Binance widely advertise their non-verified account which they state is allowed to withdraw up to 2 BTC per day without undergoing any form of KYC. If OP has deposited, traded, tried a partial withdrawal, and then been blocked, then Binance are lying. What OP has done is the bare minimum of what people may use an exchange account for (short of just depositing and then immediately withdrawing again, which is pointless). If he isn't even allowed to do the bare minimum without Binance reneging on their promise, then Binance are lying to everyone. OP is in the situation where Binance are holding his coins hostage, and he either has to forfeit his coins or forfeit his private information. I'd call that theft.

No, it isn't. If they want everyone to undergo KYC, then they need to stop advertising their unverified account, and they need to force complete KYC before you are able to deposit coins to their platform. Allowing users to deposit and then holding them hostage and demanding KYC is completely unreasonable, and borderline scammy.

You don't have to be perfect to reach 100%. I have 37 bad reports (the majority of which were unintentional duplicate reports), but still have a 100% accuracy. The accuracy calculation seems to use the ceil function to return the nearest higher integer, meaning any accuracy >99% displays a "perfect" score of 100%. In reality, this means you can still make 1.010101... bad reports for every 100 good ones and maintain an accuracy of 100%.

Because privacy is a fundamental right. You don't have to be doing something illegal to want to keep your financial dealings private or to obfuscate how much bitcoin you are holding.

Why do regular people who own fiat not post their bank statements publicly?
Why do regular people who own gold not post their holdings publicly?
Why do regular people who own stocks and shares not post their holdings publicly?
Why should bitcoin users be any different?

Bitcoin is unique in that anyone in the world can see what you are holding if they know your address(es), and so bitcoin is unique in its need for mixing services.

But that's exactly my point. Even with two addresses which are more similar than anything malware can achieve, or indeed, which are more similar than is even possible, it is absolutely trivial to immediately spot the differences when you just physically put them next to each other.

I've never understood the arguments about checking 5 characters, or maybe it should be 6, or maybe 8, or maybe 5 at the start and 5 at the end, or maybe 3 is ok if you also check some in the middle, etc. My method is both quicker and more secure than reading x characters, alt-tabbing to a new window, checking the x characters, reading x more characters, alt-tabbing back, checking those x characters, and so on. Even if you think my method takes a few seconds longer, then surely it's worth it for your security? We are talking literal seconds. The average person wastes over 2 hours per day on social media.

With respect to the above replies, the name of the platform is irrelevant here, as is where you found it and what the specifics are.

First of all, you said they've offered a "really good ROI". So good you couldn't pass it up? Too good to be true? Then it is. Red flag number one.

Second, every time you try to withdraw they won't let you. Red flag number two. I would bet they are asking you to deposit more to unlock your coins or achieve a bonus or improve your percentage or something equally nonsensical.

Third, the trader doesn't know how the platform he is trading on works? How convenient. Just keep giving him your money, its not his fault if you can never withdraw it, right? Red flag number three.

You are being scammed. Don't give them any more of your coins, and don't go through any more of their "procedures".

Be careful about this. Blockchain.com lets you import both addresses and private keys. If you have imported the address only then it will be marked in your blockchain.com wallet as "Non-Spendable". You won't be able to spend any coins received to that address through your blockchain.com wallet, and will need to have that address and its associated private key in another wallet (or have the associated seed phrase). If you don't have the private key in another wallet, then any coins you receive on that address will be stuck there forever.

If you have imported a private key, then the "Non-Spendable" label will be missing, and when you click on "More Options" in your blockchain.com wallet, you should be shown an option to view the private key.

I honestly do not understand why we keep seeing this debate popping up again and again. It takes less than 10 seconds to check the full address. Why are people trying to cut corners of a few seconds when potential thousands of dollars are at risk? Just hold your mobile phone/hardware wallet/whatever up to your computer screen, or resize two windows on your screen, so the address you are actually sending to is right next to the address you think you are sending to. Once the two addresses are physically right beside each other, it is trivial to compare the full address and see any differences. You don't even have to memorize any characters. For example:

1Ny9qqL7qsyzCmLjfUzVRMy8ej569wGQey

1Ny9qqLNqsyzFmLtf2zVAMy2ej539wGQey

Those two addresses are more similar than any copy and paste malware by several orders of magnitude, and if you compared the first 6 and last 6 characters they would all match, but I bet you could all tell in less than 2 seconds that they were different.

Log in to your blockchain.com wallet, click on "Settings" at the upper right, then "Wallets & Addresses", and it will show you a list of all the addresses you have imported. As far as I am aware, blockchain.com wallets don't support SegWit address though, so if the address your are looking for is the "bc1..." one from your profile, then it won't be in your blockchain.com wallet.

If you are staking a new address, then it is good practice to sign a message from your previously staked address to remove some of the doubt regarding the account being sold or otherwise changing hands (although staked addresses can obviously also be sold along with accounts).

I mean, I don't disagree with your stance about not trusting VPN providers, but there are plenty of examples of providers who have been subpoenaed or another jurisdiction's equivalent and had to prove in a court that they had no logs to hand over.

The only reason you don't have to watch what you are writing is because you haven't written anything your government disagrees with. Write something they view as "extreme" enough and it won't be long before they come knocking at your door. That is the whole point of the surveillance states that are being set up the world over - to make you scared to step out of line:


A VPN won't make you anonymous, and is not designed to.

