With Dutyfree.io looking more like a scan site (yes they have $250 in BTC from me). Looking back at threads sites listed are either gone, no longer listed or scams.
Anyone have any REAL sites that will ship cheap ciggys to the US?
check out CigsSpot: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1353827.0they've had a presence on bitcointalk for a few years and have a good reputation. they offer a pretty wide variety of brands, $45-50 per carton, free worldwide shipping. i'm not sure if this code still works but you may be able to get a discount as well: We are offering 10% disscount for customers who wil pay with Bitcoin!
Just type "BTC" at checkout to get it!
|
|
|
|
So if/when someone will approach (and convince...) SWIFT and hence will be able to monitor wires if need => then we could have a great DEX with FIAT support. depending on SWIFT or SEPA or fedwire is totally centralized though. first, we would need to trust them to make wire transfer receipts transparent and accessible through an API of sorts. then we would need to depend on third party services to monitor the API and execute smart contracts. i dunno what this would be called, but certainly not a DEX. |
|
|
|
@posi. I did not say a promising result is certain not to occur. I am only saying to prepare for disappointment because it might also occur similar to litecoin's halving.
litecoin's halving pump was amazing. you think a 550% pump isn't gonna cause a severe correction afterwards?  with the BTC market so bearish for the last half year, the timing is lining up perfectly for a pre-halving pump and dump---just like we saw before the 2012 and 2016 halvings. the bearish sentiment is taking its toll---people are starting to question the halving narrative. this is a good thing from a contrarian investor point of view. |
|
|
|
I'd lean more towards the opposite.
Fiat can be painfully slow to move in many parts of the world so it's likely you'll let it sit there if you plan to buy back in the near future. If there's a sudden price movement you have zero chance of getting to it unless you already have fiat parked there. It can take several days in third world countries like the US. this reminds me of the shadow banking scandal chinese exchanges were embroiled in 2 years ago. the two biggest exchanges took 1 billion chinese yuan in customer deposits and invested the money in high-yield investments. https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6vadb8/chinas_two_biggest_bitcoin_exchanges_huobi_and/bakkt and similar instruments could lead to behavior like the OP is talking about though. most physically deliverable instruments on wall street are settled in cash or rolled over, so most of the coins will probably sit in bakkt's vaults. so they'll start commingling and rehypothecating BTC collateral to make extra money. that will essentially increase supply since they'll be pledging out more BTC than they have in their vaults. https://www.forbes.com/sites/caitlinlong/2018/08/13/the-r-and-c-words-enter-the-vocabulary-of-bitcoin-enthusiasts/ |
|
|
|
So each Bitcoin in the Eco-system today isn't equal. Some Bitcoins were used in a crime , and if they were , they can be worth less because of the transactions that have been facilitated with that specific Bitcoin. And if there was a crime that happened 20 transactions ago , and you now have that specific Bitcoin , can you be indicted for a crime that someone else has committed but you are holding the Bitcoin that is associated with it?
If this is the case , how can we consider at this point , BTC as a store of value? fungibility is an issue for all forms of money, not just BTC. if you buy forged/discounted black market gold, it needs to be melted down and re-stamped before passing as legitimate. if you receive marked, serialized bills in a ransom operation or bank robbery, they can't be deposited at banks or easily spent. on-chain tumbling can be effective at obfuscating the source of funds and making outputs fungible again. however it's important to note that mixers and coinjoins can be retrospectively broken as new privacy vulnerabilities are discovered. |
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure my country is excluded from their list of places they provide their services to. And I was never a huge fan of Poloniex anyway, though they did have one or two altcoins available that I couldn't find anywhere else--but I'm not accumulating any of those garbage-y altcoins anymore, so no worries.
OTOH, this is kind of a good thing for people who can use them. I'm figuring that KYC-less exchanges are going to become a thing of the past eventually, so this almost feels like a throwback.
they prohibit USA users, but if all you need to sign up is an email address, using a VPN is an option. poloniex supposedly limited VPN usage per a report from the new york AG, but that's when they were owned by circle and run from the USA. i'm guessing it's not an issue now. this could be a well-timed strategic move with the AMLD5 coming into effect next month. i'm especially curious about binance given their registration in malta. if binance goes full KYC, this will be a real game changer. |
|
|
|
Actually the problem isn't just with KYC. Someone try to bulk amount bitcoin through his card, he tried Coinabse and Bitcoin dot com. Even that guy verify KYC but there is fucking limits and so many drama. Then I suggest for Binance, he verified everything there and try to buy bitcoin. They were locked account even for 200$, they ask again to submit passport. So account has been unlocked after submit passport again. That's the reason that guy worry because he need huge (likely 10BTC] amount bitcoin. He don't like so many drama even after verify KYC. He like straight way.
