It is mostly related to the difference in jurisdiction where the crypto exchange company is operating in as its domicile as certain countries may or may not be covered by international laws governing AML that is why KYC requirements vary as well. The same thing can be said about KYC verification levels where the higher the level/daily transactions you can the more personal details you need to give as there are certain thresholds that they need to follow for AML compliance. Other than that they might just vary as there is a different interpretation of the law for each crypto exchange.

Not an investment advisor nor anything near it but I'm surprised to see that majority of the people here have most of their wealth in cryptocurrency rather than fiat, is it because of the bull market that is why there is a shift in percentage or is it before that? Nonetheless I think we are all aware about the dangers of keeping most of your capital/wealth in a volatile market? I'm pretty sure that if you put in most of your wealth in one market it can shift drastically with just one reversal or correction. For me I'll be more comfortable having fiat currency which can maybe sustain me for a year and maybe the rest of my wealth can be diversified in both the stock market and the crypto market.

As long as the gambling site has a international license such as a Curacao license and the country recognizes those licenses I don't think his gambling winnings will be an issue, I don't think UK has a similar prohibition just like the US with regards to online gambling.

@OP if you keep track with your gambling winnings this is a good start as you will need to know the market value of your winnings on each date as this will determine if you have a capital gain or not by the time you have sold it you must also provide as much proof as you can so there will be no discrepancies or additional questions coming from your taxing authority.

That was part of my point but I'm guessing that its not only about credit/debit card companies but also payment processors such as Paypal and cryptocurrencies as well. The European Central Bank was happily co-existing with these payment methods before the emergence of cryptocurrencies and now they are only acting when the crypto market has started gaining traction in the EU. I'm guessing that this is their way of silently "regulating" money transfers while they aren't doing any kind of stricter enforcement in the crypto industry.

There is no use on reporting their username as they can easily change it or just create a new account with the same scam. If you want to bring this down I think it is better if you report the user to this telegram channel as this is what Telegram is using to handle scammers using their chat app. And I think you forgot to mention what channel this user is from so members can be familiar on which channels they need to lookout from him.

This can be possibly done by now the only thing that made it happen fast for Tesla is that this decision is coming from the higher ups itself that is why they have covered all their dealerships in the US. However the dealerships itself for other car manufacturers can accept Bitcoin as a mode of payment freely without the management approving it as accepting more modes of payment can easily be translated to sales for their dealership which car manufacturers are also looking for if more and more dealerships accept Bitcoin as a mode of payment and people are actually opting in using it maybe we can see the company itself accept Bitcoin as a mode of payment across all branches.

It will be highly unlikely to happen especially the current owner Glen Taylor is looking for owners that would promise that they will be keeping the team in Minnesota. Also I don't think this is a final deal as this had been said before with Garnett , the Wilf brothers, and as well as Daniel Straus. If the team is sold to Alex Rodriguez I'm guessing that there is in the ownership contract that won't allow the team to move to another state/city.  Also I don't think Alex Rodriguez will be a good fit to own a team especially his net worth being around $350 Million his partner on ther other hand, Marc Lore, has approximately $1 Billion net worth and might be a majority owner in this situation.

You'll find more attention if you include data such as how many likes and re-tweets you are receiving from each past project you have worked with in this post, also they will know if your followers are made up of real humans and not just fake accounts/bots who just automatically like your post which I think is one of the things they will be avoiding. Try to also put your marketing offer in freelancing websites as these is were crypto related projects also look for some of sections where they are missing something.

Fortunately most of the REIT companies right now are available for investment in the stock market but these types of assets are highly dependable on dividend payout rather than the price appreciation of the shares itself. Just like any other real estate companies out there for the ones receiving lease income as their main revenue you should always look at their active and upcoming projects, properties under their names, as well as to see how many active contracts they have. With regards to Prison based property REITs the main problem I am seeing is most of their revenue is coming from contracts related to the government and this is one of the riskiest thing you can handle especially if things like budget cuts and other reasons can take place that could directly affect the revenue of the prison.

There is no way of predicting it not unless you directly know someone working for that crypto exchange or part of the team core of a project you won't really have any way of knowing if their cryptocurrencies will be listed in an exchange of course what I have said also doesn't have any guarantee of happening as things can turn around while the duration of the launch. I don't even see any advantage in this I don't see any benefit of you knowing in advance where the cryptocurrency will be listed.

Market dominance is something that I don't really dwell a lot since it is one of those metrics that doesn't really show where the asset is heading. Right now if we are speaking about Bitcoin's market dominance you will see that even if you combine the top 2-10 cryptocurrencies in terms of market cap Bitcoin is still far ahead of them. For me market dominance is just a number and we need to accept the fact that Bitcoin won't be hogging all the market cap in the near future as soon as more and more traders become adventurous with other cryptocurrencies and begin to dwell with other opportunities in the crypto market, just think about it like the stock market where a lot of people really don't focus on the top gainers/volume stocks anymore but focus on the small and medium enterprises which has a lot of room for growth.

