No, semi-private, but not truly private.
Anyone that runs a central hub and helps complete hops, will know your channel information.
Which they can sell or give up if asked.
Any Government Agency could run their own hub and perform a sting , all under the guise to getting money launders. government adversaries are presumably already running nodes, electrum servers, etc to monitor node/IP address information at the bitcoin protocol network level. so it would be no surprise if they ran LN nodes as well. at least operating an LN hub adds a financial cost to this kind of surveillance. |
|
|
|
was that single trader accumulating massive amounts of bitcoins on the spot market? lower supply should cause the price to rise. When a noob gamer gets outclassed by a more skilled gamer, the first thing you'll hear the noob gamer say is; you're a cheater! People supporting the legacy financial system are exactly like that. Bitcoin is a fraud, it's being manipulated, all transactions are fake, nobody is using it, bla bla. At one point you expect these sore losers to give up but they are persistent as fuck. after the 2013 bubble, people cried "but the willy bot!" too. same shit, different day. even if one entity did somehow persuade the market into a bull run (  ) the fact is that real people were paying $1200 in 2013 and $20k in 2017. that's all that matters. |
|
|
|
There is more resistance to an increasingly more digital payment field from the younger population than most people here think. The awareness of how important physical cash is in our society grows the more freedom people lose conducting transactions digitally. you think that's true? i don't have that much experience to draw on, but teens and twenty-somethings i come across seem pretty into cash app and venmo vs actual cash. i've been made to feel like a dinosaur more than once for not using them. |
|
|
|
Can this news be linked to the openness of the Federal Reserve thinking about the creation of digital currency, even if it is stable and central? As it can replace the cash dollar? Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas President Rob Kaplan has said that the reserve has been studying the potential impact of a Libra-style stablecoin and is “actively looking at and debating” issuance of a digital currency. probably. that's the way the wind is blowing. the PBOC is rolling out their own digital currency (DCEP), although there are no hard launch dates yet. the USA won't be that far behind. why give up an opportunity to rein in cash usage and issue a more surveillance-friendly payment rail? two birds with one stone! and the population might willingly go along for the ride because of hype around bitcoin and blockchains. |
|
|
|
Griffin and Sham’s analysis, first published in a research paper in June 2018, had argued that transaction patterns on the blockchain suggested Tether had been used to provide price support and manipulate the Bitcoin market sounds like a sham analysis alright!  people tend to overestimate the ease with which markets can be manipulated. if bitcoin's bubbles were pure manipulation, why hasn't price crashed to double digits or $0 yet? why isn't everybody selling? why did the market hit nearly $14k this year----some other manipulator, or was it tether again? news flash: accumulators, whales, institutions etc provide support at market bottoms, including on bitfinex. it's their buying demand that forms these bottoms to begin with. doesn't mean it's always "manipulation"...... |
|
|
|
This kind of crap does more damage to crypto than its use in criminal activities. How are mainstream investors supposed
to be confident that they can safely trade on exchanges when exit scams like this keep happening?
i reckon the BCSC shutting down rogue exchanges will deter others from exit scamming in the future. the canadian government had been completely hands-off before the quadrigaCX collapse. now they seem to be investigating bad actors and trying to clean up the space. if i were a canuck, i would probably use kraken's CAD market. not many reputable exchanges left in canada---in fact, there never have been. |
|
|
|
Hi! I dont know if posting in the right post.. I have a problem with CoinBase. I bought Bitcoin with CoinBase and then I sent to a wallet from a platform. I didn´t accept the conditions of the platform so they sent me back the Bitcoin. The problem is they reversed the transaction and sent it to the same address. In CoinBase the address from where I sent is different from the address where I have to receive. I am waiting for a response for a month from support.... Has anyone had a problem like that? Thanks  it's never happened to me personally but it's not unheard of. i can't find any threads about specific cases on coinbase, but it took binance a few weeks to sort out a similar situation. how many times have you followed up on your ticket? the only time i had an issue that required customer support, coinbase replied with ~3 irrelevant boilerplate emails before a competent human finally addressed my problem. you need to keep pushing them, otherwise it'll fall through the cracks. also, post your issue and ticket # on https://www.reddit.com/r/coinbase ......that tends to get their attention. |
|
|
|
I can't make sense of the IRS requirements.
