.pdf
Where he says he'll continue on doing this until the court says "no more"
50/50
Like many others, I would just like to get on with things and get some market stability which I was hoping for bar Coinbase insider trading, Binance attempted hack and so forth ...
Although the crypto market has always been volatile this type of thing is at least somewhat predictable.
There are rightfully a lot of angry people out there who lost in Mtgox. Likewise they are raging over this. Meanwhile there are people saying dump it all and get this over with - something nobody can control because crypto is not regulated. Then there's the FUD folk who keep stirring the pot.
Realistically, what are we looking at here? Another dump in a year just as this "dip" recovers? The coin will never hit the market?
I'd love to get some concrete proof of what exactly is happening with MTgox now. When or will everyone be paid back? What happens to the rest of the coin etc?
There seems to be surprisingly little fact out there...
submitted by dtheme to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: Buttcoin top posts from 2014-02-28 to 2019-01-15 01:31 PDT

Period: 1781.72 days
Submissions Comments
Total 1000 66504
Rate (per day) 0.56 37.31
Unique Redditors 546 7216
Combined Score 190256 613696

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 4165 points, 23 submissions: Tomatoshi
    1. Cryptocurrency Euthanasia Coaster (489 points, 127 comments)
    2. Mark Karpeles states Bitcoin has failed and is useless. (273 points, 95 comments)
    3. Vergin comedy gold leaks ahead of announcement (241 points, 159 comments)
    4. Incredibly "organic" pump minutes before Tether prints $300 million (237 points, 82 comments)
    5. In today's Creepto News : McAfee's Underground King of ICO analysts apparently a pedo (230 points, 99 comments)
    6. Dying Butter attempts to dox imaginary assassin. Gives him an imaginary name and non-existent address. (215 points, 70 comments)
    7. Back under 8K. Shall I get rid of my fiat? (210 points, 86 comments)
    8. President Maduro's computer hacked. Exit scam image discovered. (205 points, 12 comments)
    9. Come all ye faithful and get rekt margin trading (185 points, 59 comments)
    10. Lightning Network upgraded - super efficient diagram of super efficient payment channels running on top of super efficient blockchain (183 points, 73 comments)
  2. 2691 points, 10 submissions: Orbalisks
    1. Debating Bitcoin (747 points, 114 comments)
    2. 1 Bitcoin transaction uses over four times as much energy as 100,000 VISA transactions (492 points, 150 comments)
    3. Remember that model that the Bitcoin crowd constantly mocked? Turns out it was pretty much spot on... (346 points, 90 comments)
    4. MRW I see butters describing how they lost 40% on Verge so they went all in on Tron but lost another 30% so they went back to Bitcoin but are down 25% (216 points, 38 comments)
    5. The Parable of the Bagholder (201 points, 14 comments)
    6. Then they came for me (161 points, 18 comments)
    7. First. Global. Currency. (148 points, 55 comments)
    8. Verge creator desperately (and unsuccessfully) trying to cash out into USD on Coinbase; notes that "taxes are due"--an observation that conspicuously coincides with Verge's enigmatic crowdfunding campaign (143 points, 34 comments)
    9. Butter shares comical chart suggesting that Bitcoin is destined for 100% adoption, despite the fact that the chart both misrepresents how long Bitcoin has been around for and already shows that it is not being adopted as quickly as other technologies (120 points, 76 comments)
    10. First you pump, then you dump (117 points, 25 comments)
  3. 2556 points, 15 submissions: dgerard
    1. The OKEx margin trading disaster — how crypto margin trading goes wrong, and how the eye-watering margin leverage on crypto exchanges works in practice (306 points, 212 comments)
    2. "Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain" is OUT NOW! (284 points, 98 comments)
    3. Reuters on OTC markets: "Less romantically, traders sometimes say 'butt' to mean bitcoin." we did it lads, be proud (268 points, 17 comments)
    4. How does Brave's "Basic Attention Token" work? By blatant fraud, of course! Twitter thread from one creator whose name and photo Brave is misusing (192 points, 173 comments)
    5. bullish on USD. it is clear USD is increasingly popular with past hodlers of the deprecated bit-Coin. USD has gone up hugely in just the past day against the b.t.C!! in the future it is posible with enough imagination that the US economy could run on USD ! in conclusion you should get into currency (186 points, 26 comments)
