Enabling 2FA shouldn't be something that is done AFTER news of hacks come out. Oftentimes when the news comes out, it's already too late if the exchanges don't do a good enough job of securing customer funds or react fast enough. You should be doing this as the first thing when you open any new accounts on exchanges, before any sum of money is deposited or traded. That said, if you haven't done it, it's never too late, especially if you know that your email provider is one of these. I've seen so many cases in which users lose funds inexplicably but they can't prove anything because they haven't enabled 2FA. They then proceed to blame the exchange for their losses, but they have absolutely no proof to back it up which means that it leads to absolutely nothing. Just take the necessary precautions and you should be good. |
|
|
|
|
I think that the correlation should be very obvious. Since the majority of transactions are to and from exchanges, it is intuitive to think that the level of transactions as well as general economic activity within the bitcoin network will increase as trading volume and prices increase in a bull market.
However, is this figure necessarily an indicator for the future? That's not something that's so obvious imho.
It might indicate what stage of the market cycle we are at in terms of bitcoin's valuation, but it doesn't guarantee anything in terms of gains. After all, at the end of the day, on chain activity is completely independent from prices, which is one of the reasons why bitcoin is decentralised in the first place.
|
|
|
|
With gold on the defensive and down roughly 6 percent since mid-February, bitcoin may continue to shine brightly in the near future. After all, experts have found the two assets to be inversely correlated.
The 90-day correlation coefficient between bitcoin and gold – a statistical measure of linear interdependence between the two variables – is currently seen at -0.71, the lowest level since March 20.
A negative number represents an inverse relationship, i.e. meaning the two variables are moving in opposite directions, which has been the case between bitcoin and gold since November. I still wouldn't take this as solid evidence that gold and bitcoin are somehow inversely correlated. After all, this is solely based on the sample of this year alone, and obviously we saw rallies beginning to come back into the market after the period of bearishness, so if you look at any depreciating asset in this short term you would also arrive at the conclusion that they too, are inversely correlated with BTC. Is that proof enough? Absolutely not imo, especially considering the fact that gold and bitcoin essentially serve the same monetary purpose, although bitcoin has seen much more growth given the technology underlying it. |
|
|
|
So apparently China will announce their decision in 4 days about mining crypto legality. Here's one scenario:
-They say no more mining, 70% of the hashrate disappears immediately, giving other miners a much larger reward than before. Price crashes as they sell for more profits, and it takes time for other miners to take up the slack in other countries. After things settle out price starts rising again in time for next halving.
What do you think? is there another more likely scenario?
I'm not expecting them to shift their stance on something that they've basically decided long ago, which is to drive crypto businesses (or at least 'unregulated ones', by China's standards) out of the country. This isn't something that is new. I don't agree with the statement that all of a sudden, hash rate in the network is going to drop by so much. Most Chinese mining companies will either have already relocated overseas, or in the process of doing so. Others that are already operating in secrecy won't be deterred just because the government's stance is formalised. I highly doubt that it's going to have an effect on the price either way, though if out of the blue they do somehow come out with new regulations for miners, then it would potentially lead to a rally. But as I said, no one expects that scenario to happen. |
|
|
|
|
I don't disagree with your statement that a recession is going to be due sooner or later, however, I sincerely doubt that the examples that you gave have anything to do with economics as well. There is simply no tangible link in my opinion between these events.
But yes, any period of sustained economic growth is going to end with short term corrections, and so far we've seen quite some time before a big correction has come.
I think that it will be very likely that some time in the future certain asset bubbles in the traditional economy like real estate and stocks will burst or at least slow down, given the fact that they've simply been on the rise for so long, probably due to the availability of cheap credit.
|
|
|
|
Obviously the tech behind crypto is a separate thing from the social use of crypto.
The IMF would have been better off monitoring real life use of crypto rather than artificially asking their staff to "earn" tokens.s process will allow the Fund/Bank to better understand how crypto assets could potentially be used in real life. The goal of this project is to promote knowledge — not bias. The app is a prototype that aims to show the good, the bad and the ugly of the technology, without hype or uninformed criticism.
I'm still quite skeptical when it comes to these initiatives, because it is clear that they are not actually supporting decentralised cryptocurrencies or blockchains in their process of research and development, but rather, looking into institutional solutions that in majority of the cases will be centralised. In these cases, it's no different to a database that is more reliable and efficient to run. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, since it can bring cost benefits to the firms that choose to adopt this technology, though it is in no way the same as decentralised cryptos. Also, who's going to say for sure that this is going to translate into pro-crypto regulation? |
|
|
|
I'm not sure if you're aware of your own reputation. You simply are not going to find anyone willing to finance your site, as good as it is, without collateral and solely based on your word for 1 BTC. If we can't get the full BTC1 investment we are looking for, then all current investors will get their money back!
