Prepare yourself for a shock. You might even want to sit down for this one. Nocks, will no longer be selling bitcoin!!!!

Yes, we know... we feel it too ... nobody will ever be the same after reading this. You'll no longer live in the same world you once did. Now you'll know that there was an exchange called Nocks and now you'll know they sold bitcoin, or at least claim to have sold bitcoin, and now they now longer are selling bitcoin.

Their user base, which has got to be at least 7 people by now, will suffer through the upcoming days without bitcoin purchasing on their Nocks run-of-the-mill payment website. 

I've prepared this statement to help soften the blow: 

WHO CARES?!

Seriously, raise your hand if you've ever heard of Nocks. Anyone? ..... anyone?? Yeah ... exactly the point. Nobody has. They've made a few appearances in 2016 but mainly have been relatively unheard of or from. This is what people do when they want some press, a headline or two, or attention of any kind when they otherwise would be pretty much ignored from lack of knowledge of their even existence. They take a stab at the biggest and best because it gets their name said. 

Hell, we couldn't even avoid it.

It's All in the Wrist

Most companies do this when they enter the industry. All companies do this when they have old crap or crap that's not selling and want to paint it the color of blockchain. Some doing this elegantly, such as Ethereum did years ago when they first present a technical case to the community and some do it quietly such as ZCash who never really uttered a negative word about bitcoin at all other than state it's anonymity could be better.

In both cases we ended up with two new blockchain networks, Ethereum and the ZCash network along with their respective ICO's Ether and ZCash, and thus far both have done well. ZCash particularly which has managed to hold it's value over $30. Ethereum has been plagued with a slew of problems for most of 2016, a year it would most likely rather forget, but it's certainly here to stay. It's even spawned an alter ego, ETC (Ethereum Classic), which has done better in less than a year than most altcoins have in their entire existence. 

Thus getting a lift from name-dropping, bit-bashing, or blockshading can be done, Nocks however, is a perfect example of what not to do. 

Nocks said in a Medium post:

"So we removed Bitcoin and you can’t purchase it from us any longer. We are cheaper, faster and offer better support than our competitors, but we want more than just a store that sells cryptocurrency. We want greatness. That greatness can not be achieved with Bitcoin’s unreliability and negative connotation dragging us down."

It's bitcoin dragging you down? Are you sure it's not your shitty idea?

Selling Bitcoin in exchange for euros or dollars, or any other fiat currency can generate a lot of business. Though, it’s not the kind of business we want to generate." ... "Did we really have to remove Bitcoin to offer compliant services? In theory, no. In practice, yes."

Yes, it's obvious you just want to sell your coin. More like in theory of course not, in practice only if you suck at selling it. Which it sounds like these guys might have.

Running a proper financial service is all about attracting the right type of people. The truth is that within the Bitcoin space, there are just too many people out to get you. From theft and distrust to fraud and money laundering, but also just the endless depth of bad attitude towards people that want different things from the technology. 

There are people out to get you everywhere and for everything, however this is an accurate statement, bitcoin and blockchain in general is a tough business and not for the faint at heart or ill-prepared.

It wouldn’t surprise us if this blogpost triggers a DDoS or a Tweet frenzy. Bitcoin just isn’t reliable. Not its current state of technology and definitely not its hardcore following.

I wouldn't worry about the DDoS, nobody really cares.

Nocks states that they are:

...a blockchain-based payments platform, combining new technologies with existing infrastructure for a better performance & experience in (mobile) payments.
So they are in an over-saturated market with yet another platform and re-inventing another wheel.

After that brilliant line of marketing, the terms of  service paints a different picture. (always read the fine print) You basically agree to:

a) The service concerns digital goods without a fixed value. When issuing a payment you agree to the value of these digital goods that Nocks B.V. determines at that time.
b) You are aware of the fact that the value of a payment can fluctuate greatly. There is no guarantee that there will be any value retention whatsoever.
d) Prices are volatile. Definitive pricing is determined once the payment has started and will appear in the overview of your bank or your wallet.
e) A completed payment or transaction (delivery of our product) can not be undone. Entering the correct data (your address/IBAN, amount) is your own responsibility.
h) Due to volatility delivered goods can not be returned to us.
k) Secure storage of your digital goods is your responsibility. Advice given by Nocks B.V. is meant as informing and offers no guarantees.
l) You can't disband an agreement due to price volatility.

