4 ms·

The mention of 81 exchanges left me thinking: If none of the trading was fake, but then I created a single exchange literally named "ScamCo Faketrading Exchange

by nullc 8y ago

The mention of 81 exchanges left me thinking: If none of the trading was fake, but then I created a single exchange literally named "ScamCo Faketrading Exchange" which claimed 1 petatrades per second were happening on its platform, then would this analysis say that >99% of all trades were fake? I think it would. I don't think any of the exchanges that I could have named off the top of my head were on their naughty list (paywall is keeping me from loading it again to check), ... so it seems to me that this report might be a bit overstated.

nullc 8y ago
An explanatory comment might be more helpful than just the downvotes!
- wbronitsky 8y ago
  I agree. I hate the downvoting feature here. It silences unpopular opinions instead of forcing people to respond. The mods really seem to like it though
  - dang 8y ago
    Note how that comment ended up in a non-downvoted state.
    - wbronitsky 8y ago
      Ah, so now you're back, trying to tech me a lesson about anec-data with your own anec-data. Got any real data to support whatever claim you are trying to make, or are you just trying to come over and be right at me again? Again, comments like this, especially from mods, make the community more closed. Your pithy comment ends up making you look like a bully, not as a person trying to foster an open debate about the platform. Like, did I come up on your tools, or do you just go and check my comments because I disagreed with you a few weeks ago? Are you so focused on proving me wrong and getting one up on me that you now follow my comment threads? Bit creepy for a mod, Daniel.
- woah 8y ago
  Explanation: There's a large brigade on HN that hates Bitcoin with a burning passion. Your comment seemed to cast Bitcoin in something other than the worst possible light, and so it was downvoted.
mikeash 8y ago
The actual volumes on different exchanges are not anything close to that disparate, so while your hypothetical does raise a real way that such a claim could be misleading, it has nothing to do with the actual situation at hand.
- nullc 8y ago
  The presentation (linked in another comment here) lists a number of exchanges which they believe are presenting fake data: CoinBene, RightBTC, CHAOEX, IDAX, LBANK, BitForex, Exrates I don't think I've heard of any of these, and there are zero hits in my email. They go on to identify pretty much every exchange I've ever seen discussed on HN (for example) as having legitimate volume-- coinbase, bitstamp, bitfinex, gemini, ... I think the headline should instead be "coinmarketcap volume claims are nonsense" -- which I think most people in the bitcoin space would say "well, duh". At least my view purpose of coinmarketcap and similar sites seems largely to direct people to the latest token pumps, as evidence by the absurd "market caps" they display for illiquid pre-mined tokens... What set off alarms for me is that there is no way that you get to 81 exchanges without including some really sketchy or obscure stuff. But a site that wants to list sketchy tokens needs to include the sketchy exchanges because for the most part the non-sketchy exchanges won't list them.
  - thinkmassive 8y ago
    Bingo. I started using Messari/onchainfx and it’s a much better alternative.
- aeternus 8y ago
  Not quite that extreme, but the difference is quite disparate. Coinbase Pro (legit) has a 24h volume of 53,234,129 whereas Coineal is reporting 740,643,873. A quick google / google trends search shows that Coineal is basically unknown compared to Coinbase. Article seems to be going by: https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/ https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/
aeternus 8y ago
You're right, few of the mentioned exchanges are actually well-known. They seem to be using coinmarketcap.com as their source for the 'top exchanges' which is basically going off of reported volume with no validation. Of course there are going to be scammer/spam exchanges reporting ridiculous numbers. How about looking at Coinbase, Kraken, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gemini. At least those have been around awhile.

by nullc 8y ago

nullc 8y ago

An explanatory comment might be more helpful than just the downvotes!

wbronitsky 8y ago
I agree. I hate the downvoting feature here. It silences unpopular opinions instead of forcing people to respond. The mods really seem to like it though
- dang 8y ago
  Note how that comment ended up in a non-downvoted state.
  - wbronitsky 8y ago
    Ah, so now you're back, trying to tech me a lesson about anec-data with your own anec-data. Got any real data to support whatever claim you are trying to make, or are you just trying to come over and be right at me again? Again, comments like this, especially from mods, make the community more closed. Your pithy comment ends up making you look like a bully, not as a person trying to foster an open debate about the platform. Like, did I come up on your tools, or do you just go and check my comments because I disagreed with you a few weeks ago? Are you so focused on proving me wrong and getting one up on me that you now follow my comment threads? Bit creepy for a mod, Daniel.
woah 8y ago
Explanation: There's a large brigade on HN that hates Bitcoin with a burning passion. Your comment seemed to cast Bitcoin in something other than the worst possible light, and so it was downvoted.

mikeash 8y ago

The actual volumes on different exchanges are not anything close to that disparate, so while your hypothetical does raise a real way that such a claim could be misleading, it has nothing to do with the actual situation at hand.

nullc 8y ago
The presentation (linked in another comment here) lists a number of exchanges which they believe are presenting fake data: CoinBene, RightBTC, CHAOEX, IDAX, LBANK, BitForex, Exrates I don't think I've heard of any of these, and there are zero hits in my email. They go on to identify pretty much every exchange I've ever seen discussed on HN (for example) as having legitimate volume-- coinbase, bitstamp, bitfinex, gemini, ... I think the headline should instead be "coinmarketcap volume claims are nonsense" -- which I think most people in the bitcoin space would say "well, duh". At least my view purpose of coinmarketcap and similar sites seems largely to direct people to the latest token pumps, as evidence by the absurd "market caps" they display for illiquid pre-mined tokens... What set off alarms for me is that there is no way that you get to 81 exchanges without including some really sketchy or obscure stuff. But a site that wants to list sketchy tokens needs to include the sketchy exchanges because for the most part the non-sketchy exchanges won't list them.
- thinkmassive 8y ago
  Bingo. I started using Messari/onchainfx and it’s a much better alternative.
aeternus 8y ago
Not quite that extreme, but the difference is quite disparate. Coinbase Pro (legit) has a 24h volume of 53,234,129 whereas Coineal is reporting 740,643,873. A quick google / google trends search shows that Coineal is basically unknown compared to Coinbase. Article seems to be going by: https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/ https://coinmarketcap.com/rankings/exchanges/

aeternus 8y ago

You're right, few of the mentioned exchanges are actually well-known. They seem to be using coinmarketcap.com as their source for the 'top exchanges' which is basically going off of reported volume with no validation. Of course there are going to be scammer/spam exchanges reporting ridiculous numbers. How about looking at Coinbase, Kraken, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gemini. At least those have been around awhile.