There's plenty to warrant suspicion, but it turns out there is a credible explanation for the seize-up in BTC payouts being a technical problem that will take some time to resolve:
This analysis describes a Bitcoin transactional defect of which I wasn't previously aware. However, from a vaguely-similar much-smaller incident involving the default client, I know that having a local wallet confused about what prior transactions are truly spendable can take significant time and custom effort to unwind.
>There's plenty to warrant suspicion, but it turns out there is a credible explanation for the seize-up in BTC payouts being a technical problem that will take some time to resolve
Would you be as OK with your bank holding money like that?
Who said they were "OK" with anything? It's just information for understanding the situation.
I'm unhappy when ATM outages or erroneous fraud alerts prevent me from using my cash or credit, but I understand that such situations are different from dishonesty or insolvency.
The casual tone by which people (including you) were discussing this. If a bank had even week long issues like that people would be frothing at the mouths (and rightly so).
>It's just information for understanding the situation.
Yes, it's the "understanding" part that I don't get (except if it's pure technical curiosity, but from the excuses people make in this thread it doesn't seem so).
They messed up, they are not a worthy exchange, that kind of fiasco is insurmountable -- end of story. I wouldn't try to "understand" a restaurant that served my cochroaches in my pizza, I'd just avoid it and bad mouth it to everybody I know.
> I wouldn't try to "understand" a restaurant that served my cochroaches in my pizza, I'd just avoid it and bad mouth it to everybody I know.
This is Hacker News, where we like to "understand" enormous failures, even if we don't have "patience and understanding" for them.
I think the point of the people talking about the technical glitch, is to counter everyone saying "BTC is perfectly frictionless, therefore if Gox can't give me BTC they must not have any!" nullc/gmaxwell gives credible technical explanations for why spending thousands of BTC in daily volume from various sources through a volume-necessitated custom implementation of Bitcoin, can actually be non-trivial. You're free to think Gox is incompetent, or that the pizzeria is unclean, but that doesn't mean you can't have interest in how they got that way.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1x93tf/some_irc_cha...
This analysis describes a Bitcoin transactional defect of which I wasn't previously aware. However, from a vaguely-similar much-smaller incident involving the default client, I know that having a local wallet confused about what prior transactions are truly spendable can take significant time and custom effort to unwind.