All this after they just finished saying they were a "payments" platform. They sure sound like a digital asset merchant to me. Where's the existing infrastructure? How is this a better experience? Sounds like it's every man, woman, and child (over 18) for themselves and Nocks takes no responsibility for anything.

What is it exactly Nocks does do? Just allow folks to buy and sell and send an altcoin? It appears as this is correct. They sell Gulden. Only Gulden.

Gulden is an altcoin traded on Bittrex and currently worth about 22 cents. It's about the same age as Nocks, about 1-2 years old.

Courtesy BITREX

The Basics

The massive 5k (USD) volume in Gulden tells the whole story pretty much and basically this is a grasp for attention stemming from a blogpost that a new company, Nocks, who is not even 2 years old (generously going by the "founding date") isn't selling bitcoin anymore because it's too hard and they think their coin is better. Which is the basic thinking of every single ICO and blockchain offering on the planet. Note their entire company started out for the sole purpose of allowing their altcoin to be used where bitcoin could be used. 

Ultimately is sounds like Nocks is just bashing bitcoin to get some attention. Judging on the dismal numbers Gulden presents, it's no wonder.

Will Nocks continue to suck at this without bitcoin to worry about? Again I would assert ... who cares?



Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by dinbits.com staff
Gulden Chart courtesy of BITREX


The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on dinbits.com do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of dinbits.com or its affiliates.














Back in September we reported that Paxful CEO Ray Yousef, CTO Artur Shaback, and Ivan Suhharev were all three arrested in Miami Beach Florida. We weren't the only ones, the mainstream media, Miami local news TV and several industry related media outlets did as well.

It appears as if the drama is over and the three men are back at the offices of Paxful unscathed.

Doom, Gloom, and World Ending

As usual the mainstream media had a field day, as did many industry outlets and the local Miami news portrayed a cartel blood bath on the brink of eruption. Like this gem from the Miami Herald, it's headline: "Arrests made after masked men pointed an AR-15 from a Miami Beach balcony". Of course once they learned of the execs being involved in a bitcoin business, it got even more ridiculous. 

Likewise as usual, instead of buying into the hype, we decided to take a look at the actual facts. Our headline went more along the lines of "Paxful Executives Arrested for Silliness in Miami" and we moved on to explain that if anything this was likely a misunderstanding at best and at worst, a minor misdemeanor.

Certainly not a situation anyone ever wants to find themselves in, but this is more silliness than it is the dramatic headline the local ABC news affiliate in Miami Beach makes it out to sound. - dinbits media 9/19/2016

We ended with "It's rather possible the judge might throw this one right out the door" and apparently our version of reality much closer to the truth than the media hype of warfare about to claim the city of Miami. 

All charges were dismissed in December and that was that. 

For the entire unfolding of events, check out the Paxful blogpost on the topic, they walk through the entire story of actual events.




Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by dinbits.com staff


The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on dinbits.com do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of dinbits.com or its affiliates.









This one is going to get interesting quickly. Trial has begun for the Coin.MX exchange, a platform that shot themselves in the ass and resulted in the arrest of several including founder Anthony Murgio. 

Sparks are already beginning to fly and one thing is becoming apparent, it's going to be every man for himself atop every finger pointed at Murgio who has plead guilty to charges of bribery and fraud. If the other defendants have anything to do with it, he'll be guilty of all of their charges as well and the finger pointing is in full force.

The Cast

Before we get to far into this, lets refresh the memory on the cast of this comedy/drama.


Anthony Murgio 
Coin.MX Founder

Status: Plea Bargain

Arrested July 21st, 2015, Murgio has since plead guilty to three counts, including conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business and conspiracy to commit bank fraud. 

He is currently awaiting sentencing.




Trevon Gross
Pastor
Former Chairman of the Board, HOPE FCU

Status: On Trial

Currently on trial. Accused of accepting over $150,000 in bribes as the Chairman of the Board of the credit union that served primarily low-income local residents in New Jersey.

Gross is pointing the finger at Murgio.  


Trevon Gross charges:
  1. Receipt of commission for procuring loans (receipt of corrupt payments as an officer of a financial institution)
  2. Receipt of corrupt payments with intent to influence an officer of a financial institution
  3. Conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business; make & receive corrupt payments; obstruct an examination of a financial institution & make false statements
  4. Receipt of commission for procuring loans (receipt of corrupt as an officer of a financial institution)


Michael J. Murgio
School Board Member
Father of Anthony Murgio 

Status: Plea Bargain, Sentenced

Murgio Sr. lied to the National Credit Union Administration. He's already pled guilty to the charge. Remember kids, it's a federal offence to lie to a financial institution.  He was sentenced to 1 year probation and a $12,000 fine on January 27th.