But surely we should be striving to make every thread higher quality? Surely we want all boards to be free of low quality spam, and not just move the best threads to their own special board, leaving the low quality stuff behind and turning the Beginner's and Help board in to even more of a spam fest in the process? The best option is to have more reporting and more moderation of low quality spam, rather than just ignoring it and moving all the better threads out. It's also entirely possible (and frequently happens) that one or two good replies in an otherwise awful thread will attract a lot of merits. You will then be moving a thread which is >95% spam to the "Quality threads" board based on sometimes a single good comment.

Tor is obviously the better choice if anonymity is your goal, as a VPN does not give you anonymity by any means. But saying that you don't trust VPN providers not to keep logs but you have no problem with your ISP keeping logs seems a bit backwards to me.

That depends entirely on your risk model and what you are doing online. There are plenty of people around the world whose lives would be at risk if their online activities were linked to their real world identities. Just because you have no need or desire for complete anonymity doesn't mean that others share that view.

It isn't something to just learn about - it something that you should be using.

Passphrases are great tool for everyone to use. If your seed phrase is backed up on paper (as it should be), then if that paper is stolen then so are all your funds. An attacker with access to your seed phrase can clear out all your coins in a matter of minutes. If you use a passphrase in addition to your seed phrase, then an attacker with your seed phrase has to then also brute-force your passphrase. If your passphrase is long and random enough this is essentially impossible, meaning an attacker with your seed phrase can do nothing and your coins remain safe. You should also back your passphrase up on paper but separately to your seed phrase, so an attacker finding one doesn't immediately find the other.

You can use as many different passphrases as you like with a single seed phrase, allowing you to create unlimited numbers of "hidden" wallets. This also provides protection against physical attacks on your person in the form of plausible deniability.

Further, since you are using a Trezor, due to the vulnerabilities of the device anyone who has physical access to it is able to extract your seed phrase. If you are not using a passphrase, then as above, your coins can be quickly stolen.

I would highly recommend everyone use a passphrase. Just remember to back it up, as if you forget it, your coins will be lost.

You've made a type in your topic title - HRW instead of HRF.

Regarding PayJoin - I know you can use the BTCPay wallet as an interface for an already existing wallet on a hardware device, and I know that the BTCPay wallet supports Payjoin transactions. Does anyone have experience combining the two? Can I use the BTCPay wallet to make Payjoin transactions directly from my hardware wallet? And are there any other mainstream wallets at the moment supporting Payjoin transactions?

Surely a much easier and less complicated solution is to just report the low quality threads to be locked or trashed? Why allow the board to continue to be cluttered by poor quality, spammy, advertising, etc., threads?

It is also next to impossible to get even senior members who start threads in any board to go back and lock the thread once the discussion has run its course and the thread has turned in to a spamfest. I suspect you will have very limited success encouraging users who are predominantly newbies to go back and move their thread to a new board, particularly a new child board which will get less traffic and less views than the main board.

The Kraken attack took only 15 minutes to extract the seed phrase from Trezor devices, and the Ledger attack took around 5 minutes. That is not a long process by any means. Home safes can vary widely in quality, and poor ones can be cracked open in under a couple of minutes. Worst case scenario, an attacker could open your safe and perform this attack in 15-20 minutes. Even if your safe requires hours to crack, if you are at work for 8 hours a day that is more than enough time.

If you are planning to use a Trezor device, then you should follow the instructions here (https://wiki.trezor.io/Passphrase) to set up a long and complex passphrase, to mitigate against the physical vulnerability of the device.

There is no way of knowing if Cyrus was the one who viewed or dealt with those reports.

That would be a waste of your time and a waste of moderator time to act upon all the reports again, and likely wouldn't change the outcome. I think you would be better either waiting for a reply in this thread or PMing Cyrus directly if you would like him to examine the situation.

Having said all that, neither of those two users has posted in weeks. It could be that have both been temp banned, which doesn't show up in the modlog.

I provided the link for my data in my post above - https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612

You can enter anything in the "Name" and "Email" boxes - you don't need to receive an email with a code or similar to progress to the webinar video. If you skip to 37:13 in the video, you'll see the complete breakdown of source of funds sent to mixers. Combining centralized, p2p exchanges, and other mixers, you account for three quarters of all coins being sent through mixers.

There have been a couple of similar cases I have been involved in where after reporting the same user dozens of times for spamming, off topic, advertising, etc., and rather than delete every single post the mod has deleted only a handful or sometimes none at all, but the user has ended up with a temporary or permanent ban. As non-global mods have to escalate to global mods if they think a user should be banned, I have wondered if in these situations they mark all the reports as good, but don't delete the posts and instead them all as "evidence" for the global mod to see.

So if you don't trust the VPN company with logs of what you are doing online, why do you trust your ISP with logs of what you are doing online, especially considering the ISP know your real name and address whereas a good VPN company would not?

That's not an argument for giving up on anonymity before you've even begun. Quite the opposite, in fact - it's an argument for taking extra care at all times. It only takes one tiny mistake to crash your car and cause multiple fatalities. That doesn't mean we should all drive with our eyes closed.

I did include that excuse on the original edition, which I first posted here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5071287.msg48016152#msg48016152

We even got to mark off that excuse on just the second usage of the bingo card, 4 days later: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5073698.msg48129339#msg48129339