Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how NDAs work.
Perhaps in theory the agreement is still meant to be honoured, but in practice if the agreement was with an organization that no longer exists (0 employees), who would initiate legal action to enforce the NDA? I have no experience in this area, but can't see how the NDA could be enforced by a dead organization.
MtGox.com is offline
341–350 of 553 posts
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#342edit - basically, MtGox lost money. for it's users, there might be a chance to get something back.
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, if I have any schadenfreude here it's not for him. It's for all of the people who smugly told us for years that Bitcoin is superior to our "legacy" fiat managed and regulated monetary system system in every way, and anyone who can't see that is an idiot.
Don't equate Bitcoin the protocol with dodgy websites. Unlike cash, radical transparency is entirely possible with Bitcoin. Bitcoin the protocol is as strong as ever, but customers of other sites should demand proof that their exchanges and online wallets actually control 100% of the BTC they claim to have in their custody.
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People aren't hating Mark Karpeles because he messed up I think they are hating Mark for losing their money, clearly a 'mess up'.
He's being ignorant about it and tries to blame others for the mess MtGox caused. On a speculative note, he'll propably walk out of this with millions in his pockets, while his customers lost tons of cash due to this mess.
The other possibility is that he's incompetent in his personal life too ... maybe his paychecks have all been spent? (I hear gaming cards are collectible!)
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#345It's really easy in all of this to pile a bunch of hatred on Mark Karpeles, but please, everybody remember that he is a human being, with real human emotions, and that those things really do hurt. -- MtGox was (past tense is probably appropriate here, but for the sake of anybody who had coins there, I hope not) a startup that failed spectacularly , and publicly, and took a TON of peoples' money with it. The transacti…
Operating a financial exchange is a serious business. In purporting to do so, you're taking people's money and promising them that you will operate the exchange honestly and competently. From what I've observed and from the private conversations I've had with people who've had first-hand dealings with them, many of the current batch of hot Bitcoin startups are run by people who don't have a fucking clue but have managed to delude themselves that they can build the Next Big Thing in financial technology by faking it 'til they make it. It's like a bunch of kids acting at being grown-ups - maybe one or two might actually blunder their way to success but the vast majority are going to crash and burn due to stupid, idiotic mistakes that could have been avoided had they been willing to listen to advice from people with more knowledge and experience. Of course, the downside of actually doing things properly is that they don't get the growth/traction that attracts investors' attention. The corrollary is that the startups who do achieve the sort of growth curves that attract investors probably aren't doing things properly, whether by cutting corners, failing to balance the books properly, not focusing enough on security or the 101 other things that can lead to an implosion/collapse/insolvency.
While the founders at least have the excuse of being young and foolish, I question the morals of investors who fund teams that clearly lack the appropriate skills/experience to provide proper financial products and services.
It's the same type of one-way bet that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis. If the startup is successful, the founders and investors exit for millions/billions. If it fails, the founders and investors get to walk away unscathed while the customers end up suffering the losses of the founders' incompetence and the investors' failure to properly supervise their investment.
I fully expect a Silicon Valley-based Bitcoin startup to implode at some point and I would not be at all surprised if the resulting clamour from customers who've lost money is loud enough that the authorities step in to begin regulating the space.
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#346You can see that over the past months there has been tons of large transfers out to addresses (https://blockchain.info/address/1pnHxHzRQ1uE4rH9KtxYKhVDic2S...) that end up splitting up into tons of small addresses, all of which has never spent a dime. From the look of it, it seems that a huge part of the total 782,558 BTC going through the address has ended up in tiny addresses which has never spent any part of it. Are there any other plausible owners of such an account?
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#347Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try telling that to the cashier at the local grocery store. Gold is not generally accepted as payment for goods and services in any culture that I know of (excluding jewelry and metal stores, of course). I'd be genuinely interested to hear about places where you can still take a lump of gold to a store and pay with it.
You're confusing money with legal tender. But in any case, you can just travel to the Utah: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/30/us/30gold.html?pagewanted=...
I don't think I am. Something can be generally accepted as payment for goods and services without it being legal tender.
> But in any case, you can just travel to the Utah
That article is about coins produced by the US mint, not lumps of gold. And even so, the article says, "so far, it is hard to find anyone who is using gold or silver to buy anything."
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no fucking way 700,000 BTC disappears with nobody noticing. This must have been building for a long time. Was there never any attempt to compare BTC in wallets to customer balances? Or did MtGox know about this problem, and hope to cover it up over time? Either case is at least gross negligence if not criminal fraud. Yes, we all fuck up at some point. But I don't pretend to be a surgeon and perforate a patie…
> There is no fucking way 700,000 BTC disappears with nobody noticing. The history of Barings Bank is interesting, primarily because the main trader Nick Leeson was in the position to mask hundreds of millions of pounds of losses. In that case, no one noticed the roughly $1.3B loss because he was in a position where the internal controls didn't apply
Re: MtGox.com is offline
#349Re: MtGox.com is offline
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People aren't hating Mark Karpeles because he messed up I think they are hating Mark for losing their money, clearly a 'mess up'.
He's being ignorant about it and tries to blame others for the mess MtGox caused. On a speculative note, he'll propably walk out of this with millions in his pockets, while his customers lost tons of cash due to this mess.