Ricardo Hill 
Coin.MX Marketing Manager 
Business Development Coordinator

Status: Plea Bargain

Plead guilty to seven counts on January 17 including bank fraud, wire fraud and conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business


Jose M Freundt 
Coin.MX Secretary.

Status: Plea Bargain

Freundt plead guilty to conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business, operating an unlicensed money transmitting business and conspiracy to corruptly make payments to an officer of a financial institution, each of which carries a maximum sentence of 5 years in prison; and (oh there's more) one count of corruptly making payments to an officer of a financial institution, one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and one count of wire fraud, each of which carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison. 

Yuri Lebedev

Coin.MX Operator

Status: On Trial

Apparently the technical brains of the operation, Yuri, like Gross, is currently on trial. He faces some serious charges:
  1. Conspiracy to make corrupt payments (two counts)
  2. See #1 (2nd count)
  3. Conspiracy to make corrupt payments with intent to influence an officer of a financial institution
  4. Making corrupt payments with intent to influence an officer of a financial institution
  5. Conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business; make & receive corrupt payments; obstruct an examination of a financial institution & make false statements
  6. Receipt of commission for procuring loans (making corrupt payments with intent to influence and officer of a financial institution)
  7. Attempt and conspiracy to commit wire fraud & bank fraud
  8. Fraud by wire, radio, or television
  9. Bank fraud

The Plot

Now this is where it gets rather ridiculous and these guys define the term idiot. 

They put all of the pieces in place to operate completely legally with the exception of actually operating legally. Something that likely would have cost them a couple grand to setup and actually saved them some reporting (assuming they even did reporting, which apparently they didn't).

On the surface Coin.MX appeared to be a legitimate and legally operating bitcoin exchange where customers could buy bitcoin with credit and debit cards.

If you weren't around or don't remember Coin.MX, they likely had the strictest KYC program of any exchange, to the point is was hard to fathom that they were not following the rules. The had legal agreements, privacy policies, rules, limited, identification verification, 3D-Secure validation, and basically anything and everything under the sun to know who you were and exactly how many Satoshi you purchased.

The problem was they just didn't file some paperwork and failed to file reports.

The brain farts didn't stop there however, instead of using a processor and a bank to take payments for bitcoin, they decided to bribe a credit union and for what reason? Nobody knows and it makes absolutely no sense unless they really are guilty of everything above because unless they were knowingly doing something illegal, there was simply no reason to bribe anyone for anything. 

It makes finger pointing and thoughts of not-guilty pleas just silly to think about. That's possibly why the first 4 defendants just gave up to begin with.

Last Call 

The last two however, refuse to go down without a fight and they're wizard defense is to blame it all on Murgio. 

Sounds potentially valid, however, under this line of thinking both a technical guru that ran the internet operation at Coin.MX and the Chairman of the Board at a Credit Union that was bribed have to both convince a jury that they were so ignorant that despite the fact they already had everything implemented and operational to comply with federal law and despite the fact that there was absolutely no reason to "hide" the fact they were selling bitcoin, that they simply had no clue why they masked their products, hid things from the bank, and didn't report a damn thing.

I mean if you're really that dumb then you better hope for a true jury of your "peers" because this is going to be a hard one to swallow when they both likely knew what was being hidden and Gross would have to admit he was completely incompetent due to the mandatory AML training someone in his position would have had to have taken.

This is not to say that's not exactly what happened, just saying it's going to be a hard sell.

Same goes for Coin.MX as a whole. With everything setup as it was, there was no reason for them to ever had been operating illegally. It's just plain stupid and it's hard to believe anyone could be that stupid and as a defendant, one would have to convince a jury of that very stupidity.

In reality, either they really were that stupid or they know they were aiding terrorist funding and/or money laundering and chose the course they did in an attempt to fly under the radar.

It comes down to which scenario a jury is going to buy. The defense is going to have to paint a picture of two very dumb and clueless men who were victimized by a brainwashing mastermind. Like I said, it's a hard sell.

Verdict?

It's too early to know how this will end up but the mudslinging Murgio's way has already began. Both men have accused Murgio of single-handedly doing it all while they sat innocently by and while they were unknowingly breaking the law.