To be honest I were also not aware that buy bitcoin with credit card is too much complicated. credit card fraud is rampant. exchanges prevent it with invasive KYC verification and very high fees---not only upfront fees like 3.5% at binance and 5% at bitstamp (+ cash advance fees from the card issuer) but also hidden fees in the form of a price spread.i would say he should avoid using credit cards at all. at those volumes, he is gonna deal with lots of headaches for trying. if he's gonna use a centralized exchange anyway, it's much more convenient to use SEPA, bank wire, ACH. he'll get way more bitcoins for his money without those fees too. |
|
|
|
Has anyone collated info on shitcoin halvings for those coins that have it? Does it have any type of notable effect?
I assume demand and volume swings that much more violently than BTC that those factors overwhelm it.
i've only looked into LTC. the last two times, it had major pumps---against both BTC and USD---leading into the halving. from may-july 2015 and january-april 2019 it strongly outperformed BTC and the rest of the altcoin market. i think that says something about the halving effect. LTC is one of the most liquid altcoins though. low cap coins may not behave the same way. |
|
|
|
I have wondered exactly opposite of this.
Can we estimate how many bitcoins are lost..? I think it will be more than the top holder of Bitcoin.
in late 2017, chainalysis estimated that somewhere between 2.78 million and 3.79 million BTC are lost forever. https://fortune.com/2017/11/25/lost-bitcoins/it's been 2 years since then, so it's probably safe to say the number is moderately higher now. 20% of the supply (~3.5-4 million BTC) is probably a reasonable estimate based on the studies i've seen. |
|
|
|
I simply don't get how can you use a DEX for FIAT<>Bitcoin? I mean there are no visible smart contract on the FIAT side. it technically can't be done. that is, the process cannot be made fully decentralized and trustless. outside of face-to-face cash transactions, fiat always entails third party custody. you can distribute that third party custody beyond a single point of failure, but you cannot fully remove the need for third party custody and trust. bisq.network is a good example. it's a huge improvement over centralized exchanges in that it uses a DAO to handle escrow/arbitration/voting. but at the end of the day, this is a pretty accurate description:it never has custody of your funds It does. There is a security deposit and escrow. It might be temporarily owned/held by more than one individual, with a complex way of keeping it away from any one person or company, but the money isn't just peer-to-peer. There is a central system that it has to go through and be held by. |
|
|
|
According to this article, it seems that Satoshi holds the most bitcoins, between 600,000 and 1,600,000 BTC.
The following are the Winklevoss brothers, with 91,666 bitcoin.
Next is Barry Silbert with 48,000 BTC.
Next in order are Tim Draper with $250,000 worth of BTC and Michael Novogratz with his crypto net worth to be around $700 million – $1 billion.
Do you agree with this assessment from the article or do you have more credible and accurate information?
who holds the most, or who owns the most? it makes a difference. coinbase probably holds the most (on behalf of its customers), with nearly 1 million bitcoins in its cold storage wallets. https://beincrypto.com/coinbase-holds-a-whopping-966230-bitcoin-7b-in-cold-wallet/if the upper estimates for satoshi's coins are correct, then he rules both categories. i'm skeptical that satoshi really mined a million coins though. |
|
|
|
This sim swapping hack is seriously horrible, nearly all services use sim ID for verification, it’s just a matter of time the entire banking to be plagued with sim swapping hacks too, any counter measure would be futile.
