When logged in on the balance page it says: "DO NOT DEPOSIT TO PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED BITCOIN DEPOSIT ADDRESSES. Deposits sent to previous address will not be honored. New deposit addresses are forthcoming.".
More generally, though. "Bitcoin core discourages address reuse." I work for the company of the future and I get paid in bitcoins. I'm supposed to log into the payroll system and enter a new address every two weeks?
Thats a pretty fundamental confusion, but it's forgivable due to bad naming.
An address isn't a destination in Bitcoin, it functions more like the serial number of a bill (though the system is able to handle duplication). It would be better thought of as an invoice number.
You don't expect to reuse a different invoice number of separate payments.
If the analogy is accurate, then the pre-addressed envelope that comes with your bill already has the unique address on it, so you don't have to do anything special. What's the problem?
Ah, good point. I said electric bill, but was mentally focusing on the few checks I still hand address, for which I don't necessarily receive monthly bills (rent, etc.).
For that scenario, you'd presumably have some system worked out where you can quickly say, "hey, what's the address for this payment?" And being on the internet instead of going through the mail, you don't have to wait a week for the answer.
Well, at least they're doing that. But there's still no explanation on their site, blog, Twitter, or Facebook, and it's after 8 AM on Monday in London.
Expect this to start hitting the financial press in London in the next hour or two.
I think you overestimate Bitcoin's media profile. FT Alphaville is just mentioning yesterday's crash. Apart from that, only the Bitcoin press and fragments of the tech press (Wired, TechCrunch) have mentioned Bitstamp.
edit: whoops, added to the FT Alphaville article! http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/01/05/2079012/who-needs-cave... Come in via Google News for full text. They're using it as one example in a piece on how Bitcoin's infrastructures and the community's ability to assess expertise are not very good.
Two days later, it's in the Economist, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, etc.
Mt. Gox underestimated Bitcoin's media profile. When they went down, they acted as if the event would mostly be ignored and they could quietly get away with it. Instead, they got coverage in just about major business newspaper worldwide: WSJ, NYT, Forbes, South China Morning Post, China Daily, even al-Jazeera and Russia Today.
Bitstamp seems to be dead. They said they'd be down for "24-48 hours". Two days later they're still down. They haven't issued any new statements. There's a good chance they're in "take the money and run" mode.
Wonder what Bitpay are going to do, since their "aggregate price" turns out to have long closely tracked ... Bitstamp. How in the bag are they? Did they in fact cash out daily?
