|
Given the recent influx of institutional investors which have significant lobbying power, I wouldn't disagree with these statements.
It's just that at this point, I don't think that anyone is really counting on an ETF to be finally approved apart from the institutions who issue out these ETFs in the first place. We've seen enough rejections and people hyping ETF approvals up in the past that the market has sort of become desensitised to this type of news.
Besides, I'd encourage anyone to think about what ETFs actually bring to the retail users of BTC? Next to nothing, unless you want to diversify your retirement portfolio. It's time to stop placing such unwarranted emphasis on these approvals, imo.
|
|
|
|
Guys, do you think is worth doing them and is it a good time to do one? And what do you think about trading competitions at all?
It's +EV, because at the end of the day, you're not losing anything. Sure, you may have to conduct KYC, but if the exchange platform that you are doing that on is legitimate and regulated, I don't see a problem with that. There is no barrier to entry, thus there is no element of negative expected value. Whether or not it's worth your time is doubtful, though. I wouldn't be counting it as an income source, but in your spare time, it could be a fun activity that can win prizes for you here and there occasionally. I've personally seen people profit from completely free competitions from Zebpay and the like. |
|
|
|
In 2017 i decided to give cloud mining a try and i did get to follow the best ones back then and the following are the ones that were very good until they stopped working excluding minergate and nicehash.
1 Genesing mining
2. Hashflare
3. Minergate
4. Nicehash
back then many fake and scam cloud mining websites did scam lots of people since not everyone can afford to build a mining rig but i was so lucky then until cloud mining stop been profitable, what about you guys? anyone on here that make better profits from cloud mining?
I'd suggest that you stop looking at cloud mining as a passive income source completely. The reason why a lot of newbies get sucked into these cloud mining companies and invest absurd amounts of money in hopes of getting a passive return on their investment is due to the fact that there are certain unscrupulous youtubers that, in attempt of marketing their affiliate links, make absurd claims about profitability. There is no profitable cloud mining in the long run, for the simple reason that maintenance fees will always mean that your contracts expire before its lifetime. Anecdotally, you'll find the same trend. |
|
|
|
Crypto-Bridge: mandatory KYC starting 01 Oct 2019. No escape/functionality without KYC.
Would like to know if anyone was successful with KYC or whether it's a scam to get even more personal info.
If you just have a small balance, I'd say don't bother. The fact that they are asking KYC in the first place probably means that they are trying to hold onto user funds for as long as they possibly can, which means that the KYC process itself is going to be difficult most probably. What's the point of risking your identity at an entity which has proven itself to be untrustworthy, just for a measly for bucks? If your balance is large, then it's another story. I don't think you have a choice unless you can somehow go down the legal route, even though that would expose your identity anyhow. |
|
|
|
Official capital is resisting privacy. However, this market will sooner or later give the necessary value to confidentiality-based coins. This is my opinion because it would be an alternative to the current economy.
True. I wouldn't doubt the fact that XMr will be one of the best actual "cryptocurrencies" in terms of people's real use of it, and its practicality and scalability. But with people's fear that XMR will get delisted as a matter of time from big time exchanges due to regulation changes, and the perennial concern over government's stance over anonymous coins in general, it is extremely hard for hype or FOMO to ever really kick off. Couple that with the fact that XMR's community has been historical quite rational and unencouraging of hype, we'll likely never see much volatility. Unless BTC sees an extremely large bull run (which seems unlikely at the moment), I doubt that XMR will see any formidable price hike. Vice versa, I don't see any reason that its value should come crashing down even with all the additional restrictions on exchanges with trading it. It's fulfilling its role as a currency a lot better than most other cryptos, but it's just not going to be a good speculative coin. |
|
|
|
Altcoins are still struggling to raise from the bottom, BTC has outperformed them all, by such a huge dominance of almost 70 percent. I hoped that Bakkt would fix things, but right now I do not know what should happen to let altcoins increase in price.
What made you think Bakkt would decrease bitcoin dominance and make altcoins outperform BTC all of a sudden? I don't see any tangible links between the two events that you have suggested here. I do think that BTC dominance is going to peak at around here, regardless of whether or not the bearish trend continues or we see a reversal in the market. It's a good time to go long on coins that have had a proven track record in my opinion. I don't think that investing in IEOs and ICOs right now is a good idea since they are so saturated and ideas are repetitive, but proven coins like ETH, EOS and MIOTA can be undervalued when compared to their long term averages. Just don't trade on leverage, since nobody knows when a rally will actually kick off. |
|
|
|
hi guys do u think BNB good to invest at 0.0019 BTC ?
