|
It's an obvious ponzi scheme for sure.
Their site does look somewhat legit at first glance, but once you look at how their floating interest rate program is offering ~1% per day returns you should know instantly if you had any sort of experience with crypto at all.
A red tag should be warranted for these participants at least until they remove their signatures for Hodium, in my opinion. Then, if their behaviour is good, that red tag could be changed to neutral in the future. But for now, there needs to be a warning for the community.
|
|
|
|
|
It's easy as to photoshop a stock image of a random person, and put it on a site as if this is your team.
And we've seen a ton of instances where unscrupulous teams who know that they have no qualifications whatsoever put on these stock images onto their team page go bust. Just because there is a team doesn't necessarily mean that the project is somehow more legit.
And even if the photos are not photoshopped, what extra do you gain by having a team that you have never heard of or met in your life? Does it add to your legal recourse? No.
|
|
|
|
|
It again seems like that $8.3k will somehow hold which seems to have propelled the latest rally.
Alts are somewhat picking up as well, which is surprising since I'd have expected prices to continue to slip down below $8k.
If this support holds at $8k, then we could see a resurgence of BTC above $9k once again. However, I wouldn't be bullish beyond that point due to the fact that $10k psychologically is still an extremely important barrier. I do expect alts to outperform BTC for the next few months regardless of BTC's price movements, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Who's actually keeping the peg? Is it binance themselves?
If yes, then wouldn't there be a degree of centrality in terms of how the peg is kept, and thus they can't really call themselves a DEX with absolute confidence? If not, then isn't this the exact same as what Bitshares tried to do with their DEX earlier?
Either way, I don't see this as any sort of groundbreaking development whatsoever. It's not like Binance inventing anything new here.
|
|
|
|
Some say that dollar is weak and getting weaker.
But dollar is still strongest currency.
Look at the stable coins like : pax, usdc, usdt true usd and more... They are pegged with usd.
But how many stable coins are for euro or other currencies?
As people spreading rumours that dollar will collapse and losing dominance, i see different.
My main question is what makes usd so dominant?
And why the euro value is higher then usd but USA dollar is still dominant, do you think that usd will be replaced by euro?
What's Ur take on that?
The USD is the strongest FIAT. That doesn't mean that it's necessarily the best asset to hold. In fact, I don't even think that the US government right now wants their currency to be this strong, because a strong exchange rate implies that their exports are completely uncompetitive (which is why Trump accuses China of manipulating exchange rates, if you follow these developments). What people mean by a "collapse" is in the long run, fiat's tendency to go to zero in value due to its intrinsic value - which is precisely zero. It's not in the short term. |
|
|
|
|
This is insane. I knew that Bitstamp was always overboard with their KYC requests to the point that it's probably even required by law for them to do some of the things that they ask for, but never knew that they would peer into such private details of every single transaction that you make just so that you can withdraw what is rightfully yours.
What right do they have to ask for tax statements, your income, where you got funds from, and what you are going to use funds on? And what relevance does that even have in terms of them upholding a very simple KYC procedure?
Why do they care that this was your gambling winnings? They are not the prosecutors nor the police, they have no proof of any wrongdoing on your side.
