Largest U.S. Bitcoin Exchange Shuts Down

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
On Thursday an announcement was made that Bitfloor, the largest Bitcoin exchange in the United States, will cease operations immediately. The exchange said its US bank account was being closed, but no reason for the closure was given.

Unfortunately, our U.S. bank account is scheduled to be closed and we can no longer provide the same level of USD deposits and withdrawals as we have in the past. As such, I have made the decision to halt operations and return all funds.
Click to expand...
 
Or the Fed trying to shut down Bitcoining in the US as it sees it as a threat.
 
Very disappointing, I think the move to an all-digital currency is a given considering the technological path we're on (though I think it's going to be a government-backed currently like the USD/Euro/etc and simply requiring everyone to accept Credit/debit cards then cease minting physical currency)

I'd probably be more outraged if I'd gotten in on the bitcoin craze when it started, but right now it's become so hard to get the coins that it's not worth it anymore unless you can dedicate entire datacenters to mining.
 
AthlonXP said:
Or the Fed trying to shut down Bitcoining in the US as it sees it as a threat.
Click to expand...

1000x this
Only when rich people creep up in the market in more complete manner, THEN the US government will not consider it a threat, but a modern tool of the new world that needs to be protected.
Its just how it is.
 
Bit coin will be used for tax evasion in the long run as more stores accept bit coins.
 
I should have mentioned by the rich. It protects us average folk if it is shut down.
 
Put away the tinfoil hats...
What's more likely?
1). The Fed is trying to shut them down
2). Customers fed up over constant DDoS attacks and stolen funds leave in droves and are cashing out, and the bank doesn't like the exposure to a risky company and shuts them off.
 
kirbyrj said:
Put away the tinfoil hats...
What's more likely?
1). The Fed is trying to shut them down
2). Customers fed up over constant DDoS attacks and stolen funds leave in droves and are cashing out, and the bank doesn't like the exposure to a risky company and shuts them off.
Click to expand...

Dude, I'm not sure you can drive any sense into the tinfoil hat wearers here, facts just don't make sense to them!
 
LastQuestion said:
I don't think the Japanese plan to suicide rush us for Bitcoins. But if I see someone start tossing smoke grenades, then I'll have considered myself warned.
Click to expand...

Except then it would be a Banzai scheme ... but maybe they were actually sinking all their funds into uninsured miniature trees and it was actually a bonsai scheme :D
 
It is likely the bank realized he was using the account in a way that goes against the banks policies for commercial accounts and is shutting it down. It was some kind of government conspiracy they would have just seized the funds.
 
TheFlosser said:
No one has any facts here. It's all conjecture.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So the most logical conjectured conclusion was that the Fed shut them down to protect the USD against a digital currency backed by nothing with a total "market cap" of a few billion dollars?

And on top of that, you're trying to convince me that the Fed is interested in an exchange that handles a few percent of bitcoin transactions when the whole ENTIRE bitcoin economy is .01% of what the Fed regulates (and that's being generous).

Seriously...

:rolleyes:
 
kirbyrj said:
So the most logical conjectured conclusion was that the Fed shut them down to protect the USD against a digital currency backed by nothing with a total "market cap" of a few billion dollars?

And on top of that, you're trying to convince me that the Fed is interested in an exchange that handles a few percent of bitcoin transactions when the whole ENTIRE bitcoin economy is .01% of what the Fed regulates (and that's being generous).

Seriously...

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

lol I never shared my views or attempted to persuade one way or the other. What a goof.

:rolleyes:
 
kirbyrj said:
So the most logical conjectured conclusion was that the Fed shut them down to protect the USD against a digital currency backed by nothing with a total "market cap" of a few billion dollars?

And on top of that, you're trying to convince me that the Fed is interested in an exchange that handles a few percent of bitcoin transactions when the whole ENTIRE bitcoin economy is .01% of what the Fed regulates (and that's being generous).

Seriously...

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Look what they did to internet poker
 
I personally shut down about 20 internet gambling accounts; it was a couple million dollars in funds. However those were mostly for AML violations right after the UIGEA was enacted.
 
Ashton said:
Very disappointing, I think the move to an all-digital currency is a given considering the technological path we're on (though I think it's going to be a government-backed currently like the USD/Euro/etc and simply requiring everyone to accept Credit/debit cards then cease minting physical currency)
Click to expand...

They will be called credits.
 
