[corresation]

Far too sarcastic for something that is almost entirely raw, unsupported speculation. Further, it is conflicted -- it disbelieves some statements by Gox, while fully believing others (e.g. "they were in cold storage").

The one element that seems believable are questions about the malleability attack. I do not understand how Gox or any exchange or service wouldn't have an up to the minute, blockchain verified knowledge of exactly what their positions are. Maybe they only did such accounting weekly, or even monthly...but at some point over the supposed multi-year exploit they would have seen that account balances > address holdings.

[agorabinary]

This. The author likes to fill the space between his unexplored technical points with this tasteless, dismissive tone that makes me question the value of his argument even before I scroll down to look for an appropriately brief TL;DR. Unfortunately all I find is some strange reverence for the most irreverent cryptocurrency, Dogecoin. I'm sure the billions of unbanked and poor in need of affordable remittances would prefer a currency that takes neither itself nor its users seriously, and which lacks even the economic principles to deflect its alt-coin implausibility, over an increasingly established and appropriately ambitious alternative to the current financial system.