|
|
|
|
Just last month, Wells Fargo & Company made known to the public its plan to launch its own centralized or bank-controlled cryptocurrency (yes, some will argue that this is not cryptocurrency at all) using smart contracts and backed by fiat money, that will cater primarily with its global network transactions. The bank’s international locations would be able to exchange Wells Fargo Digital Cash among their global network enabling the internal book transfers of cross border payments. The bank has already tested the transfers between US and Canadian accounts using the USD. Lisa Frazier, head of Innovation Group at Wells Fargo stated, “We believe that DLT holds the promise for different use cases, and we are energized to take a significant step when it comes to applying the technology to banking in a scalable and material way. This company is following the steps taken by JP Morgan with the introduction of its JPM Coin which was a pioneering move in the banking industry. Now, we might be seeing some big banks or maybe a conglomerate of banks to do the same because they are now recognizing the innovation in making transactions faster and in settling business much safer and just better. I know these coins can not be on the same level as that of Bitcoin or Eth but this development is a confirmation of the paradigm shift in the world of finance and banking which started when the blockchain technology and Bitcoin came into this world. Can we say that this is a good development, nonetheless? I remain indifferent to these incarnations of cryptos in the form of privately owned blockchains. They are completely centralised, and their sole purpose is to further the goals of the firm rather than trying to address any global issue. JPMCoin or DLT aren't necessarily bad things, though. They improve the internal structure of their respective companies, and provides probably a funding buzz for them as well from international investors. It's important to remember that these investment firms probably don't actually believe in decentralisation whatsoever. All they see is an opportunity to further their own profits through the invention of these tokens. It's an entirely different agenda. |
|
|
|
Come to think of it, on idax exchange, cma and xcrypt token ieo did have a fraction of demand, but it was surpassed by the exchange platform billings. can we term that to the project being unhyped ??
First of all, I thought Idax was a confirmed scam? Why would any ICO be willing to list their tokens on a platform with a tainted rep? But to answer your question, yes, I do think that it can largely be attributed to these projects being extremely saturated now. Most tokens with actual utility has already been invented, and the speed of innovation has slowed down drastically. There is definitely a lack of hype around anything ICO related, probably because of the fact that first wave ICO investors back in 2017 are now reaping nothing but losses as they invested in tons of bad projects that amounted to nothing. ICOs themselves are probably no longer profitable either for founders, which could explain why there is now a lack of good projects, as good projects can just seek private angel investment instead. |
|
|
|
Hello there fellas,
I'm going to discuss something that keeps making me nervous. I'm that kind of a person who likes the decentralization, the privacy, the freedom and the equality in the financial world. It comes to my mind that these exchangers might someday be selfish, crypto is getting worthy and it will bring the eyes of the greedy peoples. Imagine that these exchangers grabs the trust of the peoples and then they start manipulating the market. The total volume in the exchangers is not stabe and peoples will never withdraw all their funds. Let's say that the amount of the holdings that an exchange have is 1000 btc, they could easily create sell walls of 1500 btc and peoples will buy because they trust these exchangers. What will happen then? Imagine that all the exchangers do this, what's your thoughts on this fact?.
This is why we should not be blindly trusting in exchanges. Exchanges don't even need customer capital to manipulate any side of the orderbook they want once they gain enough of a following. After all, they have full control over their own trading engines as well as the orders listed on their books. If they have sufficient influence their manipulation can flow onto the rest of the market through indices that contain their price info, etc. Also, wash trading is another very common occurrance in the crypto scene. I wouldn't doubt if the majority of unregulated exchanges do it in order to fake their volumes. Even regulated exchanges probably dabble in shady stuff every now and then. There is now guarantees. This is why DEXs are going to be awesome, but for now, just beware of obvious exchange manipulation. |
|
|
|
|
Talk about monetary incentive.
If there was any monetary incentive for devs and teams to put out coins with actual utility, realistic roadmaps, and practical use, then they would do so. But unfortunately, what the investors demand is quick and easy profit, and that results in the marketing departments of the majority of ICOs in existence hyping nonexistent vapourware up so that they can gain easy funding from these same investors.
This is a part of the reason why I no longer dabble in the ICO markets - it's just way too shady, saturated, and even unprofitable now.
|
|
|
|
|
Whether or not ETH 2.0 actually gets the job done in terms of scalability, people are still going to be using the ETH platform (whether for good or for bad, that is), given how many tokens are currently hosted on their ERC20 protocol already.
However, if scalability can be tackled, then ETH should be able to break its long term bear market against BTC. It could at least see a fraction of its ATH of 0.1+ BTC per ETH, imo.
But at the end of the day, this is one of the downfalls of investing in the altcoin with the most market cap currently - there isn't really a lot of upside even with this supposedly groundbreaking development. The main argument for ETH bagholders is the "flippening", because of the smart contracts etc. that ETH has over BTC, but they fail to consider that there will be coins with better technology out there in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
It's honestly expected. I saw the pump as a bull trap from the get go because of how strong resistance was at $8.5k the last few times that it was tested, and how long we've hovered around the $7.9-8k price level without movement. Besides, the bearish sentiment within the market is still overwhelming.
