No they won't. Facebook gave millions of users' data to Cambridge Analytica. They were fined $500,000, which is chump change to Facebook. Google Plus revealed that 438 different third party apps had unauthorized access to your data. No punishment. Similarly, Apple have plenty of third party apps which sell your data. No punishment. And that's only if you think that these companies aren't selling your data themselves, which I find very difficult to believe.

Agreed. Although there are some idiots like my friend who FOMOed in at the peak, the majority of this movement was bots and pre-existing buy stop orders.


True, if he can be convinced just to hold on. I expect if we see a pull back down to low to mid 4000s, he will panic and sell before the next upward movements, and then end up FOMOing in again at the height of the next rally. Some people just have no patience.

Talking about FOMO, I have a friend who messaged me this morning to say bought a couple of thousand dollars worth at around $4,900, and is upset that it has already lost some value. When I asked him what he had been doing for the last 4 months of sideways movement, he said he'd been "waiting for the right time". What made him think that after a pump of 20% in an hour was suddenly "the right time" is beyond me.

I thought we would correct a bit harder than we have, and I still think we might over the next day or two.

On Firefox you can also access this link (with the URL pre-populated by the page you are visiting from) by click on Help -> Report deceptive site. I've tried to make the instructions to edit the hosts file as simple as possible - you literally just locate the file in the directories I have listed, open it with a text editor, paste the code at the bottom, and save it. Most users should be able to manage that.


You shouldn't be using a search engine to find sites like electrum, myetherwallet, binanace, this forum, etc. It is much safer to manually type in the URL. Ad-blockers and antivirus are a must (in addition to extensions like HTTPS Everywhere and Privacy Badger), but you can't rely on these to protect you 100%.

This is a perfect summary of the difference between campaigns which pay in established coins (predominantly bitcoin, but also a few in ethereum), and campaigns which pay in a newly created altcoin or token. When paying in a new coin/token which has just been created, and the creators hold the full supply (or majority thereof), they are risking nothing. There is no financial incentive for them to employ a good manager, select the best posters, or cut down on spam. They can pay as many users as they like for any old spam, because they can just create the payment medium at will out of thin air, whereas campaigns which are using an established coin to pay are generally more selective and value quality over sheer volume.

The full blame doesn't lie with the users, though. Sure, they should be more selective at which new trash coin they agree to promote and be "paid" in, but we should also be doing more as a forum to limit these campaigns. There's a great sticky thread here (Signature Campaign Guidelines (read this before starting or joining a campaign)), which unfortunately is completely ignored by users and mods alike. Being more forthcoming with bans for both spamming users and spamming campaigns would go a long way to cleaning up the forum.

Exactly. Everything in moderation.

Alcohol is bad for you. Fast food is bad for you. Sugar is bad for you. Sitting on your ass playing video games is bad for you. Gambling is bad for you.

So why are all these things advertised everywhere you look? Why aren't they all banned? If all you did was work, exercise, sleep and eat salads, life would be very boring very quickly. We all do loads of things that are bad for us every day because they are good fun, and without fun, life is meaningless.

Much like alcohol, as long as you aren't overdoing it or running yourself in to financial or health issues, then it's fine. I bet on sports not infrequently, and love a good game of poker with friends, and poker with no stakes isn't fun at all.

And who is going to get benefit from any other post which is merited, other than the person who made the post? By your logic, it is also a "waste" of merits to merit anybody with >1000 merits, since they can't rank up any more anyway.

I happen to agree that sending 20-50 merits to a campaign thread is a waste, but if people want to waste their merits in this way then they are free to do so. If there is a genuine lack of merit going around then the way to address this is with more sources and/or a higher allocation for each source, rather than enforcing rules on what users can and cannot merit, which after all, is completely subjective.

It's far worse than that. People are completely happy to give away all their personal data to companies like Facebook, Google and Apple, but it gets even worse in the crypto space. People are not only willing to give away all their details, but also to upload documents, passports, selfies, selfies holding said documents or passport, etc. in exchange for an airdrop or bounty campaign for some token that is quite literally worthless, or for some 2 bit exchange filled with fake volume just waiting to exit scam. Quite literally everything someone needs to steal their entire identity (financial, tax, credit, medical, criminal, social security, etc.), and people are willing to send it all to a complete stranger. It boggles the mind.