    6. Twitter thread of Bitcoin price predictions (164 points, 30 comments)
    7. "Kodak board members conveniently grant themselves shares the day before the announcement, a stock promoter with a checkered past is engaged for PR, and a group of German copyright trolls reinvent themselves as blockchain-enabled image platform managers." A scathing hedge-fund report on KodakCoin. (157 points, 44 comments)
    8. MERL Tech: Blockchain for International Development. "We documented 43 blockchain use-cases ... no documentation or evidence of the results blockchain was purported to have achieved in these claims ... Not one was willing to share data on program results." (143 points, 44 comments)
    9. Bitcoin’s stupendous power waste is green, apparently — bad excuses for Proof-of-Work [by me] (133 points, 112 comments)
    10. Bitcoin continues to be awesome for renewable energy! - "Bitcoin backlash as ‘miners’ suck up electricity, stress power grids in Central Washington" (130 points, 39 comments)
  4. 2541 points, 10 submissions: borderpatrol
    1. Buttcoin Foundation ROCKED as founder exposed to be PAID SHILL for Butterfly Labs (1269 points, 553 comments)
    2. Stop with the political and racist garbage (177 points, 119 comments)
    3. To the person who reports every single chart posted in this sub as "not a fucking log chart" (167 points, 40 comments)
    4. WE DID IT REDDIT! (166 points, 55 comments)
    5. Someone finally said "Buttcoin". And it's William Shatner (156 points, 39 comments)
    6. My new Bitcoin commercial idea. (140 points, 21 comments)
    7. Let's welcome /Buttcoin's newest honorary member of the mod/shill team, Peter Todd! (125 points, 54 comments)
    8. Satoshi Nakamoto is an anagram of "So a man took a shit." (118 points, 16 comments)
    9. Guess which convicted felon just fucked over another Bitcoin business? (112 points, 31 comments)
    10. You guys are the best (111 points, 81 comments)
  5. 2509 points, 12 submissions: JihanButt
    1. Hot (404 points, 19 comments)
    2. Made me check (and kek) (398 points, 49 comments)
    3. Mass adoption is here (257 points, 60 comments)
    4. New record for the fastest exit scam in human history (245 points, 23 comments)
    5. Meanwhile on 4chan bizbutt (210 points, 88 comments)
    6. TIL: Binance can exit scam at any given time and no one would be able to locate CZ or the Binance offices. Not even MtGOX was this shady. (200 points, 65 comments)
    7. Quality (172 points, 53 comments)
    8. Normies are shorting (137 points, 44 comments)
    9. CEO (lol) of shitcoin Titanium BUTT, high on cocaine during AMA (136 points, 16 comments)
    10. It begins... The biggest transfer of comedy gold in human history (122 points, 17 comments)
  6. 2470 points, 12 submissions: unitedstatian
    1. I can't tell why but this ICO doesn't look trustworthy to me (369 points, 47 comments)
    2. Cryptocurrency (332 points, 26 comments)
    3. Has crypto become a giant joke? (311 points, 60 comments)
    4. A Buttcoiner going shopping (248 points, 37 comments)
    5. There is only a 1% chance of successfully routing a $67 payment on the lightning network (229 points, 71 comments)
    6. Comedy gold over at bitcoin (179 points, 54 comments)
    7. The Four Commandments (148 points, 65 comments)
    8. Behold LN in it's full glory as two users fail to send a meager 100 Sats through a high liquidity hub (Bitrefill) due to poor route computation. (146 points, 76 comments)
    9. Jimmy Song giving advice on how to use Bitcoin as a method of payment lol! (143 points, 57 comments)
    10. This is my new favorite ICO. (130 points, 94 comments)
  7. 2037 points, 11 submissions: dyzo-blue
    1. Butter informs his tribe that he has decided to leave. Tribe kindly wishes him good luck and a happy new year. (510 points, 81 comments)
    2. STORE OF VALUE. (184 points, 32 comments)
    3. TIL: Apparently butters are mostly models who have meet-ups on boats. (167 points, 43 comments)
    4. Bitcoiner asked me if I was in the "crypto game" (165 points, 140 comments)
    5. Bitcoin’s energy consumption is growing at 20% per month and is effectively erasing decades of progress on renewable energy (160 points, 93 comments)
    6. Steve Bannon is creating a cryptocurrency to fund global fascist movements (155 points, 175 comments)
    7. Firesale! Firesale! All I see are CHEAP COINZ. (154 points, 130 comments)
    8. The electricity required for a single Bitcoin trade could power a house for a whole month (147 points, 81 comments)
