Other exchanges don't have this issue (though maybe the Chinese exchanges have this with some weird passthroughs that used to be used, I haven't followed them super close). You wire money. It's pretty straightforward (although possibly inefficient and costly for small purchases). Coinbase links directly to a bank account similar to how Neteller worked, and almost can be thought of as as a payment processor in itself.

There is a fundamental problem with businesses that hold assets for customers and control the ledger. I think you are a bit biased with the poker world, which had such a reliance on processors as the weak link, when that doesn't exist the same way in Bitcoin for the most part.

I urge you to watch this video describing it in detail to understand *the real problem* along with a solution.

Coinbase's ACH integration is very complicated and expensive. Wiring money to foreign banks is because no US banks or virtual wallets will process transactions for these businesses so ur forced to use 3rd rate guys like ecopay or okpay. I really think I'm right here, but there's a lot to learn.

I will watch the video after a couple of meetings.

Ezra

Did bitcoin not die yet? I'll check back in 3 months.

So did Gox file for 'Ch. 11' or 'Ch. 7'-style bankruptcy? Does Japan have these distinctions?

This seems completely backwards to me. These payment processors choose not to deal with bitcoin because they don't want to be prosecuted for violating laws on money laundering, tax evasion, gambling, drug purchases, etc. The solution to get a more reputable and safe environment is not to create more laws defining how bitcoin should and shouldn't be used, but a removal of the laws I mentioned. So that large, reputable companies with proper management teams can enter the market.

It's not that different from what happened to FTP/PS. Federal laws prohibited banks and credit cards from processing payments for poker sites. The sites had to resort to using shady banks and processors, who stole money from the poker sites(which went unreported) and raised the cost of money transfers. This contributed to their financial downfall. The proper solution would have been to remove restrictions, so that all banks and credit cards could participate. Payment processors would be out in the open, instead of the black market, and fraud would have been prosecuted.

This comparison is complete nonsense and meaningless. It leads the reader to possibly draw some incorrect conclusions, such as bitcoin being a ponzi scheme. Bitcoin is a new tech industry that is creating wealth by making it less costly to transfer money. This has no parallel with poker players who take money from other players. There is no wealth creation at the poker table.

Also, I don't agree that the poker market "matured." And I'm not sure if your statement on poker players is about pre or post UIGEA. The govt made it far more difficult for Americans to play online poker. It's like saying the drug market matured when the war on drugs began. A mature market would be open to anyone willing to participate. UIGEA and other laws on gambling caused restricted access to the poker market.

The parallels you brought up in your article "Why Mt. Gox May Be Headed for Bankruptcy" were interesting, and your analysis on Gox may very well be correct. I have no way to disagree with that. I just disagree with you on govt regulation as the solution to the problems you accurately described. Correct me if I'm wrong on my description of the poker environment, as I know you are an expert on that.

Coinbase ACH integration for the consumer is fairly straightforward for the customer (just as easy as linking ETrade to my bank account).

I've never heard of anyone using ecopay or okpay (at least in the US). Not sure what exchange even accepts it. You might be more knowledgeable than me here. I used Dwolla for a little. Wiring makes most sense for bigger payments, and of course leaves you vulnerable to exchanges having your money, but it's the exchange that's the danger rather than the processor.

Let me know if you have any questions after the video. It's a real change of a paradigm, where we base so much on 3rd party trust, and removing that or reducing that is so important for Bitcoin, where the may benefit is not having to trust third parties.

http://www.isbitcoindead.com/

I hear you. The point of my article is that in order to see a long-term disruption of financial regulations & laws (via bitcoin) we need to first embrace them.

Recognizing the government will never fully do away with all regulations (and I disagree that they should, but whatever) the best option is leverage relaxed, but instructive policies towards mainstream bitcoin adoption so that it can begin to displace existing frameworks as the rails for the new decentralized financial system.

I hear you on some of your critiques regarding the poker parallels. I had 700 words, and some material was cut/moved around. It's not like I had a blog post where I could write whatever - I had to fit in to some very tight criteria.

Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated & this will help me improve for the future.

Ezra

Sorry, it's a really really busy day (how am I on 2+2???)

I meant ACH on the operator side. I have heard that implementing ACH & finding banks to service it was extremely difficult and will be hard to replicate for smaller companies.

Ezra

Agree with just about every word.

This is true. You're just being completely unrealistic in what you can get.

The current legal environment has been developing since the 70s to prevent massive money laundering, tax evasion and transaction hiding.

THIS is why all these auditing rules are in place, and THIS is why the rules are only going to get tighter, not looser.

The other story this week is how USA is pushing Swiss banks to provide more disclosure. And if they want to do business in the USA, they will cave, just as they've been caving for 15 years already on different rules.

Be interesting if this trading range were to maintain for say 4 weeks. The haters would certainly be furious if this started to hang around $600.

nah bro still higher than they had ever reached just a few months ago....so you might want to check back in 3 or 30 years, not 3 months.

Agreed, and I'm amazed that Coinbase is able to do this properly and not have a huge amount of risk.

Banks have been extremely hostile, and I think you have a valid point in that Coinbase probably is using some third tier bank rather than one of the big boys simply because no one would do business with them. Maybe they'll change their mind if there was guidance and positive outlook from regulators rather than clamping down harder and harder.

I'm not sure where you are getting information about 3rd party processors, but it's not terribly common AFAIK. I could very well be wrong since this isn't an area where I have spent a lot of time.

The haters will just bring out the greater fool theory and they can continue to do so until they die. They can't lose the argument but they can win it. A great position to have on a forum.

You don't think Andreesen has some pull to get Coinbase in the bed with the big boys? I don't suppose we will get any guidance or positive outlook from regulators anytime soon, especially with MTgox and Schrem indictment.

www.buttercoin.com

A new US bases exchanged back
By google?

open source too! signed up this morning ~3k on the list when I got in

banks have been manipulating gold prices for decades and people are worried about groups manipulating the bitcoin price?

http://business.financialpost.com/20...-manipulation/

Not really. It's much bigger than him. Banks are incredibly hostile, sometimes for understandable reasons. They aren't going to get themselves in trouble with even the chance of money laundering issues without positive guidance, even if Andersen just wants it to happen. IIRC they are going through some small credit union.

Gox provides perfect cover for regulators to issue guidance. "Look, we want to serve the US customers and follow the law, just tell us what to do!" That was a common theme in the hearings.

I had been following this project since it was formed. They wanted to make a cool exchange, then found it was so problematic to partner with banks, they went with the idea of selling the platform and made it easy for people to set up exchanges in other countries. Excellent news if these guys get an exchange going. Seems like they have a great team.

The decentralized nature of Bitcoins and exchanges make it harder than the London Fix. But certainly there's possibilities of manipulation attempts. I'd be more worried about exchanges themselves manipulating things such that they benefited. There's little to stop them from doing this. One of the reasons I don't get involved in the trading aspect.

Great timing. Could be epic.

I wonder if Gox will ever release proof of the missing coins, or if it's just a bunch of bull****.

I'm not sure how they could prove it, other than show the addresses they claim to have controlled. And if those coins move, Karpeles is screwed. Unless they are claiming the coins were given out.

Shouldn't there be a record of every coin that was 'overpaid' due to the malleability or whatever it was, who the account was registered to, which addresses the coins were withdrawn to, etc?

I thought that between the blockchain and Gox's records they should probably be able to identify every single missing coin. Perhaps I'm wrong and this is not possible.