|
I still wouldn't be too positive.
Since Paypal dropped out, they will probably face significant competition from them as opposed to the former alliance that they seemed to agree upon. They'll also lack experience in the payment processing department as a result of that.
Of course, there are still certain corporations like Xapo, coinbase, etc. that do have experience in crypto, but I think this is targeting more mainstream customers as opposed to the crypto niche anyhow.
Regulations are very unclear right now, but I doubt they will be positive towards Libra.
|
|
|
|
Hey there... Over the last few months, crypto exchanges have been hacked, as I was researching for the best trading exchange i come across the binance exchange. On the other hand, I have seen that a lot of people are using the binance exchange. More importantly, I wanted to know how secure is binance exchange? Trust =/= security. Binance is very trusted, and they are known to provide quite good customer service and have a strong presence on social media. These are all why they are so popular. However, just because they can be trusted doesn't mean that security is necessarily a guarantee. We don't know exactly how they handle their cold storage (although I'd assume that they probably do a better job than some of the rest, since they haven't had any major hacks or security issues over the past few years of existence), nor how well they will uphold their standards in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Doge seems to move historically in quite predictable cycles.
I.e., a period of long consolidation, bottoming at around 18-24 sats, before rebounding drastically to form sizeable bullish rallies, probably fuelled by the fact that the coin is so speculative and generates a ton of FOMO on the way up.
I honestly don't even think that exchange listings are needed for Doge's cycles to continue, because it's an inherent part of its value now.
I'd say short term, I'd be certainly long on Doge. But in the long run, I doubt that it's going to be a useful coin per se other than being a speculative token essentially.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess this is the reason why LBC removed all gift card trades. It's simply too hard to judge whether or not the buyer or the seller is in the wrong, because it is difficult to be certain in whose possession the gift card was actually redeemed.
A lot of people see Paxful/LBC escrow as something that guarantees they won't get scammed, so they let off their guard. Freak incidents like these do happen. Accounts can be bought/sold so even reputation doesn't count for much.
I doubt this thread is gonig to do much apart from warn others of the same time of scam, because Paxful and bitcointalk are completely unrelated platforms. You could potentially contact google to see whether they are willing to give info as to who redeemed the card, and launch an investigation that way; but the chances of that is extremely slim.
|
|
|
|
“The first large democracy” to ban crypto
As the Economic Times notes, the draft Banning of Cryptocurrency and Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill 2019 has proposed a 10-year prison sentence for anyone who "mines, generates, holds, sells, transfers, disposes of, issues or deals in cryptocurrencies.”
Would it really be considered a democracy by anyone anymore if it does go through with its plans? I mean, what this is doing is nothing different to censorship. They are trying to censor something decentralised that they see as some sort of risk to their monetary system (which really, it isn't, as it has been shown time and time again that fiat and BTC can coexist in parallel). Their stance on crypto is already awful enough. Instead of trying to promote crypto adoption, they've essentially told banks to not accept any dealings with it whatsoever, wiping out the entire regulated crypto sector. It's draconian policymaking. |
|
|
|
I started thinking about developing something new like developing a Blockchain without (Block) in the future, and this is not really a blockchain, because there is no sequential chain connecting all the (Block). In fact, there are no (Block) at all, and transactions that occur on individual nodes do not need to be synchronized with the others.
on the other hand the way it works is quite unique because there is no need for miner rewards, and there are no transaction fees for end users. Transactions are confirmed through the (forward payment) process, where each new user confirms two previous transactions for their own transactions to be processed.
on the one hand Scalability will not be a problem, because the confirmation process of the two previous transactions can only be accelerated by an increased user base.
is there someone who wants to support me, for something new in the blokchain technology industry? It's not anything new. There are already DAG coins which allwelder mentioned, including IOTA as one of the largest. Unfortunately, it's not foolproof. The fact is that DAGs are much less reliable than blockchains still (I would challenge you to just try out IOTA's blockchain for a few days, see how many bugs and unfixed errors there are in terms of disappearing transactions, syncing issues, etc.), and can be significantly slower with less people using the network. I'm holding a bit of IOTA right now, but it's really something that's high risk, high reward. |
|
|
|
|
Why?