    9. Who sees this pop-up and thinks, "Hmm, seems legit"? (146 points, 40 comments)
    10. From California's Governor Primary Ballot (126 points, 28 comments)
  8. 2035 points, 13 submissions: 18_points
    1. BitGrail insolvency due to people editing client-side javascript and withdrawing free NANO! (279 points, 115 comments)
    2. Butter rushes to exchange his iMac for a MacBook hours before return policy expires, doesn't copy his wallet seed. $170K SFYL, mass adoption imminent. (205 points, 102 comments)
    3. LA Times: The only currency worse than bitcoin is Venezuela’s (176 points, 78 comments)
    4. Butter makes $1.2mm, quits his job, proceeds to lose 80% (175 points, 76 comments)
    5. Bitcoin.com openly admits Tethers are backed by nothing (158 points, 99 comments)
    6. Tether CFO: "Tether may no longer continue to use the US dollar anchor in the future." (152 points, 80 comments)
    7. Aaaand it's gone.... Stablecoin basis closes shup after raising $133 million (151 points, 61 comments)
    8. Guy travels abroad paying with bitcoin. Just kidding, he couldn't pay with bitcoin - best he could do after 2 days trying was trade bitcoin for cash 20% below spot. (138 points, 62 comments)
    9. Because this chart never gets old ... (126 points, 46 comments)
    10. Tether crashing on Kraken, down to $0.98 (125 points, 69 comments)
  9. 1985 points, 6 submissions: cool_playa
    1. a shitcoin startup called Prodeum just exitscammed with millions of investor dollars and left them the following message on their site (1111 points, 170 comments)
    2. Cryptocurrencies: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) (256 points, 72 comments)
    3. Charlie Lee gets put in his place (185 points, 29 comments)
    4. Vitalik rethinks his stance as a Libertarian due to the current cryptocurrency ecosystem. Regulations are actually good he says. LMAO. (180 points, 86 comments)
    5. Twitter CEO says Bitcoin is the future / Twitter bans cryptocurrencies from advertising on their platform. (129 points, 11 comments)
    6. Bubble, Bubble, Fraud and Trouble - New York Times article (124 points, 81 comments)
  10. 1916 points, 10 submissions: Cthulhooo
    1. Ladies and Gentlemen I have an innovative idea that will change the landscape of cryptospace forever. I present you the infinite reverse Ponzi scheme. (355 points, 237 comments)
    2. ETH is now officially a 2 digit shitcoin! (258 points, 110 comments)
    3. So this is how blood in the streets looks like... (215 points, 91 comments)
    4. Missed us? (211 points, 44 comments)
    5. The new paradigm (of spam) has arrived. (171 points, 45 comments)
    6. Attention all personnel. (168 points, 62 comments)
    7. Not only bloomberg or CNBC. Even national media all over the world are screaming about tether manipulation. This is good for buttcoin. (168 points, 42 comments)
    8. The biggest bagholders on the planet are actually institutions. Bought bitcoin for $40k (142 points, 44 comments)
    9. Millions of dollars stuck forever in a buttchain thanks to an international community effort to establish the largest comedy gold black hole up to date. (116 points, 28 comments)
    10. Smart ponzi FOMO3D round 1 ends way too early with a creative twist (112 points, 98 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. SnapshillBot (15642 points, 683 comments)
  2. Cthulhooo (11080 points, 1057 comments)
  3. Tomatoshi (10485 points, 577 comments)
  4. newprofile15 (7365 points, 477 comments)
  5. jstolfi (7325 points, 766 comments)
  6. JeanneDOrc (6318 points, 827 comments)
  7. friosc (5326 points, 244 comments)
  8. Woolbrick (5088 points, 318 comments)
  9. Crypto_To_The_Core (4838 points, 678 comments)
  10. HopeFox (4673 points, 331 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. I'm having an orgasm watching the prices dropping - upvote if you're a sick a degenerate like me by deleted (1456 points, 340 comments)
  2. Buttcoin Foundation ROCKED as founder exposed to be PAID SHILL for Butterfly Labs by borderpatrol (1269 points, 553 comments)
  3. a shitcoin startup called Prodeum just exitscammed with millions of investor dollars and left them the following message on their site by cool_playa (1111 points, 170 comments)
  4. And the returns have already begun. One person and a known reseller we get regularly. by cloud3514 (907 points, 278 comments)
  5. c o m p u t e r s c i e n c e by brokenAmmonite (856 points, 125 comments)
  6. U.S. Launches Criminal Probe into Bitcoin Price Manipulation by BitcoinTrolling101 (761 points, 218 comments)