my friend bought BNB at 0.0029 and he is in a big lost now
i was thinking to buy at current price but im afraid that BNB
fall more to 0.0012 - 0.0015 BTC
I'd say that i'd wait it out until the macro trends are clear first. We don't know whether or not the alt market is going to into a bear market, which will itself be dependent on whether or not the $8k support holds for BTC. But if I had to pick, I'd probably be long. <0.002 BTC is a buying opportunity imo. Binance has been one of the most active exchanges and I don't think that they are going to be slowing down any time soon. Plus, with the recent slip in BNB price, it does present itself as a buying opportunity to be long on the entire crypto market given that BNB's profitability largely depends on the state of the crypto market in general. |
|
|
|
Disclaimer: I'm an investor in both projects, so I'm biased. So recently I've been reading up A LOT on decentralized trading, and peer to peer transactions. All these complaints on KYC submissions on various exchanges makes me confident that DEX's is gonna blow up in the future. This is EXACTLY why I decided to buy into Komodo, since I believe they'll be a huge player in the next alt season. Their Atomic DEX provides peer to peer trading via atomic swaps, but their recent test transactions took about 9 minutes, and that's quite som time to sit and wait compared to centralized exchange trading, hence why I understand why people don't like the DEX solutions currently available. Next we got Stakenet, who's building a Lightning DEX, providing offchain peer to peer transactions, with near instant transactions, and lower fees. Lightning hasn't been easy to implement on Bitcoin, and there's a lot of doubters, but from what I've seen, this looks extremely promising, for a lot of reasons: 1) Nobody needs to sync with the DEX to use it, since all the chains is held by the masternodes running the DEX. 2) No KYC 3) No Registration process, just straight trading. Comparing these 2 projects is hard, but it's obvious that I'm actually starting to be way more bullish on Stakenet, since I believe instant transactions will make people actually USE the DEX. Not a fan of the whole "Binance DEX", since it's not a DEX in the first place. All the transactions is verified by Binance themselves (they own all the nodes), which isn't decentralized at all. I'll hold both projects, since Komodo is the "safer" investment for now I guess, but I'm sure Stakenet will eventually outperform them. Thoughts?  I'd agree with your general sentiment. Yes, Stakenet could potentially be very successful. But the amount of shills for this project that i've seen based off browsing this section of the forum is a bit too much for my liking in my personal opinion. It could just be investors, but it could also be official parties trying to use the forum as a guerilla marketing tactic. Komodo on the other hand has been around for longer, and has had a proven team and track record. Perhaps lower returns, but much lower risk as well. |
|
|
|
I was reading a article published by cointelegraph and read that: McAfee DEX is set to run in a beta release status as of Oct. 7
McAfee DEX beta: the details
According to the details released so far, McAfee DEX reportedly will entail no Know Your Customer checks, block no jurisdictions and charge a single platform fee of 0.25% for takers. It will not charge maker fees and will also reportedly be open sourced.
Here is the article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/john-mcafees-decentralized-crypto-exchange-launches-in-betaThis means if someone hacks my funds and trades through this exchange whom to I ask? I have not used much distributed exchanges but this statement was scary. Previous I had the experience where my funds were hacked and this statement opened up my wounds. Who do you ask? No one. The entire point of a DEX is taking both the authority of a third party having control over your funds away from them, unlike in a traditional exchange where the counterparty risk of the exchange is always present. If you get hacked, then there is basically no recourse. It's your responsibility to protect your own private keys, and other cryptographic info that can lead to your funds being spent. Also, I'd suggest not getting too into McAfee's claims. His track record is unproven and his project will likely get persecuted by governments worldwide without KYC. |
|
|
|
|
I think that it depends on the campaign that you are currently in.
If the rule was in place before you even signed up, then it's nothing unfair. Every single campaign manager can set their own terms, and it's up to the people providing the service to decide whether or not these terms are favourable to them or not.
If they only changed the rules after you removed your signature, then it may be shady. Especially if they haven't mentioned of this rule previously, they should at least pay on a pro-rata basis.
|
|
|
|
Theres a first time for everything. Ive been scammed by p2pb2b exchange
I sold some shitcoin there for ETH. I made two trades. Then I found I couldnt withdraw until I submitted KYC. It was a small amount so I forgot to do it. I them logged in again weeks later to check the balance and KYC requirements. Everything was good.
Ive logged in two months later to sort it and now there are trades on my account from the first day I did the original two trades. So either ive been hacked lightning quick ie in less than 10mins, or my clone has traveled back in time and made those losing trades which i have screen shots and a retardly bad. I hope my clone would be brighter than this. OR p2p has made up some trades on my account that never happened.
No tears here, its a small amount and ive learnt my lesson dont use shit exchanges. But i hope this post helps other to realise p2p is a complete scam
Cheers
You should have taken a look at this thread and this thread which were scam accusations launched against p2pb2b long before you got defrauded. The exchange itself doesn't even look professional, if you look at their FAQ it is apparent that they can't even put sufficient effort into making a coherent English page. The KYC request in itself should have been a sign that their exchange shouldn't be trusted. It is one of the primary ways in which exchanges hold customer funds, and there is a general trend that exchanges who do that aren't the most customer friendly. Your 'hack' is indeed shady and may be an insider job, but to be honest, you don't really have any chance of recourse since you have no proof that your account didn't get hacked. |
|
|
|
I doubt it when it comes to hosted wallets. Bitcoin is based on the notion of decentralisation, and even with insurance, I doubt that people would trust online hosted wallets for that exact reason - it takes away from the decentralised nature of bitcoin wallets. Thus, I don't think that such an insurance product for depositor balances would ever take off. I doubt that there would be a lot of providers for the insurance either since there is no guarantee that the service itself wouldn't go rogue and fake a hack to claim insurance money, etc. with the untraceability of the blockchain. When it comes to price hedges, though, such a product could be mainstream. But then, you've already got perpetual futures and options that people can buy on the derivatives market to insure themselves against adverse price movements. |
|
|
|
|
I think that it'll be either driven by decentralisation and/or the use of blockchain. It's quite unclear right now though whether or not the two of the aforementioned movements will be done in conjunction with one another, or independently.