This makes absolutely zero sense to me. Why not just ask for investors first, and if there aren't 10 investors exactly, just don't ask for deposits to be sent? Instead of having the investors risk to deposit first then be refunded, where there is a larger credit risk. |
|
|
|
Of course it's a correction. What else do you expect after around a month of bullish rallies? And even so, I highly doubt that prices are going to go down below $5k this time because there seems to be sufficient support at that level looking from the way that prices immediately rebounded as it got close to $5.1k. The market is also already consolidating and prices even rebounded somewhat yesterday, just by 1-2%. I don't think the majority of the investor sentiment expects a huge collapse, because most people are still expecting a bullish breakout within the year. People need to realise that these adjustments are completely normal and short term, and happens in all asset classes (not just BTC) when there is are rallies. Classic fear-mongering move.
Absolutely. Well said. |
|
|
|
How do you spot a scammer? When an escrow is used and the seller dodges the escrow in the last minute. I warn everyone to use escrow all the way. I was planning to buy an info item; AGC method at 65% rate; and the price was announced at $150. He gave up on the last minute. With these 2 excuses: -no longer selling it (LOL) -already sold it to a couple people Another excuse is he said I took too long which is retarded. Within the last 5 days I was looking for an escrow and eventually found an escrow early yesterday. He agreed to sell it WITHIN the 5 days. I'm a noob but been here for years, and don't sell anything. On the last minute, he didn't attend the escrow and came up with all the excuses. Thanks to the escrow: DarkStar_, I was able to protect my $150. Here's to show that I actually opened up the escrow on Telegram: Douglass is the Millinillion user.  EDIT: added user profile by request: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1301312Don't be fooled by any profile! If he could actually obtain AGCs at this rate completely legally, then why would he even be selling it to you? Wouldn't that be saturating his own market that he's making big money from? He could literally sell it on Paxful or Localbitcoins for better rates than 65%. Just use common sense here and you'd already know. Anyways, kudos to you for actually looking for escrow. Not a lot of newbies do this, and they often face the consequences afterwards for entrusting random people. It's not conclusive evidence that this person is a scammer (it is extremely probable), though I would personally never deal with him and probably warrants a red tag for backing out of a deal he agreed to. He probably knows his method doesn't work, or is blackhat, and he would get exposed if escrow was ever used. |
|
|
|
It seem like Bitcoin has entered an uptrend, since begin February 2019. It is most probably entering a new big bull cycle that will last for months, most probably for longer than one, one-and-a-half year. I read articles on tradingview of how the Bitcoin price is going to collapse. Well, this has already happened. We are in an uptrend now. I'm not sure why some people are insisting one publishing one pessimistic article after the other. My guess is that they missed their chance to buy low, before April, and now they are trying to influence their readers to how it suits their portfolio. My feeling is that Bitcoin is going steadily up, at least for the time being. What do you think? If you are talking about the long term trend here, then yes, I think that a bull market will be close as we approach the second half of 2019 due to the fact that there is strong support at the $4k level, and market sentiment has eased from being extremely bearish to somewhat more optimistic. But I doubt that it'll be steady. Run ups to bull markets are usually anything but steady, and will consist of rallies and dips along the way that will probably scare away some of the weak hands in the market. Just like right now, BTC experienced a short term adjustment that is still consolidating. That's always been the case, if you look back at previous transitions to bull markets, like the 2016 period. So no, don't expect it to be a linear thing, but I do think that the scale of the bull market ahead will be quite sizeable given the institutional adoption this time round. Also, tradingview is not somewhere you want to base off your analysis of the market from, because anyone with an account can publish their own speculative opinion without any basis. |
|
|
|
Since we are new to Bitcointalk, we are not quite sure how to create an image with the link or a video so we added all the details that our potential investors/donators asked for earlier. Hope these information help to all that we are NOT a scam project.
P.S. I am kindly asking my friends to remove their negative messages and topic about us. Hope all is well now.