  7. Debating Bitcoin by Orbalisks (747 points, 114 comments)
  8. TIL bitcoin is called the currency of the future because all currency transactions are confirmed in the distant future. by Thief_1 (720 points, 37 comments)
  9. M A T H E M A T I C A L L Y I M P O S S I B LE by NORATHEDESTROYER (693 points, 86 comments)
  10. This is the best take of crypto-currency that I've ever seen. by deleted (689 points, 137 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 1874 points: AlbertRammstein's comment in The OKEx margin trading disaster — how crypto margin trading goes wrong, and how the eye-watering margin leverage on crypto exchanges works in practice
  2. 1263 points: Mike_Prowe's comment in Buttcoin Foundation ROCKED as founder exposed to be PAID SHILL for Butterfly Labs
  3. 820 points: Slayer706's comment in Buttcoin Foundation ROCKED as founder exposed to be PAID SHILL for Butterfly Labs
  4. 577 points: deleted's comment in The OKEx margin trading disaster — how crypto margin trading goes wrong, and how the eye-watering margin leverage on crypto exchanges works in practice
  5. 571 points: cloud3514's comment in And the returns have already begun. One person and a known reseller we get regularly.
  6. 496 points: SnapshillBot's comment in a shitcoin startup called Prodeum just exitscammed with millions of investor dollars and left them the following message on their site
  7. 382 points: vytah's comment in Holy Satoshi! Butter pays 85Btc transaction fees for a 16Btc transaction. Is this the largest fee ever paid?
  8. 380 points: Tomatoshi's comment in It's already happening. GPU market is about to get really hot.
  9. 361 points: ShiteFlaps's comment in Why are you guys such salty fks?
  10. 331 points: -charlie-kelly-'s comment in a shitcoin startup called Prodeum just exitscammed with millions of investor dollars and left them the following message on their site
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Regarding Suspended Withdrawal from Binance

Okay, so when the issue about suspended XLM withdrawal from Binance arose, I don't think much about it. After all, just last month Polo has the exact same issue and they fix it in about a week. Since nearly all exchange use only 1 wallet for ALL their users, you can check their XLM balance and most of the time there'll be millions if not billions of XLM sitting there, easing yourself from worry of being mt goxed.
So, just today out of curiosity I decided to check binance stellar wallet...Now, there's only about 100K XLM sitting on their wallet.
You can check it by yourself, and compare it with other exchange wallet:
Now, I know that this doesn't mean that binance is mtgoxing us. A lot of possible scenario that I can think of is that they have another wallet to store XLM safely, or that they decided to create a new wallet and move the fund there. Or maybe they decided to apply 1 wallet per user policy, and begin redistributing user's XLM to each their own wallet (ala how XRP wallet works in Polo).
It'll be nice though if someone from Binance can confirm what exactly happened, and whether our funds is still safe there or not, since the low amount of XLM on their public address kinda make me worried. There's no way an exhange with more that $100 million of XLM volume only has around 100K XLM on their wallet.
EDIT: Apparently they have another wallet here and been transferring all of our deposit to that wallet. Why they decided to use separate wallet, I don't know though
submitted by rainsong94 to Stellar [link] [comments]

A word of caution. All major exchanges are not even fiat gateways. The actual fiat in the system is likely grossly overestimated. Crypto is decoupled from USD. Implications.

So we have a situation in which:
1) 80% or more of trading is in USDT (tether)
2) Coinmarket cap is an accomplice to Bitfinex which implies USDT-USD parity. To which degree this is intentional, irresponsibility or just incompetence I would not know. Basically conimarketplace lumps all USDT trades and prices with actual USD trades and prices. If you go there https://coinmarketcap.com/ and try to select PAIR, you get THIS. No USDT, even though most exchanges are USDT. Even if most of liquidity is USDT. Again, this is a major factor in implying parity along with what Bitfinex/Tether try to do. As if this wasn't enough, they also willingly or stupidly inflate USDT price itself. I have to remind you Coinmarketcap is THE point of reference for all cryptosphere. It's oscilating Alexa rank is 100-400. Betfair (real life gambling company) for example uses coinmarket price average for their own system. etc.