A correction back down to below $8k is absolutely within my expectations. Unless there is some major event to propell market sentiment upwards, like a SEC approval (which is not happening, given that another ETF has just gotten rejected and they've now moved onto targeting TON ICO), then I'd say markets still got some way to slip before bottoming.
It's a good time to start dollar cost averaging for sure. BTC is becoming undervalued considering that halving is next year.
|
|
|
|
As i was checking in cryptopia website they announced august 20 about some status about investigation . There is no major concern about investors . I was holding good amount of Crytpo currency in that wallet still i am not sure about i will get my fund back . Any updates can i get my fund back
I would strongly suggest that you just forget about the coins that you lost on Cryptopia. Even a once dominant exchange like Mt Gox essentially was not capable of refunding anyone to this day, let alone some obscure exchange located in NZ. All of the investigations will probably eventually amount to absolutely nothing, and odds are stacked against balance holders on the site. And even if there were any updates, it probably wouldn't help at all. Owners have moved onto a new project IIRC and I would be surprised with that new exchange project they'll focus any more energy onto solving this current debacle with Cryptopia. |
|
|
|
I've got a bunch of coins kept in wallets at an exchange and I want to move them all to offline paper wallets.
Looking at my records I seem to have BTC, BAT, BTG, PASC, MUSIC, ELLA and XMR.
I've been to bitaddress.org, created a wallet and printed it. Before I transfer my BTC I wanted to double check that this is a legit wallet generator... most of my $$$$ is BTC.
How about the other coins? Most are low balances. I think MUSIC is now worthless, but nonetheless, I might ask well keep them!
Thanks
Honestly wouldn't say that paper wallets are the best idea to store your coins with, mate. They can be easily water damaged and fire damaged (at least laminate it to somewhat prevent these issues, if you do choose to go with it), and it's extremely annoying to have to keep printing new paper wallets every time you want to spend some coins. If you still want to do it, there are client side private key generators for other coins, just make sure that what you're using is legitimate and open source. Do your due diligence. Otherwise, just run the official wallet software of that coin offline and generate a new address, and record down the privkeys yourself. But honestly, hardware wallets are so much easier to use and potentially less prone to physical damage as well. Look into investing in one of those if you are storing large amounts of coin. |
|
|
|
I just want to ask you guys if Scalping is a good move when trading on a bearish market. Because for me this is the best way to earn a profit when the market is bearish. But still, I choose the right coin and the perfect exchanger for scalping.
I personally don't think that scalping or any sort of ultra-short term trading is a good idea for someone who isn't a professional trader. The fact is that you need to monitor the markets extremely closely in order to profit off these trades, and one big loss from an open position can wipe out essentially what you earned from the previous 10 trades altogether instantly. In a bear market, theoretically the best idea is to short cryptos on leverage, but even that is extremely risky since it involves trading on margin, and you never know when the market is going to start picking up again. I strongly suggest simply going with DCA, average out your positions at a lower price, and holding for the long run. |
|
|
|
|
Why would you care about how much returns a coin generates you if the coin itself doesn't even have any real value? That's the question that I propose to you.
Any staking rewards should be adjusted to inflation, and price of the coin. And the price of a coin can only hold in the long run if the project is actually useful to tackling certain issues, or at least have some sort of utility/speculative value to traders.
Don't just buy a coin because it's PoS and promises high returns. I could create a coin today with absolutely no substance myself for extremely cheap, with a 50% annual staking reward. But what would it actually mean? Nothing. Because in the long run, if the coin doesn't have demand, staking rewards are irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
This would be incredibly useful for international investors in my opinion.
No longer would they have to be bound by semi-legitimate services that don't have the best track record in terms of regulation and reputation, like BitGold/Goldmoney (which it's currently known by), but they can rather directly transact with a gold backed cryptocurrency from an official government backed mint.
