Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Tuesday December 05 2017, @10:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the tax-man-cometh dept.

The Verge reports

[On November 29], Coinbase suffered a major defeat at the hands of the Internal Revenue Service, nearly a year after the case was initially filed. A California federal court has ordered Coinbase to turn over identifying records for all users who have bought, sold, sent, or received more than $20,000 through their accounts in a single year between 2013 and 2015. Coinbase estimates that 14,355 users meet the government's requirements.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by ledow on Tuesday December 05 2017, @10:26AM (7 children)

    by ledow (5567) on Tuesday December 05 2017, @10:26AM (#605569) Homepage

    " estimates that 14,355 users "

    That's not an estimate.

    That's a number. A very specific number. At best, to the nearest five, which is about as accurate you can get.

    An estimate would be: 14,000 users.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 05 2017, @10:46AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 05 2017, @10:46AM (#605574)

    English is a giant clustersnarl of a language. Just one additional possible reading of TFS is:

    Coinbase estimates that 14,355 users have bought, sold, sent, or received more than $20,000 through their accounts in a single year between 2013 and 2015.

    There's the potential for quite a bit of estimation there in not just numbers of users, but also in dollar trade amount as well as relevant time period.

  • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 05 2017, @11:18AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 05 2017, @11:18AM (#605577)

    I find your choice of 14,000 users very specific.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 05 2017, @11:46AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 05 2017, @11:46AM (#605581)

    It means "My witch hunt will be over when I say it's over."

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by zocalo on Tuesday December 05 2017, @12:53PM (1 child)

    by zocalo (302) on Tuesday December 05 2017, @12:53PM (#605598)
    Actually, an estimate would typically include a range of values or some other margin of error resulting from whatever methodology was used to derive it, without which 14,000 is no more or less of an estimate than 14,355 is - whether or not it's a round number has nothing to do with it. For all we know Coinbase may have only done a partial analysis of their data, identified a given number of users meeting the requirements for a given timeframe/level of funds/proportion of users, then multiplied out to get the 14,355 figure, which would indeed make it an estimate.
    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday December 05 2017, @01:26PM

      by isostatic (365) on Tuesday December 05 2017, @01:26PM (#605607) Journal

      "About 14,000" would imply to me anywhere from 13,500 to 14,499, probably distributed over a bell curve, but with a peak around the 14k mark
      "About 14,000 to 15,000" would imply around the 14500 mark, give or take 500.
      "About 13,500 to 14,500" would imply around the 14,000 mark, give or take 500, but with a flatter curve in the middle than "About 14,000"

  • (Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Tuesday December 05 2017, @02:19PM

    by nobu_the_bard (6373) on Tuesday December 05 2017, @02:19PM (#605628)

    It might be an "estimate" because of some fiddly details about what does and does not count. Calling it an estimate covers them if it turns out to be inaccurate.

    For example, if a user had 4 accounts that each did $10k worth of transactions, but it's not immediately obvious it was all one person, the IRS may have intended this person be counted (perhaps because of a different definition of "user") but Coinbase understandably didn't count them. If the IRS comes back later and wants to know why they were skipped over, Coinbase can say their previous number was an estimate and it was always possible a few corner cases slipped through.

  • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday December 05 2017, @02:51PM

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Tuesday December 05 2017, @02:51PM (#605641) Journal

    Sure it can be. If it's 14,355 +/- 5, it's pretty exact.

    If it's 14,355 +/- 10,000, it's a very vague estimate. Without a stated margin of error, we can't know which is implied.

    "Round numbers" based on base 10 are completely arbitrary and should not be seen as a necessary center for a statistical distribution. I know there's a concept of "significant figures" which is sort of what you're getting at, but without error bars, we can't know what's implied about precision here.