LastQuestion said:
I don't think the Japanese plan to suicide rush us for Bitcoins. But if I see someone start tossing smoke grenades, then I'll have considered myself warned.
Click to expand...
That would be Bitcoin Bonzai! Not to be confused with Bitcoin bonsai (a little bitcoin tree). :p
 
Whether or not it is the case congress has complete authority to shut this down. One of their main jobs is to establish and administer a national currency, and levy taxes therein
 
Hardly, bitcoining can't hope to succeed longterm as anything other than a good idea. Unless power becomes magically free, or the difficulty of bitcoining stops increasing exponentially each time someone thinks about starting to bitcoining, global bitcoin returns will never exceed the cost of obtaining them.
 
spugm1r3 said:
Hardly, bitcoining can't hope to succeed longterm as anything other than a good idea. Unless power becomes magically free, or the difficulty of bitcoining stops increasing exponentially each time someone thinks about starting to bitcoining, global bitcoin returns will never exceed the cost of obtaining them.
Click to expand...

small mind.

the reason difficulty skyrockets is due to the new ASICS's hitting the market... they actually use way way LESS power and do many times the work.

The whole point beyond that is the system is designed so that you CAN'T mint millions/billions of bitcoins forever.

There is a fixed number of them -- forever -- unlike Uncle Sam and the infinite money printing press of theirs.

Bitcoin could be worth $10,000 a coin in 10 years, or it could be worth 1 penny, nobody really knows.


Unless everyone abandons bitcoin the difficulty will pretty much never go down. No big deal -- computing power is always increasing.
 
collegeboy69us said:
small mind.

the reason difficulty skyrockets is due to the new ASICS's hitting the market... they actually use way way LESS power and do many times the work.

The whole point beyond that is the system is designed so that you CAN'T mint millions/billions of bitcoins forever.

There is a fixed number of them -- forever -- unlike Uncle Sam and the infinite money printing press of theirs.

Bitcoin could be worth $10,000 a coin in 10 years, or it could be worth 1 penny, nobody really knows.


Unless everyone abandons bitcoin the difficulty will pretty much never go down. No big deal -- computing power is always increasing.
Click to expand...

I mean wow in a year I'll make $1000 bitcoin mining...and I'll have only spent $3000 in hardware plus the cost of electricity!
 
"bonziiiiii"

lol :D

I agree bitcoin probably is seen as a "threat" to current methods... people in power don't like to lose control... I don't agree that it's somehow dangerous though, and it shouldn't be illegal.
 
kirbyrj said:
So the most logical conjectured conclusion was that the Fed shut them down to protect the USD against a digital currency backed by nothing with a total "market cap" of a few billion dollars?

And on top of that, you're trying to convince me that the Fed is interested in an exchange that handles a few percent of bitcoin transactions when the whole ENTIRE bitcoin economy is .01% of what the Fed regulates (and that's being generous).

Seriously...

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They aren't trying to protect the USD.

They are trying to protect their ability to track and control the flow of money.
 
Bitcoin would never work in the masses. Every noob's computer gets compromised all the time with viruses and spyware. They would get their Bitcoins jacked so many times. Thats the poind of a bank to offer 'protection'.
 
TheCAD said:
They aren't trying to protect the USD.

They are trying to protect their ability to track and control the flow of money.
Click to expand...

<face palm>

308000 BTC changed hands today@ ~$100 per BTC = $30,800,000 at mtgox.com (which controls 80% of the BTC exchange).

At best, Bitfloor controlled at best 10% or most likely a lot less, so $3,000,000 tops. And that's on a good trading day. Most likely it isn't anywhere near that number.

If BTC were being used to "control the flow of money," you would have to have transactions in the hundreds of billions of dollars, not at the $3 million level. $3 million compared to the U.S. GDP per day is 0.0073%. The Fed is not going to act on 0.0073%. And that number is based on a BEST CASE SCENARIO.
 
Mt. Gox is the largest bitcoin exchange. There are growing pains to this currency but the idea is here to stay.

Speaking of ponzi schemes, every heard of the trillions in unfunded liabilitiesin US dollars?
 
The definition of a stable currency is one that doesn't vary its exchanged value for specific goods wildly. Bitcoins does not fit that definition so far. As far as I can tell its a bubble and when it pops there will be a lot of unhappy people and they'll blame the government for the bad outcome of their speculative investment.
 
jpm100 said:
The definition of a stable currency is one that doesn't vary its exchanged value for specific goods wildly. Bitcoins does not fit that definition so far. As far as I can tell its a bubble and when it pops there will be a lot of unhappy people and they'll blame the government for the bad outcome of their speculative investment.
Click to expand...

Then there's the occasional hacking of an exchange or account and the untraceable disappearance of lots of money.
 
jpm100 said:
The definition of a stable currency is one that doesn't vary its exchanged value for specific goods wildly. Bitcoins does not fit that definition so far. As far as I can tell its a bubble and when it pops there will be a lot of unhappy people and they'll blame the government for the bad outcome of their speculative investment.
Click to expand...

It has popped at least twice already.

Still waiting for the "lots of unhappy people".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top