For example, banks may start using blockchain as a means of data keeping and recording transactions. However, they may not be moving towards a decentralised money supply for obvious reasons.
Vice versa, society might move towards decentralisation and create a paradigm shift, but may do so with a different means like DAG. I doubt this will happen because of what bitcoin offers already, especially with LN which offers more scalability, but it's a remote possibility.
|
|
|
|
I suggest that you include more proof. Simply saying that someone owes you 2 BTC while providing no evidence that this loan actually ever happened, or even the connection between the scammer to the team member in question. Otherwise, Nightwanderer could be anyone. It could be just a coincidence that two people have the same name. But the project in question is certainly extremely shady. Their claim that you can't lose any further than the fees they charge in their savings platform is worthy of a warning flag in itself. |
|
|
|
|
Great initiative. Extremely helpful now that the derivatives market of crypto have exponentially increased.
I'd say that the layout of the site is good, but I had to navigate a while before actually understanding how data is organised. What I think you guys should add is a ranking of exchanges by their aggregate volume of all their markets, similar to how CMC has an option to rank exchanges.
Furthermore, I think you guys should have a FAQ that explains terms like 'open interest' and 'spot market cap' to beginners. That would be extremely helpful.
|
|
|
|
This is cause for concern. If you are going to invest anything into cryptos in a country which has explicitly stated that institutions are not allowed to handle crypto transactions, and you choose to dumbly trust a third party to be holding your investments - then you should be prepared for the risks. I do think that the Indian government should make some exception to the legislation in order to refund the victims, though. Because after all, even though getting scammed is somewhat their fault, a ponzi scheme at the end is illegal and its victims should be reimbursed. |
|
|
|
Is it usual? Yes. Most exchanges have tiered fee structures these days as well, and they are <0.1% in most cases for such high trading volume as well. It's not like Huobi is losing any revenue from this, because before people can enter this VIP Program, they would have already earned a ton of commission from people trading at normal rates for the first 500-1000 BTC. Besides, the sheer amount of volume these traders generate mean that Huobi will be able to continue to make a ton of commission anyway. If you think this is shady - it's not. It's just smart marketing, that is all. |
|
|
|
I don't waste my time with new projects anymore, 99 percents of them are rushed to make quick gains and cater away with the money, i don't expected more than 5 good new projects in a whole year, why?
1. Good projects takes time to build, they aren't rushed so they take lots of time in development
2. Real working products from companies that have been in existence for years are way better when they implement blockchain tech in their company it will work out
3. Its red flag to projects from companies that starts on crypto from scratch, meaning that they are able to be where they are today with crypto.
Example companies that implement crypto and standing strong with their idea is Clear foundation or Wings Mobile, those are new ones i have seen, i know there are more, care to share?
I wouldn't say that companies which started off with crypto is necessarily a red flag in and of itself, because there are certain companies which genuinely offer crypto related services and that's just their entire business model. What people should look out for are projects or companies which have no differentiating factor, operate in an already saturated market, and indefinitely asks for funding without any clear roadmaps. Of course, old companies that implement crypto will be ideal, since they'd have both the exprience and expertise in their field already. However, it's not always possible to have a channel to invest in these companies. |
|
|
|
In this kind of bad altcoin market i am still surprised that some new projects are giving out 50% price tag for their tokens, this is a project killer if you ask me, this move is only good if altcoin season is out and surging, 50percent is way too much in this kind of market we are in presently, tell me i'm wrong
You know why people aren't buying these projects' tokens anymore? Because they have no intrinsic value. As the market matures, people are no longer as inclined to investing in crap tokens because they know the end goal of the project is to take investor funds and benefit themselves. The market is also extremely saturated at this point, coupled with the fact that the entire crypto market is in kind of a short term recession means that there is extremely limited interest and demand for ICO tokens in general. So yes, in a sense new projects that have no value are responsible, but at the end of the day it still depends a lot on the market conditions, which are not favourable at this point. |
|
|
|
Coinexchange is shutting down their exchange for no good reason....Guys please take your Coins/Tokens out.
The website and withdrawals will remain operational until the 1st of December 2019.
I don't think that this was the correct way for them to approach it. They should have emailed all users and contacted them on all possible platforms, as opposed to just putting up an announcement as Bountyhonter said. Furthermore, they should clarify what is going to happen after the withdrawal period ends. I don't think that 2 months is long enough, first of all, and they should at the very least have manual withdrawals after that period. Otherwise, it's not fair to their users, or people who have small balances on there who may not know about it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
