First off, Binance could collapse, prosecuted or not. FUD or not, it could happen. It's always a possibility not just with Binance but with all centralized exchanges. If it happens and you're into BNB or BUSD and your funds are kept in Binance, then expect that you'll lose all of them. To avoid that risk, you only need to stay away from those risky altcoins including stablecoins and choose self-custody. It ain't that complicated at all.

It's plain hubris for Binance to equate itself with crypto. Or is it blackmailing? But if it were true that the entire crypto would collapse if Binance collapses, then let them all collapse. They're not meant to last, anyway. But Bitcoin will definitely stay. It isn't centralized. There's nobody to prosecute or arrest. There's nothing to shut down or raid or whatever. The price will definitely be affected, but only temporarily. Its survival means it could solely gain back the trust and confidence of everybody just like when it started, and all the money that could have gone to any altcoin would go to Bitcoin, as in real Bitcoin, not paper Bitcoin, not IOUs, not mere numbers.

There are probably a number of ways not to make it obvious. I guess it's not anymore safe nowadays to just merely list words. Worse, in the case of what happened in Nevada, it was also indicated that the funds are kept in a Ledger wallet.

This is also what I actually did with my seed phrase. There was a PIN and a password along with it, making it clear it was a seed phrase. Perhaps we could write a letter instead or perhaps a poem or whatever that uses the words in order. Or perhaps it is not really wise to keep it in your wallet. It's probably better to roll it really thin and hide it inside a small pocket of one of your clothes in your bag or even inside the hem of a shirt.

1. You have a skill in programming and yet you're working on a "super low end job?" Yes, the business may need you buy you need yourself more. And it doesn't mean that since you're fairly happy with your current job, you can't be happier elsewhere.

2. If you were looking for "a way to make money," what did you lose, again? Was it USD? Or which crypto was it?

3. You're probably a loser in trusting that crypto that you have, but you're certainly a loser for keeping it on FTX. Bitcoin + self-custody is a much better formula both in terms of security and profit.

4. There are always lessons to be learned. It's just that sometimes it is quite expensive.

15- Darker45

Please and thank you, willi9974!

53- Darker45

Please and thank you, cygan!

00- Darker45

Please and thank you, betnomi!

You seem to never run out of cold wallets to freely give away. Such cool and timely gift for the holidays!

As a matter of fact, I've just reactivated a dormant bank account. I wasn't charged for any fee. I knew later on and that charges would only be applied after 5 years even if an account could reach dormancy after a couple of years without client-initiated transaction. And the charge would only apply if the balance is below the bank's required balance.

I also had tried reactivating inactive centralized exchange accounts years ago for the sake of what's left there. I couldn't remember I was charged for dormancy fee. The worst that I encountered was that I was asked to submit KYC once again.

In which case, it means some gambling platforms are even worse than banks and centralized exchanges.

I think no FUD is justified. But as Binance's CZ himself would have it:


https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1602590863451889665


https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1602905590384181248?cxt=HHwWgICytYqJ1b4sAAAA

So, I guess CZ is somehow seeing some fair justifications of FUD. After all, he started some himself.

In an unlikely event that Binance would "collapse any day now," would Bitcoin's price be severely affected? Probably, yes. And if the collapse of FTX and Binance would also mean other centralized exchanges lose people's trust and confidence and would also collapse, it will certainly shake the market. But I think it would be beneficial to Bitcoin, and whatever it fights for, in the long run. For one, the age of paper Bitcoin and IOUs might come to an end.

Anyway, I know this is a non-issue to many, but I find CryptoQuant's way of putting it a little odd.


https://twitter.com/cryptoquant_com/status/1603537076225335296

Great job making the most of the dip. Sooner or later, you will not only look back and feel proud that you had the balls to buy when others were selling, you will also be making some nice profit. I hope you are in for a long-term HODL. And I hope the money you spent on Bitcoin is not intended for something else so that you can keep your Bitcoin for as long as you want. The sad thing about some who really intend to keep their Bitcoin is that when emergency arises, they have no choice but to sell.

I think this is going to far. If it's such a bad idea to keep money in a gambling site dormant for years, it is much worse if you keep money for your kids in a gambling site. Not only is a gambling site, and any centralized platform for that matter, not a storage for your funds, it especially is not a place for generational wealth. Quite frankly, I find this idea weird.

Is it really true that leaving funds in freebitco.in gives you interest? This is good, much better than other gambling sites taking your money away, but why is this so? Did you in any way stake your funds? If you didn't, does this mean freebitco.in use users' money to be invested somewhere?

The moment Bitcoin was launched was also the moment all succeeding coins will be named altcoins. Whatever coin they are, they will be nothing but mere altcoins. The point is that there is no starting Bitcoin over again.

However, I have to embrace the reality that Bitcoin is probably not the best currency the world will ever have. At this point, Bitcoin probably is, but a hundred years from now? We cannot tell. Calling Bitcoin the best currency the world will ever have is probably a huge insult to an ever-developing and evolving world. The growing pace of technological development and innovation and the ever-changing times could mean a new best currency would arise a century from now.

It's probably the right thing to do, what Mazar did. While Mazar cited public perception as the reason why they discontinued engagements with crypto companies, I think the real reason is that they just want to preserve their name and reputation. They simply do not want to get entangled in all the controversies surrounding the crypto industry especially in the last few weeks.