Bitcoin or crypto in general with the news about it no being a legal tender is one of the news that is always being inflated by the crypto news media but the truth is cryptocurrencies not being a legal tender is nothing to worry about. Why? Because one of the first laws of most of the countries is a recognition of one legal tender and that is their own fiat currency not unless their own government has mandated their basic laws like what Venezuela did on accepting USD this basic law won't be change that is why countries who accepted cryptocurrencies have not recognized Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies as a legal tender but rather they just classify them as a "digital asset"  or other closely similar terms like "crypto asset". Crypto being an asset while at the same time it being not a legal tender just gives these type of assets to move freely in that country without harming their own fiat currency as their one and only legal tender.

I can't find the exact article I was reading about the "Digital Euro" but this is the closest one I can get online


If we will treat the European Central Bank as an example their own digital currency is a "reflection" of their fiat currency which is the Euro. the European Central Bank has proposed this last year and one the reasons why is the pandemic that had spread fast in their country, also this is their own way to battle out other cryptocurrencies as well as payment processor which their citizens will also be incurring fees just for the transfer. Their value will always be backed up by the fiat version of their money and I think this will be the same situation for other countries seeking digitalisation of their money.

They aren't exactly allowing it most likely the channels you are watching right now where they are giving a "free giveaway" are hacked accounts from Youtubers that is why they have a lot of subscribers to begin with. With them hijacking the accounts it will go under the radar on Google that is why viewers/users need to make the necessary action to report them. IMO what isn't acceptable on Google's part is the one happening the their Google Playstore where even though they have screened the apps there are several scam apps that are made available for download this is the area they need to focus on as a lot of android users have lost their money because of it.

I'm surprised that even Bloomberg is writing articles related to Bitcoin vs. Gold and not it's about their hedge against inflation which I think they went too far. My point of view regarding this matter is you can never really compare Bitcoin against Gold as they are completely different types of assets, Gold being a more stable asset while Bitcoin on the other hand is more volatile in nature making it a risky asset to be holding as a hedge against inflation. Inflation hedge assets in the first place are only about investments and I don't think Bitcoin has fit into that criteria, yes I know we have hodlers but they more likely fit in to a long-term speculative play rather than an investment.

Its getting clearer by the day that Inter has a high chance of finishing in the top table and I can say they truly deserve it with the changes the brought in the club, I guess this was also a preparation for their Champion's League qualification. For me personally as a Milan fan I don't care if Inter will finish in the top spot this year as long as Milan will qualify for the Champions League which they will successfully accomplish this season, although I'm not yet sure if their current roster will be enough to play competitively in the Champions League.

If there is a problem of unaffordable housing system I don't think financing is really the main solution here. The government really needs to step up in these kinds of matter where they need to see how they can either boost the income for the ones who need it or control the rental prices which they can definitely do. But if we are strictly speaking about your propose solution makes me feel like this is an ambitious solution which you need to understand that your project must have partners first or rather people who will be ready to accept your token as a payment for their rental.

I bet the government wouldn't go this far in terms of classifying cryptocurrencies. Simply what I have been seeing so far is the general classification of cryptocurrencies which is Utility and Securities and thus these classifications affect what laws are covered with them and in other countries they have these similar classification only difference is the terms they are using. Why they won't classify cryptocurrencies in terms of their scalability? I believe that it won't come to this point as there is simply hundreds of cryptocurrencies the population can choose from and other payment methods that I don't think that it will come to a point that scalibility will be a big issue for the cryptocurrencies being used in a mode of transaction.

Here is what I posted regarding the Coinbase IPO on another topic


Regarding its upcoming IPO they will be offering around 114 million class A shares with a Proposed Maximum Aggregate Offering Price of $943,218,155 meaning that the potential price per share will be around 8$ now a lot of experts in the stock market say that a lot of them don't invest or participate in any IPO offering as during its first launch you won't really know where their stock is heading. Yes you have the chance to buy their shares at a the lowest price since it is their IPO offering but based on historical performance just like the ICOs we have in the crypto market a lot of times first shareholders of the stock are also doing profit taking once they see a gain on their portfolios.

Medyo bagong pamamaraan ito para malaman ang ATH pero sa tingin ko hindi tama ito. Sa aking opinyon ang FDMC ay isa sa mga worthless na metrics na meron ngayon sa mga crypto listing websites at exchanges kasi ina-assume nila na ganito ang value ng isang cryptocurrency pag lahat ng supply ay na-mine na or nagci-circulate na sa mga exchanges, isa pa sa mga panegt na nakikita ko dito is ginagamit lang ito ng mga projects madalas para i-inflate nya ang value ng kanilang cryptocurrency kaya madlas makikita mo ang supply nila mas higit pa sa Bitcoin.

Bigyan kita ng isang example kung gaano ka in-accurate yung ganitong forumla.

Bitcoin's Price during the first halving (November 2012) - 12.22$
Circulating Supply - 210,000 BTC
FDMC - 256,620,000
Expected ATH - 1,222$
Actual ATH -61,000$

So very inaccurate ang ganitong formula palagay ko ito din ang ginagawang "formula" ng ibang mga project para lang i-hype ang kanilang mga cryptocurrency.