Latest posts of: magneto

It's not necessarily always stupidity, nor do you have to be stupid to make these mistakes.

It's just that a lot of beginners don't thoroughly research or bother to ask questions before they attempt something for their first time. And when there is money involved, this is never a good idea. Another factor is that beginners from my experience usually fall into traps that play on their greed, like promised returns on their funds or steep discounts on goods.

Quote

Sign a message :
Just forgot the thread, I have noticed few days back that a guy got scam by signature. Someone gave few code to him for sign a message from his wallet. Code was request for payment. After sign message his fund was transferred to hacker account. Is it not a stupidity? Why should we sign with unknown code? Obviously it was happened due to lack of knowledge.

Like this. It's honestly quite an elaborate scam, but warning signs should be apparent when a seemingly meaningless message is asked to be signed. But with a little research and asking around if you had these suspicions, people could easily avoid it.

Quote

I have been always telling my fellow bitcoin investor friends. Bitcoin is scarce!. And it is scarcer than we think.

Scarcity isn't just about the supply. It's also about the quantity demanded.

If adoption doesn't pick up, then bitcoin will not become more scarce, and none of these calculations that you have made would matter whatsoever. I also think that the assumption of everyone in the world holding equal amounts of BTC is not a valid one, as that would pretty much never happen.

But I understand where you are coming from in terms of your concept of "true scarcity", and I agree. Given the fact that fiat doesn't have a limited supply the way that bitcoin does with a capped supply, it can be difficult for people to see the advantages that bitcoin has regarding its function as a store of value compared to that of fiat currencies, though it is be apparent to many BTC adopters.

How does the yobit sig campaign have anything to do with the crypto market as a whole?

I think that you have so many misconceptions probably about crypto in general that it'll be difficult to even start explaining. But let me make this a easy to understand for you as possible - there is absolutely no correlation between marketing done on a forum by an individual company, which is shady as hell in itself, and the direction of the entire bitcoin market.

The only correlation between this relaunch of the campaign that I can draw would be potentially the level of spam on the forum, given their history of not moderating their participants for quality. But there is none of the wider implications you speak of.

Quote

Let's have a healthy discussion as to why Yobit is/might be a shady exchange, and whether or not the promoters of said service should face any repercussions for the damages they do against customers who are unknown to Yobit's business practices. (Which is to squeeze as much money out of every customer possible.). Or if this is completely healthy, and everyone just has to do their own due diligence before using them.

The fact that they essentially incentivise pyramid-like activity on their platform with things like ROMs (Rise only markets) and their Investbox (which is essentially somewhat of a HYIP in itself) makes them shady at best.

This is not to mention the fact that their customer support has demonstrated time and time again that they are completely unreliable and will not help you out when you encounter any sort of issue with them. That is a fact given the absurd numbers of complaints you see on this forum on a regular basis.

Is it a normal business model for an exchange to encourage manipulation and even make a new type of market, and the IEOs, solely for manipulation? Definitely not. Is the Investbox a ponzi? I'd say so, and it'll eventually collapse sooner or later given the unsustainable rates they offer. But anecdotal evidence alone should be sufficient to accuse them of not being a legit exchange, at the very least, not a safe exchange.

First of all, she invested in Coinbase. Not bitcoin itself. There is a huge difference between decentralised cryptos, and equity of a company.

Secondly, what celebrities invest in or what they endorse doesn't necessarily mean that something is mainstream. It's as simple as that. Whether bitcoin is mainstream still depends on the actual adoption levels, and the awareness of BTC in an average community. It's not like one celebrity endorsement will change these figures overnight, like this article makes it out to be.

This is completely falsified news that is made only to produce these sensationalist headlines and nothing else. They make BTC seem more like a fad, or a movement, as opposed to a legitimate currency and store of value. As BitHodler said - it's non news. It's neither positive nor negative.

Quote

Why does the US get to print money to save their banks? Why does China pump their stock market by printing more money whenever the stocks dip?

This may be the beginning of the new crash: every country out there decides they want to do quantitative easing too.

US banks got bailed out, why can't governments get bailed out?