Alternatively, with Firefox (I'm not sure about other browsers as I don't use them) you can create multiple profiles. Each profile can have its own set of cookies, bookmarks, etc. Therefore if you stay logged in forever, you can simply log in to each account you need to use in a separate Firefox profile once, and then just open the profile you need each time. Additionally, you can install Firefox twice (or even just copy and paste the entire Firefox folder) to be able to run two instances of Firefox in different profiles at the same time.

See the link here for instructions: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiple_profiles

Once again, trust is not moderated, so your repeated appeals for him to be banned will continue to go ignored.

While I agree with sandy-is-fine that most gift cards being sold at a discount are usually stolen or scammed in some way, it does appear that claudiauit isn't trying to scam anyone themselves, which explains why they have not been red trusted.

This whole thread raises the much bigger question of why you are so keen for sandy-is-fine to be banned, and why you are picking other users' fights for them, especially when they don't want your help as evidenced by the above comment. It's almost as if you have some vested interest in there being no repercussions for posting anything you like in the Digital Goods board.

I'm all over you like a newbie on a shitcoin.

This is true, but what would be stopping me from printing the same paper wallet multiple times? I can continue to hand out the same paper wallet and the same bitcoin to as many people as I want until someone transfers the bitcoin out of that address. Or I could quite easily keep a copy of the private key for myself, pay someone using a paper wallet (or even multiple people using the same wallet), and then transfer the funds back to myself.

The BIP 39 wordlist contains 2048 words.


Sure, but they would do it until the heat death of the universe and never get a match.


With a 12 word phrase, there are 2048¹² possible combinations, or 5.45*10³⁹. In reality, the actual number of valid seeds is slightly less due to checksums, but let's not over complicate things.
Even if you had a billion computers all checking a billion combinations a second for a billion years, you would only have checked around 0.0006% of all combinations. If you are looking instead at 24 word phrases, your final percentage becomes astronomically small.


As an aside, don't confuse a 12/18/24 word phrase with a brain wallet. The first uses the BIP 39 word list, is generated from your wallet seed, and is highly secure. The latter is usually thought up by a human and can use any word or character (much like a password), and therefore is usually neither random nor secure.

Anyone who ranks EOS as number one on any list except "A list of the most overpriced trash" is either holding massive bags or is a moron. Last year, Weiss ratings rated Dogecoin higher in their "adoption" category than they rated BTC. They are owned by TheStreet.com and Jim Cramer, who brag about illegally manipulating the market, and have been charged by the SEC in the past.

In short, ignore this nonsense.

I would add that many users don't even read what the project is about before they agree to advertise it. There have been a number of fake signature campaigns in the past where they are advertising a known scam, or where the campaign manager is a brand new account and there was no escrow or proof of funds. Despite this, as soon as you promise any amount of money (even trash altcoins/tokens which are worth fractions of a cent), people will jump at the chance to sign up. If you continue to advertise for a known scam after being warned, you could very well end up with red trust.

They shipped a new one at no cost to you? Even though it was one month out of warranty? I've got to say, if that's the case, that's mighty impressive customer service from Ledger.

Did they mention anything about whether they had seen this kind of issue before?

This is true, but on the flip side a 2000% gain in a year also sounds completely silly for a traditional company, and yet that's what bitcoin did in 2017. You've got to take the highs with the lows, and I'm sure (at least, I really hope) that no one has chosen crypto because they believe it to be a stable asset.


Nah. The most important question before you go near BCH is - why? It's a failed fork, which has now forked in to two failed forks. The two chains have just become playthings for the ever more ridiculous feud between Ver and CSW, and all either of them have done is slowly lose value against BTC.

One of the parties must have an internet connection though. You can generate and sign a transaction without internet access, much as you would do on an airgapped machine, and you can send that signed transaction to another party any way you like - via telephone call, radio waves, TxTenna, snail mail, even carrier pigeon if you were so inclined. But until the receiving party broadcasts that transaction to the network via the internet, then that transaction doesn't exist on the blockchain, and so the bitcoin hasn't been sent anywhere. Someone must have internet access at some point to broadcast the transaction. And until the transaction is broadcast, the sender could easily double spend by establishing internet access and broadcasting a different transaction in the meantime.

Ahh, I never tried using an image that had already been posted - does it give different results? Would have been a nice little Easter egg though.

I'm convinced there will be a hidden tag for which you have to use a very specific image (or fake image URL). Something like "Verified admin" or "Verified theymos", but try as I might I can't find it.