Wandering what that website was doing?
1) Selling fake Trezor modified with malware or something to steal coins?
or
2) Just collecting the payment and not delivering?
Likely the second. The capital required to develop a large scale clone of any hardware wallet is so substantial that most scammers will be unwilling or unable to put in this initial investment. It's much easier to build a phishing site from ground up and market an already existing product on it. Either way, it's a scam. So that's that. People should be extremely careful with these phishing sites, especially in terms of hardware. |
|
|
|
I’m a little surprised that people seem to be panicking about the recent Bitcoin price drop to $7000. I guess I’ve watched Bitcoin for so long (since 2012) that the volatility doesn’t phase me.
What we need to remember is that just a few months ago the price was a little over $3000 so it’s doing fine. That spike to $14,000 was way overpriced.
It doesn’t really matter to me if people panic because it gives me an opportunity to buy more Bitcoin at a cheap price. And I still am very confident that the price will hit $20,000 sometime mid next year and probably quite a bit higher by the end of the year.
Well said. People forget about the bear market completely way too easily, and it doesn't make much logical sense for people to all of a sudden hit the panic button. BTC's fundamentals have only changed for the better, and this flash crash is due to some news that was already known to the market long ago - that China wasn't going to be supportive in their stance with decentralised cryptos. I'm seriously struggling to comprehend why markets first overreacted so much to China's endorsement of cryptos (it's obvious that they're doing it to support their own project), and now the pledge to ban all exchanges, which has been said time and time again. |
|
|
|
|
Nice finds.
I've seen too many instances where a person complains on forum that they've been scammed by a well known mixer, when in fact they've been dealing with a phishing site all along. That is one of the most disheartening things to see imo, something that can be so easily prevented.
Anyhow, this is a clear phishing site. Logo and everything is cloned. Another reason why you shouldn't go clicking on google ad results.
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone, in general, such a story I can’t verify for more than 2 months on the localbitcoin service, and they don’t want to send me my bitcoins. Who is verified on this site, someone also had such problems? I would be very grateful if you tell me about localbitcoins and how those support are ignored
Why does LBC owe you any bitcoins? They are an escrow service, essentially, and they usually do not pay anyone directly unless you've worked for them and I don't think that you have. So it's weird that you claim they need to send you BTC as compensation for something. They have indeed upped their KYC restrictions in recent months following regulatory tightenings, but apart from that, they are still a legitimate platform that I use on a weekly basis without issues. It's likely that there is something actually wrong with your verification IDs. |
|
|
|
|
It's funny, because everyone seemed to rejoice when China came out earlier to endorse crypto, and the markets reacted very strongly by rebounding from the $7k lows up to nearly $10k again where the resistance again proved to be too strong.
China's stance on crypto isn't likely to change - it's likely to continue to be restrictive, whether it is towards crypto based businesses, or exchanges.
This is a classic panic dump. I do expect further losses in the near term future, but it shouldn't be anything major that would cripple the entire market.
|
|
|
|
There are no price predictions here it's just something I've been thinking on a lot in the last month or so. During the last price run-up, countless predictors and TA personalities were saying this over and over. Once we close over 10K you'll never see a 4 digit BTC again. Well here we are 2 months later and we are below 8k. This just shows that a chart tells you what you really want to see. They all obviously saw the other side of the trend and would mention the chance, but went with what they were biased towards. Some of these folks are perma-bulls, some constantly bearish. Overall they see an upward trend in the long term but rarely see eye to eye on the short term. There is a reason people get wrecked trading or pull massive gains, there is no way to know for sure what is going to happen. The only thing through all of this that makes sense, is the dollar cost averaging strategy. When you go to buy into a speculative market, best not to jump all in at once. Especially if you aren't sure you can hold out for the long term. I can't find it at the moment but about a while ago I saw a chart showing that you would be profitable even if you started buying in at the ATH, if you had continued to DCA, throughout 2018 into 2019. Here is a different article I just found though that covers the same idea. https://www.bitcoinforbeginners.io/cryptocurrency-guide/dollar-cost-averaging-investment-strategy-bitcoin/Absolutely. This is why I think that TA doesn't work unless you are sure that the operator is someone completely unbiased - TA can be manipulated in some many ways to pass off opinions as evidence based facts. Dollar cost averaging is especially useful in this type of market, where prices are constantly going down, but you don't know when the downtrend is going to necessarily end. You essentially hedge yourself both ways - limited downside risk without giving up much upside. Perfect if you are a long term holder. |
|
|
|
|
I certainly side with you on this. I believe that cryptos should be made available worldwide to everyone - and not have artificial restrictions placed upon it that can detrimentally affect the accessibility that people have to cryptos.
