91–100 of 474 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is possible to know 194,993.50000004 BTC changed between two addresses - these could be owned by the same individual, could be different accounts for the same individual. Anything else, USD, goats, Yuan, securities, etc that may have been traded would not be reported/recorded in the BTC transfer. edit: corrected by josephagoss, ty
Goats aren't tracked by the blockchain?
Consider this: They paid $0.00 for the transfer of $150 million dollars. A direct (i.e. not based on third party credit, regulations, etc.) transfer of wealth of this magnitude between two entities usually consists of a heavily guarded, insured, physical shipment of cash or gold. Depending how safely you want to make the transfer, and how far the entities are on the globe, it can cost hundreds of thousands to million…
You can see the fee amount further down the page. If he had paid a fee, 0.0001 BTC, or $0.04 worth of BTC, would have been enough to ensure the transaction was included in the next block.
Should this be regarded as capital gains from currency speculation, when it comes to taxation, or how does something like this look to a tax attorney or accountant?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember this is the first node that the Blockchain.info website saw. This relay information is extremely misleading. So that German node could have relayed the transaction from another node before Blockchain.info became aware of it. (Blockchain.info is connected to about 1% of all the active Bitcoin nodes)
Well, how does the propagation of transactions in the BTC network work? I honestly don't know, but I would assume that it is more likely for the originating node to be near to the relaying node than not.
There's never really many degrees of separation between nodes, but you're probably incorrect in that blockchain.info knows anything about the originator of the transaction. They connect to a large number (abusively) of nodes, but not enough to do this sort of discovery. There's a reasonable portion that never expose themselves to the public network at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's say that you pay for Virgin Galactic ticket - that will be a fairly large transaction pointing to your wallet. Someone will be able connect the dots and find out that you also bought Viagra, and a penis enlargement pump. Do you really want that connected to you? Another case - you buy something from one of the stores that accept bitcoins. That store may have the address of your bitcoin wallet. They will be able…
You can wash BTC of any identifying information by sending them through a conduit -- someone that is willing to operate an address used to obfuscate the eventual destination of transactions.
Well, this is just another reason why bitcoin will not work - you can track money changing hands.. Certain three letter agencies would have not trouble tracking most of the transfers, all over the world.
You clearly don't have a clue about how bitcoin works. If two parties want to make their transactions totally untraceable it is possible. As far as I can tell, this transfer could be made by the same wallet, from generated address to the other in order to initiate speculations and show that BTC can actually be used for big un-taxed, non-stoppable money transfer, or it was just a way to show to the IRS what money is m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently people think its the Winklevoss' since they claimed to have bought ~1% of all BTC and the amount moved nicely coincides with about 1%
So if this currency does become ubiquitous the Winklevoss' will be the kings of the world? God dammit.
Well, this is just another reason why bitcoin will not work - you can track money changing hands.. Certain three letter agencies would have not trouble tracking most of the transfers, all over the world.
Yeah, try moving 150m out of any bank in the world and not having lots of people knowing you just did it. Secret fund transfer on this level is very, very uncommon.