Which leads to another issue. Federal law doesn't allow unknowingly operating an unlicensed money transmission or unregistered money services business as a valid defense. Regardless of if they really were that dumb or not, they can and likely will be found guilty for those charges and both men are charged with "Conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business". 

Whereas federal law states (18 U.S. Code § 1960) that one who "knowingly conducts, controls, manages, supervises, directs, or owns all or part of an unlicensed money transmitting business" is committing a crime, it goes on to state:

(1) the term “unlicensed money transmitting business” means a money transmitting business which affects interstate or foreign commerce in any manner or degree and—
(A) is operated without an appropriate money transmitting license in a State where such operation is punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony under State law, whether or not the defendant knew that the operation was required to be licensed or that the operation was so punishable;
(B) fails to comply with the money transmitting business registration requirements under section 5330 of title 31, United States Code, or regulations prescribed under such section; or

Not to mention these two have this part to worry about as well:

(C) otherwise involves the transportation or transmission of funds that are known to the defendant to have been derived from a criminal offense or are intended to be used to promote or support unlawful activity;

It appears as though Gross and Lebedev already have an uphill climb and given the the hefty $12,000 fine and year probation or Sr. Murgio for the lesser offense of lying to a credit union, they may be in some serious trouble along with the rest of the clan who have already plead guilty. 

The finger pointing at Murgio makes allot of sense and he may well be the one to blame, but unfortunately for Gross and Lebedev ... the federal law just doesn't care.




Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by dinbits.com staff
Portrait credits:

A. Murgio - WPTV.com
M. Mugio - WPTV.com
T. Gross - http://www.cutoday.info
R, Hill - LinkedIn.com


The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on dinbits.com do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of dinbits.com or its affiliates.











It just won't go away. It just won't pay ...  until now.

Victims of Mt. Gox claims can get something out of their claims now if they are willing to part with the other 85% of it. 

Those Gox'ed don't have much of a choice for 75% of their claims as current expectations are estimated at approximately 25% of the actual claim value so only 10% of actual value in reality is going to be lost and let's face it, this is assuming everyone is going to get paid. There have been reports of valid claims being outright rejected. 

Now there's hope and funds available from four hedge funds in the United States and Japan offering 15% of the yen value of the claims. 

If you have a weak claim or more restrictively, lack the time to continue to wait on the distributions from the bankruptcy proceedings of the now defunct exchange, this might be for you.

The Epic Implosion

Mt. Gox imploded in epic and historic fashion in 2014 claiming they were hacked and then pointing to an inside job. 

Plenty of information on the entire saga is here: http://news.dinbits.com/search?q=mt+gox

To quickly summarize, thus far Japanese police investigations have uncovered apparent embezzlement by ex-CEO Mark Karpeles, however, since he has not been convicted so we are supposed to say "allegedly" ... 

...yeah ... right.... and I am allegedly from Mars. 




Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by dinbits.com staff


The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on dinbits.com do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of dinbits.com or its affiliates.




FinTech startup Tramonex, who recently was award a government grant of £250,000, has been approved in the United Kingdom to issue electronic currency on the blockchain.

The question is, is this the Blockchain, or just a blockchain? Did they T0 or did they Corda? In other words is this thing going to be safe and secure or is it going to just ask for pain?

They had this to say:
“Automation of payments using the blockchain and smart contracts will reduce costs of transactions, allowing for the adaptation of this solution across many different fields such as insurance, real estate and government, to name only a few. Previously the missing link was lack of regulation – Tramonex Labs is very proud to provide a regulated environment where digital payments can be executed in a secure and transparent way.” Marc Avedissian, co-founder of Tramonex Labs.

Safe or Suicide?

T0 for example is a blockchain that sidechains the the Blockchain (the bitcoin network) and in doing so, provides an immutable and tamper resistant recording of a transaction whereas Corda is a private sidechain without any incentive to encourage its use, thus it will be as weak as the same software and infrastructure banks use now which is a frequently hacked environment since where there are people, there are holes in security.

In Corda's case it's even more dangerous given the fact you not only have points of failure and the given banks hosting nodes, you have only those banks hosting nodes in a private environment. It's just asking for trouble and even less secure than current systems with this architecture.

I won't even go down the IBM path, that's just pure silliness and I wouldn't want anyone truly looking into blockchain technology to get any fathom of an idea that anything in IBM's cloud is a blockchain because it isn't.

Then again IBM says the problem with current blockchain is its inability to provide immutability. Yeah.... they said that. So we won't even go there.