3) If/when tethebitfinex crashes, not only does bitfinex crash, it will crash all crypto pairings using USDT on all exchanges using USDT.
4) There are very few fiat gateways. Until recently I assumed the major(top) exchanges have some kind of fiat pairing. I mean.. any respectable exchange would have some way of actually getting money in and out, right? I didn't even think to check. Well, they don't. Literally all the major exchanges are USDT (and/or another stablecoin or proprietary coin) and nothing else. No USD, no EUR, no fiat whatsoever. https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/ . Only the 11th one has actual USD pairing. Didn't check lower but most exchanges don't have fiat. I did a full check on Binance myself as it's the biggest exchange and I had an account there for lulz. There is no fiat.
What does this mean? It means that an allegedly 200 BILLION market cap of all crypto has a fiat gateway of only a couple of exchanges. Most exchanges not using any fiat are not only immune to the risk, they offload risk on the much smaller exchanges that are fiat gateways. And on clients, of course. The cash side of the actual exchanges would need to have to siphon even a fraction of this are unimaginable. If any of these exchanges use crypto to evaluate their own fiat reserves (it is illegal but crypto is hardly regulated or audited), they're fucked.
5) If the first four points looked bad, this one is by far the worst. The system is running on a presumed liquidity provided by Tether and on presumed USD capital. Even if tether was legit it's just 2b USD rolling 200b USD. And that 200b USD is just presumed quantity of USD that is in. We don't know how much USD is in the system, there could be and there probably is way less, as over the past 8 years or so crypto ran mostly on funny exchanges that could "provide" whatever USD value they wanted. More so, even if they went bust, people would usually get to withdraw crypto and store it on some other exchange. Even when an exchange was slowly withering, people just pulled out crypto and the exchange actual liquidity was hardly tested out. Or btc-e crashing or MtGox crashing. Their cash side crashed but "crypto" side did not crash. It was bailed out so to speak. So we have crypto running around that should've been worth 1/10 or 1/100 of it's price but it's instead running on par value with crypto on legit exchanges. This grossly inflates price.
Even if tether is legit, it can be drained in a couple of hours. What happens to the pairings of crypto/USDT? People just trade one bitcoin at the presumable price of 6k for 6k USDT that are 100% backed but have no value because there's no USD in the treasury? Who is stupid enough to deposit USD there to get stuck waiting for another fool to bail him out by getting himself stuck?
Even if tether is 1% it holds much more assumed value, which is the actual issue. Let's say only adds 1 cent to a real dollar market buy order for example. Each buy order made in a system that implies USDT:USD parity is now worth 1% more than a true USD purchase. Now repeat that buy order millions of times. Each added value comes from USDT injection and USDT has to be liquid on the way down as well. It's added value to the market value is not it's market cap.
As I was saying, all the exchanges that are not holding any fiat are immune to any crash or actual liability. If/when cryptos fail, they'll give you back any number of cryptos/stablecoins you had, even if they're worthless. It's just entries in a database. If/when USDT fails, all it's corresponding crypto prices will go to infinity. If you're holding any USDT, you can't get out of the exchange because 1 btc will cost infinity. If you're in any margin position, no matter where your stops are you'll get margin called instead, as stops are just suggestions in high/extreme volatility. You can't get out through fiat cause there's no fiat.
Your only hope is you were actually holding crypto and they don't block withdrawals. Best case scenario you move your crypto to a fiat gateway exchange and hope to cash out there as fast as possible because it will have had become evident that cryptos were overvalued because of USDT (and even hypothetical USD in the system). Will most likely be too late as people that were already in fiat gateway exchanges already sold/cashed out. There will be enormous sell pressure. And no buyers.
The whole stablecoin issuance is idiotic and I just hope it crashes now and we won't see another bubble built on presumed capital, cause that will hurt way more people. All of this is a mess. Crypto is completely decoupled from real fiat now. The potential money that are in the crypto sphere is exponentially greater than available money to trade out of. Or maybe we should be grateful for stablecoins for finally crashing a system that would've crashed anyway in the long run.