If I buy their product, I don't expect to have to pay for future costs in the form of their own utility token or whatnot - I expect to buy Ledger, use it, and not have to worry about ongoing costs.
And if it's not a utility token, why would there even be any demand for the coin in the first place?
A lot of these things have to be attributed to hype, due to what appears to be a company with an actual product (who doesn't like when a project has its own hardware, huh?). But what people don't realise is the fact that their tokens can be just as useless and intrinsically valueless as some of the vapourware, just not to the same extent.
|
|
|
|
And if a project is frugal enough, there are several absolutely *free* ERC20 token creation services on this forum alone. The fact that the barrier to entry to the ICO scene is so low explains why the quality of most tokens have drastically fallen after ERC20 tokens became the standard for ICOs. No longer do you even need to create your own blockchain, which was an easy task in itself. It also explains why airdrops are so popular from a dev's perspective. The cost of setting one up can be done under two digits USD, while if anyone actually buys into their token, they can easily make thousands of percent in ROI. |
|
|
|
|
Idax is definitely one.
They should be essentially be rendered a scam given the fact that there has been multiple accusations of them defrauding projects who want to list their tokens on their platform. They also charge absurd listing fees for the project itself, which means that even if somehow a project does raise funds, most of it will not be going to development.
But in general, you should avoid IEOs unless you can confirm the legitimacy of the project. People seem to blindly believe in them.
|
|
|
|
|
And what would make anyone believe in the fact that you are actually mining, and not just pulling another Ice Rock Mining which was a known scam from the get go that has turned into a fully fledged ponzi scheme?
I personally don't buy into the whole tokenising cloud mining thing, because if it was truly profitable, why would any company be willingly tokenising these stakes?
It makes no sense to me. Also, the counterparty risk with having a third party mining is simply too much for me. The claims are extravagant enough.
|
|
|
|
|
What was the point of investing in alts that don't have any sort of liquidity in the first place? That's my question to you. Good projects will have no trouble finding exchanges, and investors will put up liquidity in the orderbooks with absolutely no trouble. Only crappy projects with absolutely no substance will have trouble finding this.
Just don't do it in the first place. Prevention is better than a cure.
I suggest that you also try to sell them in the marketplace section of the altcoin forum on bitcointalk. There are P2P traders looking for these coins without liquidity once in a while.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds good on paper but honestly, technology is not what speculators look for.
Speculators look for potential value, which doesn't necessarily mean that something has the best technology. Rather, it means that they are looking for hype, looking for reasons that a project should be hyped - which can be contributed to via the underlying technology, but isn't always.
That's just a pragmatic way of thinking about altcoin markets, or even equity markets in general. Your way is purely ideological, unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
There certainly is, which is why I'm personally kind of baffled by the amount of bearish sentiment that there is within the market. There has been numerous improvements in a lot of blockchains with developments such as LN, and ETH 2.0 that apparently will bring scalability. Yet people seem not to be focused on these fundamental developments.
There should only be a matter of time before markets pick up these signals, though.
This is why short term movements doesn't necessarily reflect what the long term potential of something is, to put it simply.
|
|
|
|
The UN is opening the door to crypto donations in bitcoin and ethereum and have announced plans allow a person to donate crypto to specific projects they run, in the future. Whether it be providing school supplies for needy children in third world countries. Or developing biometric identification for people in africa. They plan to allow transparency and choice in terms of specifically where individual donations go. Crypto funds will also be used to fund startups associated with blockchain/technology.
These ideas are not new. There have been other crypto ventures which structured their goals along these lines.