Yes, there is indeed a problem on how their reports are understood by the public, but apparently it is not so much about how the public understood them as to how they are presented by the crypto companies to the public. Take as an example how Binance made it appear to the public that Mazar's report is an audit report and how this proof of reserves report assures people that the platform is solvent and that the users' funds are backed 1:1. This isn't what the report is.

Not to mention that limited methodologies used are according to the demands of the client. That takes away any real sense of independence and audit. We have to be reminded that the same thing was also done to FTX itself and the reports say it's doing good.

And now that Mazar has cut ties and that reports have been taken down, whatever happens to Binance, KuCoin, or Crypto.com in the next weeks or months wouldn't be much of a problem to their company anymore.

I know nothing about Bitcoin ATM installation. But the impression is that it must require a lot of study, feasibility study and consultations and whatnot, legal processes as well. While there are resources found online like the ones abundantly provided by CoinATMRadar, there are definitely a lot of factors that are unique to your own place. For example, how aware is your locality about Bitcoin? And you can't even take its high level of awareness as a guarantee that your venture would turn out well. If there's high awareness, it could even mean they are aware that most Bitcoin ATM machines charge exorbitant fees, ask for KYC, that there are a lot of better options online, and so on. Also, how about the legality of it all? I guess you will have to get a lawyer for it.

But since your brother seems to be a little influential in your locality, I guess he could pull some strings to expedite everything a bit. If it's the first Bitcoin ATM in your place, it might indeed get a good deal of attention and curiosity. It might drive some adoption. It might also help if you organize some kind of an information drive. Surely, a lot of beginners need some guidance before trying your machine.

That Musk's way of handling Twitter is somewhat controversial and how it seemed to reinforce his image as a villain must have contributed a little, but I don't think that's the main reason. There are probably a number. Not least of which is the aggressive and successive interest rate hike by the Fed. And it's not just Tesla that is significantly affected by this.

Specifically, I guess it's also a reason that the future of electric vehicles is somehow challenged by grid capacity. While this is dismissed by many, the reality on the ground is that even at the current adoption pace, many have already been charging using fuel-powered generators because of grid congestion.

In all countries, I guess we just have to admit that the primary currency will always be fiat. That monopoly will stay. There's no competition. Bitcoin is an alternative. In that respect, will it ever dethrone fiat? I don't think so. However, Bitcoin has a special place in global e-commerce as an internet money and in international remittances. When it comes to cross-border transactions, especially involving large amounts, I guess Bitcoin is much quicker, cheaper, and smoother than fiat.

Whether we like or not, keys stored in a bank's safe deposit box is probably much safer than keys hidden underneath a pile of clothes in your closet, or at the back of a painting in your living room, or even in a personal vault in your bedroom. Nobody would just barge in to a bank's vault.

And since Hal mentioned that his "son and daughter are tech savvy" right after saying that his "bitcoins are stored in our safe deposit box," I guess it means the keys and other important information are not in plaintext. Everything is certainly encrypted. His children are the only ones who could decrypt them.

And now that all efforts of CZ and Binance to prove their worth are seemingly falling into the gutter, they're now pointing fingers at everybody else. After the pointless Merkle tree and the shady proof of reserves failed to make depositors feel at ease, and did not stop them from withdrawing their funds off Binance, they are now attacking the capability of everybody else to self-custody.

It was in CZ's AMA that he claimed that "for 99% of people today, asking them to hold crypto on their own, they will end up losing it."^[1] This is obviously an exaggeration to stress a point, but I don't know if this is valid enough to make Binance relevant. If I'm actually incapable of being my own bank, is a centralized exchange a better option? I don't think so. I guess that's a bit worse than myself. I'd rather just keep my hardware wallet and my seed phrase in a bank's safe.

Secondly, Binance is an exchange, for heaven's sake. If people don't trade, their funds have no business in Binance. So it's actually ridiculous to offer Binance as a solution. It's a wrong solution to a wrong problem.

---

[1] https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1BdGYykXBDyGX?s=20

What specifically was the lie?

I guess it wasn't strictly a testimony. Kevin didn't give a single fact. Well, he admitted it himself. It was an opinion. He could have immediately been cut off right after his admission that what he had was "an opinion. I don't have the records." I don't even understand why this man is invited. What does he know really? What relevant knowledge or information could he contribute to the hearing?

Anyway, my opinion is that CZ opened the Pandora's box. It was full of shit, of course. FTX might fall at a certain point, but it was CZ who pushed it. And down it fell.

This is just one among a number of reasons why keeping funds in a centralized exchange is not recommended. Different kinds of breach could come from anywhere. A hack in the exchange's hot wallet could happen anytime. Or the malicious intention could come from the inside itself. Users' funds could have been risked elsewhere and lost. And then there's also mismanagement. Or a trusted staff could have leaked vital information leading to a successful breach. Since there are also third parties involved, the attack or failure could also come from them. In other words, there are a hundred possible ways that a centralized exchange could collapse anytime.

James Howells threw his hard drive containing 8,000 Bitcoin in 2013. Today, that's around $140 million. But that hard drive has been buried in at least 110,000 tons of garbage. And that's almost a decade ago. At this point, I doubt he will still be successful in trying to retrieve it. I'm not even sure if there are still efforts to locate it until now. But in case the search-- if it's still going on-- will be successful, I'm sure it will hit the headlines just as the search hit the news.