Phishing is very common still with BTC related websites. Thanks for pointing it out op...

Overzealous prosecutors are looking to make a name for themselves sometimes. That guy could have gotten away with a slap of the wrist even if what he did was illegal. The thing is, if you scrutinize it too much, the maximum sentence looks more likely all of a sudden.

If crypto couldn't be supported by the technology people had access to, then we would also have other problems. Crypto currency depends on basic technologies to sustain itself. It doesn't need the best computers or the best miners. It was designed to work with CPUs and hard drives of home users. Later phones, etc.

Well, referral is much more than just posting a link. To earn form referral links you'd have somebody to visit and take a series of actions. While ranking a page just by posting a link is very much more indirect. For both reasons though, I have suggested to remove the privilege of posting links form new users.

I'd say that in this context, tools are the best utility the community could have to assist in policing DT and activity like "back scratching" by making easier to hunt for anomalies. I'm just wondering, since you say it's time consuming, is the access to trust activity developers can have to build their tools sufficient? And how resource intensive would be a tool that could make matters easier for such abuses in DT?

To be honest, I don't see ETH doing that well lately. It had a big rally but that only acts as more resistance. Lately, when BTC price goes down a little, ETH traders seem to be much more bearish, exaggerating all negative moves with a greater margin. To me, this is a very bad sign. Maybe not 70$ in the immediate future, but we could see much lower prices than the ones in current levels not long from now.

It's uncertain to me if BTCtalk has a clear policy on the issue. It seems like it's one of those things that would be under each mod's discretion, no? On some boards maybe moderators would tolerate a referral link if it was disclosed and the user actually offers valuable content aside of it. But if it's posted by someone that does nothing else other than posting referral links, I think that the rule should definitely not allow such behavior no matter how relaxed interpretation would be otherwise.

Props to Loyce for discovering things like this... The trust system has a few weaknesses and I guess 'back scratching' could be considered one. DT members, and especially on DT1, should be heavily scrutinized by the community for such things not to be so easy to pull off.

In my experience, of the cloud services from industry heads (Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Oracle), Google is perhaps the most reliable. But not the most affordable for sure. Also, to get familiar with any cloud platform, there's a very brand specific learning curve. I think the plain-old linux VPS hosting is the best. Pre-optimized VPNs are always more affordable too in comparison to setting up a machine in a cloud service too.

What's been happening with the FED lately is that they have taken over the repo market. It's odd to see that they would have to rush to fill the need for overnight liquidity for banks. It's for their own rules that banks had to have this liquidity, and now the free market can't provide it at an affordable rate? It's not exactly printing of money of the FED issues some bonds or buybacks to provide liquidity, but this all hints to an unsustainable system that is only a few steps  behind a global crisis again. Such is fractional reserve banking.

A status page would be good IMO because currently there aren't any official channels to know if the forum is facing issues other that bitcointalk itself. There is a twitter account but it's very sparsely updated. It wouldn't matter if it's manually updated, so long as it's accessible and functional when other components of the site aren't.

It can also have some functions updated programmatically that would turn red if for example the DNS was unaccesible, or clouldflare was slow etc...

Regulation can't stop businesses from moving in territories it doesn't apply to. It also can't stop residents where it applies to to stop using those online businesses. Online blocks are so easily circumvented. All bad regulation will do is drive businesses and revenues away... If those websites wanted to continue operations they could. perhaps they will. maybe it's a legal requirement to rebrand.

I would say none, at least none unless BTC also does. Currency bitcoin seems very bearish and it'd be almost impossible for any cryptocurrency to break above a bearish sentiment over bitcoin, especially provided that crypto market movements are so highly correlated.

I'm not in support of this. Dormant accounts already got screwed over by the merit update, now having to put in much more work in order to rank up even if they had the potential activity. Also, the removal of already acquired merit wouldn't do much in that regard. We're not talking about enable merit, but rather total merit. You can't remove more than the already earner rank, and I think it'd be unfair to remove base metrit based on the future activity. The merit drop's criteria where applied when it took place, no need to go back at it with new criteria.

I highly doubt it that BTC would go on such a bull run, but perhaps a small increase in price could be feasible. However, there's still quite a bit of resistance.

I believe there isn't sufficient support at the moment and there are quite a few market forces that would rush to take in profits if prices rose any higher. The levels reached not so long ago probably pose as heavy resistance given that many newcomers might have had that as their introduction to BTC and could currenty be in the red.

TBH, I'm sure regulation is going to show weaknesses of stablecoins. With no institutional clearing house to support large volumes, they'd collapse or at least would not be able to serve the number of people the do today. Regulators could bring any stablecoin to its knees if they so desired. If it's backed in FIAT, it's just as sizeable, no matter how tokenized.

It must be a false positive. I know Paste.ee. It is one of the more reliable and also convenient alternatives to pastebin and I've been using it for years. Its owner isn't after profit, and the site even allows direct linking to raw text files uploaded (replace /p/ with /r/). Sadly some bad actors must have been abusing the service. Virus protection software tend to flank hosts along with actual malware websites and this must be one of such cases. Anyone could upload bad stuff to a paste site. That doesn't mean the site itself is bad, or that ralle14 would be a bad actor either for example.

Anyway, long story short, known website, IMHO it's safe.

There are numerous things Trump did and are commendable in my own personal view, but his way of addressing Greta has been very undiplomatic for a head of state no matter how you look at it. I get that America has a lot to lose from slowing down its industry for environmental purposes and it makes good sense to stall more even if the entire world calls for measure to protect the planet. And maybe even Trump truly, deep down from the depths of his heart, honestly doesn't believe in climate change and global warming. But I think it'd be safe to say that calling a girl names isn't the way to go. And that's without any exaggeration. In my view, his stance would deserve to be scrutinized even more.

If his goal is dismissal at least remain silent IMO. It'd help save face.

It's one thing to utilize cheap production for everyday use products via international trade and another to invest in tokens... Guess which one is more tangible.

Maybe multiple accounts isn't against the rules but to be honest, creating accounts automatically and attempting to pass their post as normal usage is very clear abuse. The forum should be very clear in auto banning and nuking such accounts if it's clear that they are automatically created.

And also, from the moment even one of the accounts created by the same person is banned, all others are considered to be evading the ban and are therefore breaking the rules.