However, it is extremely unlikely that a petition alone would change an entire central bank or government's stance on crypto.
They have much bigger agendas in terms of their bans and restrictions than satisfying the wants of the crypto community, which is unfortunate, but true.
|
|
|
|
|
After so many rejections, why do people expect any different?
There has not been any major fundamental changes to the way that these ETFs are going to be looked at or presented to the SEC. So why do people keep thinking that the SEC's attitude towards these ETFs are going to change time and time again?
This kind of reminds me of the quote from somewhere that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results - the same can be applied here.
|
|
|
|
|
Lmfao.
Peter Schiff has been exposed long ago for being a completely irrational gold bug. I'm not sure why anyone would still take him seriously when he has not acknowledged decentralised cryptos as a viable means of storing value (or any other asset, for that matter), outside of gold.
He has vested interest in saying good things about gold, so it's not surprising that he's clearly biased. Just don't fall into the trap.
|
|
|
|
0.5% for transactions below $ 10,000 is a high fee when compared to other exchanges. Coinbase pro is a good exchange but it is not suitable for traders who trade with high frequency.
Your quote is literally self contradictory. The whole idea of coinbase pro is probably to encourage professional traders to trade with high volume, and based on that they'll get discounts on trading fees. But I think that their execution is way off, because discouraging small time traders to trade on their platform altogether is NOT the way to go. You want all traders, big or small, especially when you consider the f act that big traders will likely want to try out your platform at first with a small chunk of change as opposed to using your platform full time. What kind of image would it create if they see a 0.5% fee? Besides, the fee structure doesn't even get that much better compared to their competitors for even high 5-digit and low 6-digit trading volumes. It's only for the 0.1% elite that it's even worthwhile to use coinbase pro. |
|
|
|
|
It sucks to be one of these investors, doesn't it?
That's why to avoid getting ripped off you ALWAYS have to do your due diligence. Just because a token has reached their hard cap, or has a seemingly professional looking site means absolutely nothing in regards to what they are actually going to do after they receive the funding that they are initially seeking.
As others have stated, ICOs are unregulated and there is no oversight the majority of the time. So legal recourse is slim, which means that you should be even more careful.
|
|
|
|
Holla friends, I want ask opinion and advice regarding the situations of altcoins and BTC today
You know , today market are show bad price for all coin and token.
Is th eright time for make some profit with buying altcoins ?
Don't jump in simply because you see a sea of red. Sometimes going against the trend will not pay off handsomely like it would in other situations, simply because of the fact that you don't know where the bottom is. And right now, I'm not sure whether or not we've bottomed yet. BTC certainly doesn't seem to have bottomed out yet, with the $7k support likely going to be tested soon and I don't expect it to hold up - which could ripple onto the rest of the crypto market in terms of impact. I'd wait it out to closer to next year where I think markets will likely find support at a lower level after a series of projected corrections, and will have more bullish prospects with the halving. |
|
|
|
There seems to be a lot accounts setup at blockchain.com and blockchain.info with the passwords lost.
What happens with the bitcoin after a few years, does their support siphon the coins?
I mean they have the wallet IDs and wallet backups in JSON format together with email addresses, but if a person loses the mail associated with the wallet then BOOM, your coins are gone. A friend of mine has been trying to recover a long lost password since 2013, a big chunk of coins, but since his mail provider went out of business he has no way to request a backup wallet.
Anyone in similar position?