submitted by 5ty54y5yh45 to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Mt Gox Bitcoin Fork Dilemma, Stellar + Western Union, XRP Base Pair & Binance Coin Price Jump SEC, Binance and Mt Gox Sink Crypto Markets - FUD Storm #314 Bitcoin Flash Crash, Binance Hack & Mt Gox News, Coinbase Indexfonds & TrueUSD Bitcoin FUD - Mt Gox, Binance Hack, SEC Regulations! Crypto News - 11.03 Binance Monero Bittrex Bitcoin Wabi Mt. Gox TUSD GuruTalk- What is happening with Bytecoin and Binance? Mt. Gox Bitcoin Delay, Ripple + Justin Bieber, Monero Futures & Bitcoin Price Bounce

Bitcoin security specialists at WizSec declared that recently arrested Alexander Vinnik is likely also responsible for siphoning illicitly gained funds out of the MtGox hack over three years ago. WizSec came out of a two-year long hiatus from Twitter to make the announcement , stating that “Vinnik is our chief suspect for involvement in the MtGox theft… Binance, which is based in Taiwan, announced on Tuesday that hackers were able to withdraw about 7,000 bitcoin through a single transaction, amounting to $40 million. Hackers employed various ... Bitcoin History is a multipart series from news.Bitcoin.com charting pivotal moments in the evolution of the world’s first cryptocurrency. Read part 24 here . Images courtesy of Shutterstock. Binance, one of the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchanges, has been hit by a $41m hack — just the latest in a string of thefts in the crypto world.. Malta-based Binance announced in a blog post on Wednesday that “hackers used a variety of techniques, including phishing, viruses and other attacks” to withdraw 7,000 bitcoin.. Binance has suspended withdrawals for the time being but ... Here's What's Really Happening In The Bitcoin (btc) Markets Right Now - Global Coin Report . January 18, 2018 By Samuel Rae 158Views 0Comments Its fair to say that action over the first few days of this week in the cryptocurrency markets has been a bloodbath. Prices of all of the major coins declined by 50% or more in some cases and sentiment took a steep in the wake of the dip. On Thursday ... By then, the bitcoin was worth roughly 60,000 U.S dollars. As the price of bitcoin went on appreciating, the value of the lost bitcoins started worrying Mt Gox investors. Again, in mid-2011, the exchange found itself in the hands of hackers who took away with 2000 BTC after manipulating the price of BTC to just a single cent. After seeing what was happening, Karpeles transferred the remaining ... Also read: New List Claims 1.9 Million Bitcoin Held by Centralized Exchanges. Binance Is a Giant That Won’t Stop Growing. This week, a new exchange ranking system revealed that 1.9 million BTC ... Bitcoin History is a multipart series from news.Bitcoin.com charting pivotal moments in the evolution of the world’s first cryptocurrency. Read part 16 here . Images courtesy of Shutterstock. Technically speaking, it’s impossible to destroy bitcoins. But it is possible to send coins to an unspendable address, rendering them redundant to all intents and purposes. Bitcoin History Part 17: That Time Mt. Gox Destroyed 2,609 BTC What if you have Bitcoin on Binance: ... There is an open dialogue happening with the community which is definitely a very good thing. Only hours after this happened, Binance took to social media saying basically what had happened and trying to communicate with customers. Binance will be conducting a security review which will include all parts of their systems and data which for such a large ...

[index] [14693] [18897] [7990] [8701] [11225] [6382] [16922] [17442] [7234] [11047]

Mt Gox Bitcoin Fork Dilemma, Stellar + Western Union, XRP Base Pair & Binance Coin Price Jump

Welcome, Bytecoin Enthusiasts! In this video we discuss the Delisting announcements made by Binance. A lot of things need to be considered, on all parties involved, and hope that this is just a ... Support Me On Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/TheModernInvestor ----- Protect And Sto... Index Funds And Bitcoin Dumps! Binance FUD, Tokyo Whale, SEC and CFTC Press Releases - Ep159 - Duration: 20:02. Coin Mastery 35,315 views. 20:02. Trevon James Loses His Mind - Crypto Nick On The ... Index Funds And Bitcoin Dumps! Binance FUD, Tokyo Whale, SEC and CFTC Press Releases - Ep159 - Duration: 20:02. Coin Mastery 35,314 views. 20:02. Ari Paul on Cryptocurrency Use Cases ... Index Funds And Bitcoin Dumps! Binance FUD, Tokyo Whale, SEC and CFTC Press Releases - Ep159 - Duration: 20:02. Coin Mastery 35,316 views. 20:02. How to build your swimming pool - Step by step ... My Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvXjP6h0_4CSBPVgHqfO-UA ----- Supp... Close. This video is unavailable.

#