Its not the type of futuristic development one would normally expect from the UN, however. I'm positively surprised, actually. And thanks for making this post so easy to read with the bolded parts, it's much better than having to churn through lines of text. However, while I personally think that this is a positive development and a statement to the status that BTC now has in terms of being a global reserve currency (it's not there yet to the point that central banks and governments would see it as a hedge against forex movements, but it could be there soon), accepting donations in BTC in itself doesn't necessarily mean much. If the UN can use the crypto that they receive in donations directly onto its projects, without converting it into fiat, or even using the funds to help the unbanked in third world countries with a new initiative, then THAT would be truly awesome. |
|
|
|
I know that we are just speculating here but market sentiment can be a big factor for the movement of the price of any commodity or currency. Are you of the same argument or do you see that Bitcoin will instead go south and be trading below the $7,000 within the coming week? Is Bitcoin now ready to take over the $10,000 price range? I doubt it given how much resistance that level saw the last time it was tested. Furthermore, we don't even know for certain whether or not the 8k support will hold at this point. Even though we did see sizeable rebounds each time BTC tested this level, this was exactly the same scenario with $10k, which eventually crumbled. I'd refrain from making any bullish predictions in the short term even though I'm still holding my longs on BTC in the long run, simply because how sentiment in the short run can affect the entire market's performance. |
|
|
|
|
I find it hard to imagine how this is going to work.
There is going to be a joint project involving 30 odd companies and somehow they have to keep the peg of this stablecoin perfectly to USD - all without a central party? It doesn't make any sense. There has to be some sort of central point here or there that is not mentioned.
It doesn't sound that intriguing, tbh. It might even be that they're just using Libra's name to create another reincarnation of the same old stablecoin.
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of reasons to believe that the value of our fiat money is losing its real value. We have inflation eating into the worth of goods and services that our money can buy and although this can be controlled to a certain degree this can never be stopped nor eliminated from any economic system. Another major problem is the tendency of many central banks to just print more paper money (termed as quantitative easing which is nice to ears) and circulate them to the economy. Coupled with a high degree of economic and political uncertainties as well as lack of trust for the government, we can in an era uncharted and which repercussions can be felt in the coming years. Actually in recent months, inflation has been fairly low which is why the Fed is contemplating further rate cuts on top of what is already 2 rate cuts. Other world central banks are also pursuing easings of their monetary policy. So it would be unfair to say that fiat is losing purchasing power right now, in the short term. But in the long run, fiat doesn't have what BTC or gold has, which is a natural hard cap on the circulating supply, which is what should be concerning to asset holders. Not necessarily the short term depreciation, which doesn't always exist unless the currency is grossly mismanaged like in Venezuela or Zimbabwe, earlier on. |
|
|
|
Something weird is going on now with the bank accounts. I just read a thread here regarding India's bank accounts being wiped ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191378.0) and it reminded me of an article I read only a few days ago regarding the Turkish bank accounts being frozen up. This doesn't look like a coincidence to me, and what's scarier is the amount of events worldwide we're waiting to happen, the biggest ones being Brexit and the American elections getting closer. We're confronting many economical events and that could bring down the system. It's good for those who've prepared, but it's gonna be a pain for whoever isn't ready for it. Sounds like a familiar throwback to the 2008 global financial crisis doesn't it. Central banks around the world are lowering rates because they forecast below average growth rates in general and low inflation, which is not always a good thing given the fact that it can directly feed into a recession. What should be a neutral policy rate in Australia would be around 3%, but instead the rate is at 0.75%. I'd suggest having both a reserve in precious metals and in BTC. If a crash happens, you have both of them and I can assure anybody the price of silver and gold would rise substantially in case of one. In fact, it's not the price of the precious metals rising but the fiat currencies being slowly devalued by the crisis. Certainly, especially when considering the fact that both precious metals and BTC are currently undervalued in my opinion. The fact that both of these asset classes have no affiliation with the fiat economy will help it retain value in times of crisis. |
|
|
|
|
Even if it didn't have a fake team or stolen content, it's certainly not a project that you would want to invest in.
There has been a long line of sh*tcoins which use specific regions in their name to target investors, like Swisscoin, Dubaicoin, etc.
They all have the same algorithm and provide no utility to anyone. All they do is that they say they will provide a way for people to transact in a decentralised way in that specific region - but doesn't BTC do the same thing?
|
|
|
|
My question is this: what if we just crash the prices by increasing production, and ensuring other manufacturing sectors are running to balance human needs in the world? Although this is different from currency.
What incentive would anyone have to increase production, when they know that demand is inelastic? All of these competitors that are producing the same good/service are essentially colluding in a legal way to artificially surpress supply, and that is for a reason. They are not just going to give this up for the greater good of the world, unfortunately. You simply can't increase production unless someone with vested interest in keeping prices high decides to do so, and that's obviously never going to happen. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