Can you even request a wallet backup via mail? I'm fairly sure that you aren't able to do that. Blockchain.com insists that they don't have any role in keeping private keys, so if they were to be sending out wallet backup files via mail, wouldn't that be essentially holding private keys for the user? That's quite self contradictory imo. Anyways, afaik support will not take your case and the only hope your friend has will likely be brute-forcing or somehow using existing clues to try and guess the password. At least he has the wallet-id. |
|
|
|
Behold good trading volume doesn't mean a coin or token is good, i read in a thread where few people are saying if a coin has no volume means its a bad coin, well here we go, bad coins can have huuuge volume, you must have heard of bomb token? bomb token has good trading volume but guess what? it has no real use case, the volume comes from HYPE because its a deflationary tokens, people believed that the more a max supply of a token get decreased or burned off over time means they are GOLD tokens, it does bring profits to early adopters like they say but NO REAL USE CASES.
It depends. Greater liquidity generally is directly correlated to a better project, because projects that have a low liquidity on exchanges usually aren't very highly demanded to begin with. All of the major projects which have real development will have significant volume traded. The only big coin that I can think of that goes against this trend would be IOTA, which has less volume because its difficult infrustructure that means that it's listed on less exchanges. But every other coin, you should definitely look at volume and liquidity, because that directly affects the viability of your investment. |
|
|
|
|
Absolutely. Scam ICOs are a plague of the crypto space and should be regulated as such.
However, it is not always possible to enforce the rules 100%, because of the fact that the real life identities of developers are rarely known for certain for scam projects anyways. They manipulate and photoshop team member pictures to appear realistic, but they aren't representative of the actual scammers behind the project.
As a result, enforceability is spotty at best. You can't really ask for much more.
|
|
|
|
The title says it all basically. The DEX competition is HUGE, so many projects seems to be competing in this field. The first DEX on the market was Blocknet, pretty decent DEX, but there are so many out there. What do you guys think?  Binance will likely be able to generate liquidity most consistently, and that's the biggest issue that any DEX needs to tackle first - liquiditiy. Other projects like Komodo that have had a history I'm also long on, but not as much as I'm long on BNB. The smaller projects you can just disregard unless they're actually something special, because of the fact that DEXs needs exposure to succeed. That's not even saying for certain that DEXs will somehow be able to replace centralised exchanges over the next few years alone - they probably won't. |
|
|
|
|
Deflationary coins seems to be based on the fact that over the short term, people will be inclined to purchase the tokens with the expectation that in the very near future the supply will be reduced enough for them to turn a profit.
The emphasis here is not development, but rather pure speculation.
So there is no surprise that most of them have failed thus far. I think a far better model would still be the disinflationary model, which BTC operates under.
|
|
|
|
|
I actually think the opposite - afterpay and other credit based financing systems seems to be the way to go.
These are essentially replacements for credit cards, which can have high interest rates and have negative connotations attached to them. Afterpay and other companies essentially take the same idea, except putting it into a more modern paradigm.
Prepayments are going to continue be the push of retail stores, through the form of gift cards or whatnot. But it's hard to envision a massive blowup in volume, especially when there's not much innovation going on in terms of incentivising users to prepay.
|
|
|
|
Just between security token and utility token, which token do you guys prefer? I am actually on the side of utility token because there is a clear demand over there, which means assuming its supply stay constant, the price of that utility token will theoretically rise as demand increases.
I just can't see how security token is going to change the industry in any way.
What do you guy think?
Actually, the lines between the two tokens are very blurred and how they are classified are basically based on the sole decision of the SEC or any other securities regulators. In terms of investment, I actually think that security tokens, given that the projects they represent a stake in are legitimate, will be better long term investments. This is because you're essentially holding equity in a company when you hold a security token, and that will translate into a much better return than utility tokens, which derives from the demand from the product in the long run. |
|
|
|
|
GPT sites are completly garbage.
Their primary audience is supposed to be unskilled, unemployed users who have too much time on their hands, from countries with low minimum wages and/or high inflation. If you don't fit in this category then I really don't think that you should be doing them.
Faucets are the same thing. Unless you are looking to get started with a coin and want to test out their blockchain, you should not be looking at faucets as a way to earn money.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