The thing wth bailing out these institutions is that at the end of the day, the monetary base is increased and that ultimately depreciates the value of money in the long run. Same with quantitative easing, you are literally inflating the money supply to artificially stimulate the economy. Perhaps this is useful in the short run as a countercyclical mechanism, but I don't think it'll do any good in the long term.

As you said, it's not necessarily just Argentina either - it's many countries around the world doing this. Banks who are too big to fail.

To a lot of people, this fiat system is not sustainable and will eventually collapse. I guess it's why people look at bitcoin as a hedge against the fiat monetary system right now, and a store of value, since it can't simply be manipulated or debased by the government the way QE can be carried out. I doubt though that a paradigm shift will come until after a major collapse in some country.

Yep, Cryptogift is indeed a telegram handle used by YoutubeTV, a well known scammer.

I don't even think that proof linking MadmanAmazon to the person who OP dealt with on selly is necessary, because it is so obvious that Madman is running a con. Otherwise, he wouldn't be selling gift cards at such steep discounts, while trying to censor complaints on his thread by locking and self moderating his thread.

I would not be surprised either if Madman was connected to more accounts that are also autobuy scammers in the past, given the potential connection with him and YoutubeTV.

A word to the OP - make sure that you just avoid steeply discounted gift cards at all costs, even if they say they accept escrow. Even escrow cannot protect you against fraudulent or carded GCs, and that will land you into deep trouble even if the card works.

Quote

“Cryptocurrency should not exist at all. It interferes the development of commodity production. And making money out of money is detrimental to the entire population of the earth. Those who work in this market are speculators,” the parliamentarian said.

How does an alternate currency that is separate from the traditional fiat system, all of a sudden decrease productivity and all that?

While it is true that a lot are in bitcoin for speculative purposes only and not to actually adopt the technology and use it as a means of payment, it is not the ultimate goal of bitcoin at all.

If they were really this concerned regarding cryptocurrencies, then why were there rumours that Russia was interested in undertaking their own crypto projects or whatnot? Also, how is a proposed ban going to work at all given that bitcoin is decentralised? Are they just going to ban the businesses that use crypto? Either way, I wouldn't really see this as an issue whatsoever. The enforceability of a worldwide ban is simply not there.

I don't think that this necessarily translates into actual recognition for bitcoin itself.

It's not rare to see experts of certain industries to be seen as witnesses or be involved in certain court cases. This is no different. But ultimately, they do provide a much needed aid to legal professionals who aren't necessarily familiar with bitcoin, and perhaps even give evidence that help either party in winning their case, it's just that I really don't think this is very significant news at all.

Quote

I think this is great to help catch those who are moving mass amounts of money

How is moving massive amounts of funds in itself an illegal activity?

Quote from: AppliedOptimal on April 18, 2019, 08:09:36 AM

Is it going to start with poor countries and their dictators?
Is it going to start in the USA with their SEC and ETF and everything?
Discuss.

I don't think that the SEC approving the ETF will have anything to do with adoption.

After all, ETFs are going to be used by mainly institutions (and some retail investors, but they're not the primary benefactors), and will not really benefit the network in any tangible way.

What I think will spark the most adoption is in certain countries in which fiat currencies are unstable, and they actually have a need to seek alternative forms of store of value in order to preserve their wealth - not institutionalised derivatives. That'll get adoption from the grassroots level.

If you are comfortable with providing your personal information to a third party, then I don't see why not.

But if you're solely going for the airdrop rewards then I certainly don't think it's worth it. Personally, I'd see my privacy as worth much more than just an airdrop, especially when it comes to financials as they can now trace back transactions done by you to your name.

It's an offer that blockchain.com has put out there, and it's up to you to accept it. No one is forcing you to do it.

Quote

And also, according to the Italian Inland Revenue, the private user that earns capital gains (profits) on their crypto sales should pay the taxes as "different incomes" on two conditions:

if they are the result of fixed-term contracts;
been held in their account for over 7 days (a week) for an average value in excess of €51,645.