@secondlifecoin, this still doesn't explain the fact that the team members' photos on your site are all very poorly photoshopped, and proven in the OP. You can't expect your negative trust to be removed if you don't explain this part. Also, please do explain your founding partner's affiliation with Gapicoin, as raised by OP. Apart from these obvious inconsistencies, I tried to understand what your fundamental goals are. I actually took around 10 mins to read your website's content and from that, I gained absolutely nothing. Your statements generic as can be. Either way, if you can't explain why there are PS'd team photos that were taken down after this thread was created, then your negative trust will stay. Your operation is shady at the very best. |
|
|
|
|
It'll be interesting to see whether or not they will look at bitcoin derivatives as more of the direction that they're heading in, or just bitcoin itself.
I think that if it's the former, there isn't really anything to see here, but if the latter, there could be some positive implications as a result of the listing.
Still though, I doubt it'll influence any fundamentals that bitcoin brings. Potentially it could mean that bitcoin becomes more liquid as more institutions see it as legitimate since it's traded on a platform that they know of, but in reality, the product that Nasdaq offers is really not that much different to all the exchanges that we already see currently.
So yeah, what it comes down to is really recognition, volume, convenience, and potentially liquidity, which are all great benefits especially for institutional investors. But just like ETFs, I doubt that it's going to increase adoption per se.
|
|
|
|
Sorry for your loss, shasan. I've tagged the user, lets see if he responds. Some strange things have gone on with that account lately. Looks like it may have been hacked and then recovered. And I found this topic about the user: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111751.0 Could also be due to account being sold and then recovered illegitimately. Who knows. But these should have all been red flags. I personally would not have been comfortable with dealing with this guy even with a signed message, because of all the shady activity that has gone on in regards to password changes and account recoveries. Besides, all of his trust was given prior to his account being recovered, which means that they should have been discounted in my opinion. Anyways, this is a risk of a no collateral loan that everyone knows about, and I think shasan was prepared to take it. I highly doubt that the guy is coming back given that it's been a month since the due date. |
|
|
|
Fear when others are greedy, greed when others fear - Buffett
Those who have had a trading experience will realize “fear and greed”, they will make you struggle in hesitation, whether should we take action? There is nothing wrong with “fear and greed” in trading. Buffett’s famous saying tells us that there should be a little more reverse thinking in the trading process. For sure. That's why I personally tend to go contrary to what the prevailing market sentiment is when it is obvious that an asset is currently in a bubble or that it is clear people have unsubstantiated fear due to a bear market. One of the best indicators for what market sentiment is at currently would be looking at what stuff the mainstream media is putting out, because usually, they go along with whatever the hot takes are at the moment. Of course, this won't always work out in the best possible way. It is very possible for you to miss out on potential gains, as well as potentially entering the market in an inopportune time. That's why I think averaging both your sells and buys is extremely important in any facet of investing. |
|
|
|
But those caveats aside, the example highlights one of the least-appreciated advantages of bitcoin: Because they can be located anywhere with an internet connection, bitcoin mining operations can take advantage of energy supplies that are impractical for other uses. As explained in depth by Coin Center, the electricity used by bitcoin mining is, contrary to some narratives, not expended on “useless calculations.” The computationally-intensive hashing process is the heart of bitcoin’s distributed security scheme, making it just as important as the (no doubt carbon-intensive) steel doors that guard a bank vault. But, simply by virtue of its flexible location, bitcoin mining can potentially be far more efficient and environmentally friendly than a traditional bank vault. I still think a lot of people think that the electricity that is put into bitcoin mining somehow "goes to waste". The reality is that it serves a purpose, just like how energy put into facilitating transactions on networks like Visa or Mastercard serves a purpose. Without this energy input the bitcoin network would be unable to function. And I'd argue that it's much more "green" and has less of a ecological footprint than precious metals mining, which essentially fulfils the same monetary functions to a lesser degree. I'm not sure whether it's always possible for bitcoin to be using up excess energy on the grid. But ultimately, whether mining is environmentally friendly or not still depends on the source of the energy generation. |
|
|
|
I'm certain that most of these legacy institutions have some sort of an exposure to crypto through proxy firms. Absolutely. Not only that, but we'd never know if these institutions are accumulating from the OTC market. There is really no way of knowing exactly what a corporation is doing internally in terms of adopting crypto. I would not doubt if at least some of these traditional financial institutions were able to spot the bottom and accumulate coins while everyone else was still concerned about the bear market. After all, that's when the smart money starts to flow into the market. I can see nonetheless that the level of participation from institutional investors being an all time high during the next bull market, which is probably going to swing by in 1-2 years given historical context, because of how many have launched either trading services, custodial services, and their own tokens, or are planning on doing so. |
|
|
|
But the biggest thing that stuck out there in that list of countries is India.