This would probably pose a lot of competition to current gold stablecoins like Digixdao, and Xaurum as well. It could be extremely successful given how much backing it's got, but ultimately, marketing from the Perth Mint (whose products I like a lot, by the way), will be crucial.
|
|
|
|
The altcoin sector is by far the biggest in terms of numbers of coin in the cryptocurrency market. Ethereum is the most valuable altcoin but it's like the glory day of ethereum is in the past now. Investors are by passing the opportunity to invest in altcoin in preference to the number one coin bitcoin.
Why is there a sharp decline in the altcoin sector? This question keeps coming up in the head of cryptocurrency followers, like two years ago altcoin was a very promising sector which everyone expected more form but fast forward two years on the case seems to be negative.
my answer to the question is attitude yes our attitude can impact either negative way or the opposite.
What are this attitude we have exhibited that has negatively impacted on altcoin.
1. Selfishness. Most investors are selfish they only care about what they can make but don't give a damn what happens to the coin it self, bounty hunters to have a role to play to they are snappy to dispose of the coin and this sure will decline the price
2. Poor publicity on the part of the developers. Altcoin can very much get into the cryptocurrency market with out being known developers should focus more time into spreading awareness about there project.
3. Poor road map. Developers should not create an unrealistic road map that they know can't be achieved cut your coat according to your size. Be truthful and real to the project.
Perhaps this works in theory. But in practice, what you're going to find is that people will generally still tend to gravitate towards projects that create the most hype, regardless of whether or not it has actual value. People care the most about short term profits more than anything else, that's the thing. This isn't something that can be changed simply by saying it, because greed is innate. Otherwise, the ICO bubble of 2017 would not have existed, nor should bitcoin dominance have ever fallen under 40% during that period of mass hysteria. Human psyche is what dominates the market, not necessarily rationality. |
|
|
|
I agree with the ETH evaluation, because of the fact that it can be manipulated by a single party essentially due to the sheer amount of influence this person has over the community. Also, it was ICO'd, which probably makes it more suitably categorised as a utility token, or security. I think that classifications themselves don't really matter that much on paper. It's not a matter of principles, but what these classifications bring in terms of tax and regulations. I'm no expert in this field, and I'd be interested to know how would something being classified as a commodity be different from a regulatory viewpoint compared to a currency? |
|
|
|
Dogecoin Is the Third-Most Resistant to 51% Attacks, After Bitcoin and Ethereum It costs more to perform a 51% attack on Dogecoin than Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash, and other proof-of-work cryptocurrencies, according to recent data. Surprisingly, it seems that a meme cryptocurrency boasts better security than some of the leading cryptocurrencies.
Analyst Kevin Rooke posted his findings earlier today on how expensive it is to conduct a 51% attack for one hour. What he found was that such an attack would cost almost $800,000 on Bitcoin and around $100,000 on Ethereum. Dogecoin comes a distant third, closely trailed by Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash, and ZCash.
https://beincrypto.com/dogecoin-is-the-third-most-resistant-to-51-attacks-after-bitcoin-and-ethereum/Interesting to see this report, but I'm not sure how they back up their claims. The only thing that hold's Dogecoin is that it is also so resilient as bitcoin is, that's why it stood the test of time. Or maybe there's no incentive to try a 51% attack on Dogecoin though, because it's not as popular as the other coins in the alts market. And perhaps Dogecoin design (PoW) is very solid from the very beginning. What do you guys think? Interesting. Nonetheless, the risk of such an attack would still be relatively low because of the high opportunity cost of all parties that would be involved in orchestrating such a large scale attack (they would essentially have to sacrifice their entire mining power due to the depreciation of the thing that they're mining with the equipment). Personally, I think that Doge long term doesn't really have much to grow. Development has been pretty dead. However, I think there will always be a niche for Dogecoins regardless of the period we're in, simply because of the fact that tx fees are extremely low, blocks are fast, and it's got a history of high volatility which makes it ideal for speculators. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