Does this mean that one would only be paying CGT if they benefit off of fixed contracts, and not actual selling of BTC? Also, does it mean that any amount under that figure wouldn't get taxed, or would it just be included within the taxable income as opposed to having a separate "different income"?

Either something is omitted from translation, or this is some pretty vague rules that I at least can't figure out.

But this is something that is common throughout the world right now when it comes to crypto regulation, especially tax laws surrounding them. There are just still so many grey areas and vague points that need clarification in the tax code, and since not a lot of professionals even have experience dealing with these issues, it just makes it even harder for an individual to deal with them.

The post is way too long. Please cut down on unnecessary details and focus on the main events. Did your first scam accusation against yoloyet get resolved (was that the one involving only one card that got delivered at the end)? For reference, there is also another scam accusation by a different user here.

You should have never gotten comfortable with this guy, and sent funds upfront. He seems to be exit scamming at this point, and if you don't have any funds that are held in escrow, you really have no chance of recourse. From the other thread he is even claiming that the person on telegram is an impersonator, I wonder if he's going to do the same with yours.

Quote from: RavenC on April 16, 2019, 04:54:27 PM

If I understand correctly, this amount is for the amount that yoloyet owes you, correct? What's the point of escrowing in this instance when he still has complete control over the funds? He mentions conditions about you not being able to "disturb" him or whatnot, but these conditions won't even matter if funds are never in the hands of the escrow.

Quote from: Elvyn247 on April 16, 2019, 07:40:29 PM

Rightbtc.com is currently down and the admin have not released any statement about it, I hope we are safe?

From what I can see it is no longer down, but the all the trading pairs aren't showing up and functioning correctly still. No ANN yet from official sources, I don't think.

Perhaps it's just a temporary maintenance that wasn't scheduled, though it is extremely unprofessional for them to not have released any public statement about this hiatus given that it can affect customer's access to their funds.

With that said, I wouldn't consider RightBTC a trustworthy exchange by any means.

They have had constant withdrawal issues in the past (here, here and here), there is uncertainty as to whether they are a regulated entity, and their support and PR people don't seem to be terribly responsive. I'd avoid using them once they come back online, if I were you.

Quote from: sann111 on April 07, 2019, 11:51:39 PM

Can anyone guide me, is this considered gifting someone if you send over bitcoin to another familymember on coinbase? How do you file this on tax form?

Small amounts that are under the relevant gifting limits, the tax authorities probably won't bat an eye on it.

But if your concern is solelyp that you're transferring funds to a family member, I really don't think that there is much of an issue here. There is absolutely no one who says that transactions undertaken in BTC to family have to be gifts in the first place, unless your intention is really to gift them.

If you're actually gifting funds, find out the relevant limits in your country from official sources, and stick to them. There may be tax implications that you have to oblige by regardless of the payment method, with BTC or fiat, on or off blockchain.

Quote from: Lmaooo on April 11, 2019, 04:14:39 PM

The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) revealed its intent to eliminate the bitcoin and crypto mining sector immediately in its guidance for adjustments to industrial structure published on April 1.

The list of sectors that will be encouraged, restricted and eliminated will undergo a public consultation period until May 7 according to the report of SCMP, and as such, mining facilities in China are likely to be able to operate throughout the next month or two.

If after the public consultation phase the NDRC and the government of China move forward with the current plans to shut down the bitcoin and crypto mining sector, it would signal the end of the most dominant bitcoin mining region.
Why It Could be Good For Bitcoin and Crypto

The potential imposition of a ban on crypto mining may lead to the decentralization of mining across the global mining market and encourage miners based in China to move to foreign countries.

“Bitcoin mining will no longer be dominated by China but become more decentralized,” a Beijing-based cryptocurrency research company analyst Michael Zhong told SCMP, emphasizing that Chinese miners in Yunnan and Sichuan would have to leave.

For many years, major mining pools based in China in the likes of BTC.com and Antpool, some of which are operated by Bitmain, have had dominance over the hash power of the Bitcoin network.

Wouldn't they still be centralised if certain companies just decide to move to a more crypto-friendly country with more positive regulations, that also happens to have cheap electricity as a replacement of their mining activities in China? I'm sure that these mining companies are already thinking about this.