If I trade BTC for ALT and ALT only has value in BTC (ie. a net zero transaction), what do I owe tax on? BTC always has an equivalent USD value so these aren't "net zero" transactions. when you buy altcoins with BTC, the IRS considers it to be 2 transactions: 1. sell BTC for the equivalent amount of USD 2. buy altcoins with that USD you are expected to calculate the USD value of BTC at the time of the altcoin trade to determine the cost basis of your altcoin position. And if I trade that ALT back to BTC I owe tax AGAIN on the same thing I already paid tax for.  nope. when you bought the altcoin, you were selling BTC. that's what you paid tax on already. when you sell the altcoin, it's a different taxable transaction entirely. oversimplified example: -let's say you bought 1 BTC for 10000 USD. then you sold that 1 BTC for 100 GGC when BTC was worth 15000 USD. you owe tax on the 5000 USD gain. -your 100 GGC has a cost basis of 15000 USD (150 USD each). let's say you sell them for 2 BTC when BTC is worth 20000 USD. you now owe tax on a 25000 USD gain. |
|
|
|
need suggestion about best and top btc exchange..
you need to be more specific. it depends what you're looking for. -the most reputable from a legal/compliance standpoint: coinbase pro -futures trading: bitmex or deribit -altcoin and stablecoin trading: binance -p2p lending and margin trading: bitfinex -altcoin and stablecoin trading for USA traders: kucoin or bittrex -margin trading for USA traders: kraken |
|
|
|
good stuff! use of bech32 in hot wallet activity spells good things for overall network adoption. bitcoin maximalists will always have a soft spot for bitfinex because of stuff like this. it reminds me of when they launched bcash markets under the "BCH" ticker---they established that trend. they may bank like criminals, but they mostly do right by bitcoiners. |
|
|
|
Ever since the Xi pump we have been pretty much going nowhere and your triangle is what most traders are looking at.
The issue with crypto and Bitcoin in general is that there are a lot of traps out there. Everybody is expecting our pivot low to hold or at least until the CME gap is filled and most likely it will be stressful what happens afterwards.
I am either expecting some type of front run for the Gap traders or some type of bull trap. It wouldn't surprise me if it hit the gap, went up like $200 and the next day a massive dump and the entire Xi to fade. Or it will come close to the gap and quickly reverse leaving most retail traders behind.
the weekly candle just closed above $9200. that's pretty damn bullish IMO---a whole week without a single wick into the previous trading range. all of the sellers from october are trapped and are now providing buy support. re traps in the bitcoin market, i hear you. if the market fills the CME gap, bears will be desperate to buy $8500+ IMO. price won't stay down there for long at all. that's the trap to watch for. over-eager bears will short a break of the $8900s low and then quickly get trapped. |
|
|
|
I know some people who want to invest in Bitcoin but they are constantly waiting for a good opportunity, maybe not $1000, but something close to that number. No one can say for certain that the price will not go below $5000 again, and what I say to such people is that it is possible, their money, they decisions. the funny thing is, these types of people never actually buy anyway. when price is going up, they're always waiting for a dip. when price is going down, they're too scared to buy. i don't waste any breath anymore. some people just aren't cut out for speculation. |
|
|
|
i never even noticed that. you're right, it's a perfect example of an ascending triangle.  nobody took notice at the time because everyone was bearish IMO. most people consider ascending triangles to be bullish, so they ignored it. everybody plays to their biases....... I think the reason this particular ascending triangle was ignored was due to only have two touch-points along the ascending trend-line support (with a relevant distance between these contact points). Most consider the pattern as relevant with 3 touch-points minimum per support/resistance trend-line, which is the basic confirmation requirement of any triangle based pattern. Traders that ignore ascending triangles and only acknowledging descending triangles (and visa versa) are clearly not very clever traders Unfortunately for many traders, the third touch-point never occurred to properly confirm this ascending triangle, even if hindsight is a great afterthought. whose rules are those? i was always taught that two touches are required to form a triangle's trendlines. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/ascendingtriangle.aspA minimum of two swing highs and two swing lows are required to form the ascending triangle's trendlines. the fifth wave in triangles (wave E in elliott wave terms) providing a third touch is the textbook ideal but it often doesn't happen. |
|
|
|
Triangles aren't usually reversal patterns (though it happens).