If Tramonex is sidechaining to the blockchain or issuing currency on the blockchain through the Omni layer or other methods, then this is something to watch for sure and we could see gigantic things from Tramonex. This would be synonymous with what the folks at Circle are trying to do, albeit possibly the wrong way given the controversy they stirred up, but they are doing a very similar thing where payments are sent in actual currency dollars using the blockchain as that settlement.  

However, if Tramonex is simply doing some private networking, then this is another project where the consumer is going to be at risk and may not be the best thing for the industry. Not to mention the space is overcrowded with the same crap that doesn't work well now.

Registration

From past Tramonex speaking they appear to be pro-bitcoin so it's possible the Blockchain will be used. Ethereum is another possibility or a combination of the two. 

Whats for certain is that they will be issuing value on a blockchain somewhere and they have been granted a registration for this now as a Small Electronic Money Institution with the Bank of England Financial Services Register (FCA). 

The company has been registered with the FCA as an Authorized Payment Institution since 2014.



Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by dinbits.com staff


The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on dinbits.com do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of dinbits.com or its affiliates.


The latest  P2P (peer-to-peer) trading site called Remitano has launched and it's much more like Bitquick or WallofCoins than it is Paxful or Localbitcoins.

It's also up and coming, but not there yet. We took a look at Remitano and here's what we found.

User Interface

The user interface is modern and sleek. Very useful and responsive so it works well on mobile and tablets and is available for both the Android and iOS platforms (and Win10 mobile for those with side-load powers, but not directly).

Remitano on Google Play

Remitano also has a "forced factor" authentication whereas in addition to using your login information of which there is no password, you're sent a new login in link every time you login. 

Once inside the platform you're met with a run-of-the-mill dashboard which primarily tracks your performance. The available tabs allow you to view past trades, check your advertisements, and see if you have nay referrals. 

Creating a new advertisement to either buy or sell bitcoin is also easily done and straight forward, however, requires identity verification and reputation from buying before you can sell. Which is lame but straight forward nonetheless. 

Create Ad on Remitano


The Buying Customer

The big question is, what's it look like as far as traders go? Any customers? Success? 

Well what we fond is that like the inability to sell bitcoin, we couldn't buy any either, so not only can we not comment on the customer base, we couldn't even buy any to get anyone else point of view either. In fact there was only one seller that showed up on our list,

Granted, Remitano s new, however they may want to consider adding sine buying customers to their platform if they expect any sellers to show up and likewise, they can't buy anything if there's not any sellers selling.

Right now Remitano is a ghost town reminiscent of the once decent BitWallet.cc (Note: BitWallet.cc is technically still alive and working) but operates more like Bitquick with the exception of you actually have an account ... and other traders available.

Remitano is not without issues, they've been called out for fraudulent activity and scamming according to some of the reviews.



In each case Remitano responded and there was no further communication on the issue, so we can only assume the problems were resolved.

That said, I don't know what is more shocking here. The fact that Remitano is already having fraudulent claims or the fact that a buyer actually found a seller on the platform.

That's really the only issue with the platform we found.The lack of anyone actually using it. The security is a but weak as well with only an email securing your bitcoin. 

Here's how it stacked up:

Documentation☆☆☆☆Although fairly self-explanatory, help is virtually non-existent.
Account Opening ★★★Easy open in minutes.
Security★★☆☆☆The security isn't great. 2FA is available but not apparent.
Ease of Use★★★☆☆Complete with Android and IOS apps. Its simple, clean, and fast.
Usability ☆☆☆☆It appears very usable, there's just nobody using it.
Safety★★☆☆☆Remitano appears to do KYC, but again, there's nobody to KYC.
Overall Score★★2 out of 5 stars. Needs Improvement.

It's rather simple Remitano needs people buying and selling bitcoin on their platform to buy and sell bitcoin, because right now there's nobody there. It' hard to build any trust enough to hand over sensitive documents like identification when the service appears unused and unavailable. Two Factor Authentication is available, but it's buried and hard to locate.

The positive things are the rapid account creation, which takes merely minutes and of course in addition to the web application, you can download Remitano for iOS and Android, at least 6 poeple have already according to Google Play... but unfortunately .... that may be the entire user base on the platform currently.

For more information visit the Remitano Website:

 REMITANO



Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by dinbits.com staff
Article References:
Feedback Source: Google Play StoreRemitano Screen Source: Remitano 


The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on dinbits.com do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of dinbits.com or its affiliates.
Powered by Blogger.