I'd say that "work wonders" is a huge exaggeration here. True decentralisation won't occur just because China bans mining, or whatever else.

Even if mining continues in China for a while more until the rules are finally enforced, I highly doubt that no one right now has been prepared for this new restriction to kick into effect. So if you say that it'll have a profoundly negative impact, then I'd disagree with you. But on the other hand, it doesn't have a notable positive effect either.

Quote from: olumyd on April 15, 2019, 08:12:46 PM

I think Bitcoin's volatility is more suited for scalp traders to make timely quick bucks. On the other hand, not sure swing trading is any good especially because when the bull run starts, a swing trader can be confused on where to exit the market to maximize profit.

Any credible handbook on scalp or swing trading exclusive to cryptocurrencies, especially for the top 10 cryptos?

It honestly depends on what resources are available to you, how much time you want to dedicate to trading, etc.

To me, even swing trading may be too short term as I'm a firm believer in the long term fundamentals of bitcoin, as opposed to trading it solely as a speculative asset. However, if I see that there is a likely overheating short term market, then I'd make a temporary move to move out a portion and get in via dollar cost averaging once prices dip again.

Small intra-day trading is simply not worth it unless you have experience, sufficient capital, and the right tools like bots to execute your trades. It's harder than what people think. In the long term, prices move due to fundamentals, which are easier to analyse in my opinion. In the short term, it's a lot more randomness, TA, and emotions.

Quote

This news story could illustrate one advantage crypto currencies have over conventional banking and credit platforms in terms of them being less trust based. Smart contracts in crypto would likely be deliberately designed to prevent this form of exploit. While credit card companies as trust based systems would more commonly fail to recognize the attack vector.

Every so often I see stories in the news where a bank and consumer get into a legal dispute and the bank loses in impressive fashion. Years ago there was a guy who wore fake vampire teeth in news interview that sued wells fargo and won(news clip below):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oIxBVhGubI

Perhaps we will see less of this occurrence as financial institutions like banks make a transition to more algorithmically regulated banking which relies less on trust. Until then, I hope everyone enjoys humor and entertainment from this, while it lasts.

Certainly ironic considering that these fine print T&Cs are exactly what financial institutions use to sometimes take advantage of their customers.

I'm not exactly sure how suing this guy for fraud is going to turn out for the bank, especially considering that a previous ruling was already made in favour of the borrower. Though, I certainly don't think that the type of compensation the guy is asking for is going to be handed out either.

At the end of the day, as you say, an immutable ledger may be needed to eliminate this type of problem (even though it may not be widespread). Whenever you involve a human in a certain task, including verifying contracts etc., there are bound to be errors and potential exploits available.

I've used hardblock before as well, they may be more convenient in terms of selling, but rates may be worse.

Coinspot is also a pretty safe option to go with if you are willing to verify yourself and all that, they've been around for years (I remember them existing for pretty much as long as I've been into bitcoin), and I don't think I've heard much complaints about them at all. Never heard of Jinance though. Independent Reserve I've also heard of, though their site does seem a bit unprofessional.

At the end of the day though, I do think that for a small trader who plays the long term market swings p2p trading may give you the most flexibility and convenience, especially if you want some anonymity. Rates are going to be somewhat worse, but if you aren't trading with a lot of volume, it barely matters given the withdrawal fees that some of these platforms have anyways.

As LoyceV mentioned, as fees are quite low right now, it's certainly not a bad idea to consolidate your inputs, so that if market activity does pick up in the near future you can avoid paying fees in excess of what you should be paying if you only had one input, as opposed to many.

But yeah, right now, the fees that the usual wallets are suggesting (like Electrum) are quite high.

I've personally had no trouble generally getting confirmations on the first block for normal transactions with using the “within 5 blocks" fees or even lower. Of course, there is an added risk which you probably shouldn't take if it's an important transaction that you need assurance will be confirmed ASAP, but if it's just a normal transaction that you can wait on, certainly do evaluate the risks along with the fees and make a decision based on that.