There are absolutely NO intentions from our current or past government to implement any token taxing law. If anything, they want to outright ban it.
A case on the Indian Supreme court is pending for months now where the judges have asked the government to come up with a set of rules but the gov keeps pushing for more dates.
So yeah, I'll sign your petition, but correct the fact there first!
I completely agree. I'm not entirely sure why India is on that list either, especially given all the recent news on RBI restrictions and all that (which isn't really recent anymore given the amount of time that these restrictions have been in place). Perhaps it's just a filler. Anyways, this is what countries should be looking to do - positive regulation, as opposed to restrictions or bans. I personally think that the US can really be doing a lot better in terms of incentivising blockchain or crypto related businesses to go operate within their country, because right now, there are others like Japan and Malta that seem to be leading the way. I'm also not sure how a petition alone is going to fare in terms of awareness or actual practical results, though. |
|
|
|
It's just pure evil and doesn't go with the very basic ideology of crypto if you can't have the freedom of speech and anonymity and that's the kind of treatment I got today from TradeSatoshi team!  Today I wanted to trade BTC to buy some ALTs. As it would be my first trade with them I didn't want to get locked in by any sort of ToS terms. So I knocked them in Live chat and wanted to know if I need to KYC to withdraw my funds. They said yes, but as they have two type of verification and it looked little confusing so to double check I told them that I only want to withdraw .0015 BTC worth of coins and if I still need to verify. Surprisingly enough, they don't know the answer of this simple question. Which is definitely weird. I then asked the same thing on their Discord channel and that mod don't know the answer either which is very unexpected from a mod as they should be knowledgeable about their business! They told me to open a support ticket and "WAIT" for the reply. As ''waiting'' annoys everyone, specially in volatile crypto space where the price may move at any second, it annoyed me too and I expressed my disappointment by saying the same thing/points I told here. Aaaaaaand he BLOCKED me! WOW! TradeSatoshi's activities always seemed fishy to me. I tried several times to sell my ANON, but whenever the price of ANON/ZCL spikes, they put it under ''Maintenance'' mood for indefinite amount of time! And now after the treatment I got from them, I simply HATE them  I wouldn't say that they are evil or whatever - that would be an exaggeration. But your experience says a lot about their internal structure and how even the staff themselves within the exchange have pretty much what is the answers to very basic questions that everyone is bound to ask. It's two possibilities. Either they want you to deposit and get your funds stuck at withdrawal knowing that KYC is coming, or they genuinely don't know they stuff. It's not some obscure question, it's a frequently asked one. It's good that you asked around before using them because it could have ended badly. I wouldn't label them as a scam yet, but given their support responses and the maintenance that you talk about as price spikes, it seems fairly fishy for sure. |
|
|
|
I do not know if this is the first P2P platform that enables lightning network, but it seems that acceptance has begun to increase. Users try Lightning on the testnet (testnet.hodlhodl.com) at the start of May but by the end of May, they will be able to use it on the Mainnet. Here in Peter McCormack's podcast, we announce Lightning support, but we'd like to highlight a few things:
1> Everyone will be able to try Lightning on the testnet version of our exchange testnet.hodlhodl.com at the start of May.
2> Mainnet Lightning will be available at the end of May. The good side is that identity is not applied basically (KYC/AML) as it does in localbitcoin/Paxful, so maybe if you're looking for an alternative this might be a good one. Well, any adoption, especially by these trading platforms, is good adoption. I think that hodlhodl is trying to differentiate their product here by integrating lightning, and taking advantage of the fact that Localbitcoins and Paxful right now are both probably receiving regulatory pressures to increase the stringency of their KYC procedures. If this goes well, they could really set themselves apart from other p2p exchange competitors being one of the first to adopt, and being still young means that there are minimal regulatory pressures for them to force KYC onto users. Whether this is anonymity is going to last though as they grow is probably going to be an issue. |
|
|
|
|
Does it really come as a surprise to anyone though? Not really.
The Indian government has esentially been trying to ban bitcoin for the last 1-2 years without stop. Even though there were calls to review the regulations around bitcoin they were all postponed or dropped to the best of my knowledge.
What they think bitcoin is is quite irrelevant, because it's clear what their intentions are with bitcoin policy at the moment, and obviously they are going to go with something that is negative. Ponzi scheme has been one of the most widespread accusations that bitcoin has faced, and it has been debunked time and time again. It's just a way for them to justify their actions, I'd say.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