It was a major one this year. Before the price exploded from $4000 to $5000 we were perfectly completing an ascending triangle with a ~$1000 measured move, which is exactly what we got. The only thing is that people weren't talking about it back then, where nowadays everyone and their dog knows about them, which weakens their actual effect, so I expect triangle breakouts to result in sideways price action more often until a longer time frame pattern breaks. We had a time where short squeezes were hyped up, then head and shoulders patterns, bart patterns, triangle patterns, etc. What's next? i never even noticed that. you're right, it's a perfect example of an ascending triangle. nobody took notice at the time because everyone was bearish IMO. most people consider ascending triangles to be bullish, so they ignored it. everybody plays to their biases....... |
|
|
|
Today I work on the graph to now and the second graph of how bitcoin has reacted, since February the bitcoin to reach another lower ... but in February bitcon made us a very nice re-bond signifying the end of the cycle Bearish ... Left Graph = February 17, 2019 Graph right = November 3, 2019  it should be noted that after that breakout, the market dumped straight back to $3650 and then we went sideways in the $3000s for a month. so it wasn't exactly the big breakout that kicked off this year's rally. i could see that happening again---break upwards to $11.8k, dump back to $10.5k, then sideways for a month or so before the real fun starts. |
|
|
|
Are we going to witness major dump before halving?
we are about 6 months out from the 2020 halving. let's look at what happened the last two times: -the 2012 halving occurred in november 2012. from may to november, price rose from $5 to $13. -the 2016 halving occurred in july 2016. from january to july, price rose from $350 to $780. food for thought.  |
|
|
|
"The Chinese Government Will now ban Content Aimed at Discrediting Blockchain Technology" [1]This is how things should be done-- in a totalitarian way. I presume the state has made all the necessary studies of the blockchain technology and they found out that it is the best option. they realized it's the best option for surveilling all their citizens' financial activities! i'm assuming this move is related to their plans to launch DCEP, their central bank coin. they don't want anyone criticizing their blockchain surveillance model and discouraging people from using it. |
|
|
|
The real challenge is how long will the company pay for advertising the site? Will they make a return from that? What happens when payments stop? Will it be an empty version of the serious discussion board?
i'm trying to figure out yobit's motivation for launching cryptotalk. i figure they must plan to use it as a venue to pump markets, hype up their IEOs, etc. otherwise i don't know why it would warrant such investment. it's completely built on paid posts so if you take them away, not much will be left. at the same time, the campaigns can be paid for by a tiny % of yobit's overall revenues. it's a drop in the bucket for them so maybe they will keep paying. |
|
|
|
Currently looking for volunteer writers for a cryptocurrency and stock news website, please comment if you're interested in volunteering.
you are planning to monetize the website for your own profits, right? but you want to build it on free labor? look at how low quality the crypto media already is---coinidol, btcmanager, CCN, etc, not to mention the even lower tiers. if that's what paying for articles nets for them, what do you expect to get for free?! |
|
|
|
Now i said, the other thing would be me sending btc from my wallet to his exodus wallet. Then he deposit btc from his exodus wallet to that gambling site btc address given to him by that site. I wanted to know, do i need to take this step as oppose to sending btc directly into his gambling account. Because my issue is... i also have an account and that gambling site as well where i previously deposited via btc from my same btc wallet. look at the site terms. are multiple accounts prohibited? lots of gambling sites don't care, in which case this type of activity wouldn't be a red flagged no matter what. like o_e_l_e_o said, we don't know the site in question or their internal policies so no one can give you a firm answer. if you stated which site, maybe we could help more. chances are you have nothing to worry about. here's the bottom line: when in doubt, include a couple extra hops between your transactions. make deposits like this from a new address. (you shouldn't be reusing addresses anyway) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