i can understand why exchanges might want to verify phone number as an ID verification method, especially if they don't require actual KYC documentation. i just wish they more actively discouraged it as a 2FA method. i suppose they are in a tough position. if they discourage SMS 2FA in favor of TOTP or UTF, some customers will get superior security but some will opt for no 2FA at all due to the inconvenience. people are very used to the idea of SMS verification because lots of internet services and banking platforms use it. |
|
|
|
Right, I too think that the market will continue do be bearish,
Is it really bearish? I don't know why so many people still think we're going to go lower than 5000. because the market has already dropped 54% from the highs and people are worried the carnage will continue. there's no measure by which the downtrend has been broken yet. as they say, the trend is your friend, until it ends. |
|
|
|
The new regulation is much stricter than the previous one, and the current view is that any crypto transaction will need to identify itself with the actual user. By this, I mean that some limits that were directed to buying/selling up to a certain amount will no longer be anonymous. It's not just about mining, but everything that is related to cryptocurrency, and that includes even faucets. Main micro wallet FaucetHub has ceased operations, and some new players are also in trouble and require verification of their users so they can continue to use the faucets. does this apply only to EU-based operations? or also to offshore companies that serve EU customers? i've seen surprisingly little discussion about the exact consequences this will have for the industry. i've just seen that a few EU-based companies are shutting down and deribit (the netherlands) are implementing KYC. i'm hoping exchanges like binance, bitmex, kucoin, etc will hold the line and stay KYC-free. binance is based in malta so i'm wondering if they'll jump jurisdictions soon as they have so many times before. |
|
|
|
Pathetic attempt at FUD/trolling from a bought account. It's not even an argument, just a stupid strawman argument that Bitcoin is "just ones and zeroes" and that it's being manipulated without any real proofs. You are just hoping that people will panic because the price is going down, and they will listen to any stupid argument because of their emotions.
the silver lining: this is what bottoms look like. bear trolls abound, FUD and crash predictions everywhere...... this is textbook stuff. the bears are celebrating because there's blood in the streets. what's the old saying about that?  "Buy when there's blood in the streets." -Baron Rothschild |
|
|
|
wasabi wallet's obviousness has bitten at least one user. his withdrawals from binance singapore were suspended pending a KYC questionnaire after analysis revealed withdrawals to wasabi from his account. https://twitter.com/bittlecat/status/1207621591820951552CZ responded and seems to be implying this is specific to the singapore operation. https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1207825158783696896Binance SG operates under the requirements set forth by MAS and our MAS regulated partner, Xfers. Hence there are AML CFT controls set in place.
Not something for us to decide. either way, i would use something better than wasabi wallet to mix your coins.  If the "something better" requires third party trust, I would suggest, be fair and inform newbies that they have a choice with a trust-minimized option. The choice is theirs. i already did that upthread. sadly, just as with the DEX vs CEX question, the decentralized options are severely lacking. the above case is a real world example of why we need to be smarter about decentralized tumbling. wasabi needs to up their game and make their coinjoins less obvious. we need randomized or user-set ranges for anonymity sets, otherwise this shit will keep happening. |
|
|
|
one drawback of wasabi wallet is that it's blatantly obvious you are using a coinjoin because it enforces a 100-anonymity set. another is the ~0.1BTC minimum. it's definitely cheaper than swapping to monero though.
wasabi wallet's obviousness has bitten at least one user. his withdrawals from binance singapore were suspended pending a KYC questionnaire after analysis revealed withdrawals to wasabi from his account. https://twitter.com/bittlecat/status/1207621591820951552CZ responded and seems to be implying this is specific to the singapore operation. https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1207825158783696896Binance SG operates under the requirements set forth by MAS and our MAS regulated partner, Xfers. Hence there are AML CFT controls set in place.
Not something for us to decide. either way, i would use something better than wasabi wallet to mix your coins. |
|
|
|
we need to officially break this 6-month downtrend before it's safe to margin long IMO. the downtrend line is ~$9k, and to form a weekly higher high we need to break $10350 (bitstamp).
good luck though. i respect your courage and i hope you're right. the trade is just too risky for my taste, especially considering your own TA is pointing to the $4000s.
I agree with your idea but personally I would feel safer to buy now than in a strong bullrun with possible market overload as happened to me in the past, I am trying to buy as low as possible for this reason and not for greed with desire to earn as much as possible. i'm not saying to wait until the actual blow-off top (like last june) before leveraging long. i'm just saying that it's very risky to leverage long into a downtrend. i only long strong uptrends and short strong downtrends. everything else is for spot trading, where i can ride out choppy range markets and drawdowns without risking too much capital. $5k-$8k seems like a smart accumulation zone for spot BTC---and i am putting my fiat money back into the market at these levels. leverage is a whole different animal though. to each his own. different strokes for different folks..... |
|
|
|
Just for the record though, this is the official product: https://www.erisx.com/product/futures/We can't really say that it is not popular, Bakkt started slow as well, but the last time I checked they've reach record volumes. Besides there's more hype on Bakkt than ErisX physical bitcoin future contracts offering. But we will have to see what will be the impact on the market. bakkt was a big deal because it's operated by the ICE, one of the biggest and most trusted exchanges on wall street. erisX is a new startup launched just last year. like ledgerX---who was the first to bring CFTC-regulated physically settled bitcoin derivatives to market---they could be seen as "the little guy". i'm not sure what to expect from them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
