I still sometimes see Paypal ads being in the front page, even though it is one of the highest risk transaction methods available on LBC that people actively trade with. Fairly sure that I've never seen gift cards being listed, though.

Apart from the obvious answers of reputation, and age of account, I think that another factor that plays in a role in determining your ad positioning is probably your response time. Most ads on the front page from anecdotal observation is green in response time. So if you only have a yellow or grey response time, you may be less likely to be featured on the front page.

I think that LBC most likely has an algorithm that takes all of these into account, and aggregates them before ranking them. If you want to know specifically how the algorithm runs, then you'd have to ask support, though they probably won't tell you anything given that people with inside info can game the system.

I'm still not terribly convinced that this is necessarily the start of a new bull market, as some people have already jumped to conclusions about.

We can already see some resistance at the $5k level that is keeping prices down right now. And I'd certainly agree with the fact that the bull rally is pretty much solely fueled by FOMO, and backed by close to no fundamentals. People have been waiting for a spark in the market, it seems.

But it does go to show that investors are at least somewhat confident in $3k as a floor, in my opinion. Though, even after the rally the probabilities of regressing down to $4k is present, but I don't think that we'll see new lows being made anymore. The second half of the year should see some pumps of similar nature, given that the halving is occurring in the first half of 2020, which again, will likely spark demand in the market.

From what I've heard, Changelly's after-transaction support isn't the best, especially when you consider how there are cases of people having their coins stuck in limbo for days before getting their transaction processed.

Obviously though, how long it'll take exactly will depend on what issue it exactly is. If the problem is from your end, like failing to include a memo in your deposit when you are supposed to, then expect a longer wait time or them not being willing to process the issue at all.

You could also try messaging them on bitcointalk, they seem to be somewhat active. Though I think that the response time you'll get from this will be no smaller than if you just waited for a response from their technical team.

Loan sent to staked address as discussed on telegram: b2e7414fb755f9ef9872e80b00c63ded8e85f17d533e979de3bfafb2671bf83c

Please repay to bc1q45n2uvxt3h9ta5zfnhtfcslgeyv5rk9qt7fav6 on or before 8/4.

Thanks

---

Oh well, we'll see.


I understand the risks, but I can afford to lose it if things do go awry. He's told me about the trading competition before, but the amount he was asking was too large at the time. He's also had a loan from me of similar size previously, so I'm somewhat comfortable with loaning him .05 despite his trust score.

The government isn't accepting bitcoin as a means of settling tax payments.

I think that the main takeaway from the article is that, a third party middleman is used in order to convert the BTC into CAD first, before the government collects the tax payments. It's not as if the government has the payment infrastructure set up in bitcoin and ready to go, at least not at this stage.

In this case, there is zero exchange rate risks for the government receiving the payment, and it's almost the same from their perspective compared to traditional means of payment through fiat. It's most likely just hyped up news that in reality, won't really make any difference.

There is absolutely a need to keep all records, although there are still some limitations as to using portfolio trackers.

Your data is exposed to third parties who is technically and potentially capable of conducting data mining on all of its user data, leading to privacy concerns and potentially to give themselves a better understanding of the market (although these are just theoretically, and have not been confirmed). So if you're extremely concerned about privacy, you should probably use a spreadsheet of your own.

But all the rest of your points definitely still stand - especially come tax time, it's hard to dig back to old trades all the time. You'll appreciate then why it is crucial that you record all your trades down as you conduct them, no matter how much hassle it may seem at the time, because they will compound as you go along.

Prices of bitcoin has absolutely no correlation to what the network actually does. In fact, improvements have been made during the bear market stretch.

The central bank of Italy is really stretching their arguments here. Everyone knows that the value of bitcoin fluctuates greatly on a cyclical basis, and it just so happens that the scale of the past bull market was so great that the correction was just as large in magnitude. Although it could be true that bitcoin never gets mainstream adoption on a mass scale, I don't agree with the fact that this possibility is discounted simply because of pricing reasons, and because certain institutions have halted their progress with developing products.

If we're judging something solely based on its value, then are all companies a bust whenever there is an overall bearish sentiment in the stock market? Also, a bull market is likely to emerge now that the bearish stretch seems to be done, and also due to the halving. Does that mean that bitcoin is somehow fundamentally better?

Please do attach all evidence, preferably through the structure that is outlined through the scam reporting format sticky.

Regarding your issue, it's good that you recognise that it is a scam that it's almost impossible there is any chance of recourse. But you have to realise that mining rig sellers/reselling scams are very common, and should not be trusted on any level unless you are certain that the company behind the site is actually official, or officially affiliated to a manufacturer.

Just don't deal with random sites that you come across, because the way these sites are set up, they likely don't even have anything in stock and are just stealing images from other sites. There is also no chance of using escrow, and if you're paying by BTC, you can't reverse the payment. If unsure about a site's legitimacy, ask.

Is there really a problem with having block reward though? It's essentially an incentive for the miners to keep the network going.

You seem to be extremely concerned with the inflation that these brings by, and I can assure you that it has minimal impact. Firstly, the percentage that the currency base is growing is very controlled, and much less than a lot of what the fiat currencies around the world is measuring in at, especially when you consider the fact that coins are being lost on a daily basis that will never be recovered (unless through brute force, which is very unlikely).

Furthermore, short term pricing have more to do with demand than the supply. The value of BTC will reflect the sentiment of the market, more so than the supply of coins. In the long run, there is a cap on the amount of BTC that can ever be mined, which makes it in fact a better store of value than fiat currencies.

It's really a non-issue if you ask me. And it certainly doesn't warrant centralised intervention, when you consider that this emission system was designed to be here in the first place.

The only thing that is somewhat true from the four accusations is probably speculative. Bitcoin's value right now certainly still has a speculative element to it given the fact that real adoption is still fairly low in the grand scheme of things.

However, apart from that, I think that they're honestly just stating things that have been already reiterated over and over again in the past.

Bitcoin is decentralised, and there is no one that can stop certain rogue people from using a currency for illegal means. It's interest how they're this concerned about bitcoin's criminal use, while basically completely ignoring the fact that their own fiat currency is also used for the same deeds. It's simply impossible for a currency, especially a decentralised one, to regulate what exactly it is used for.

They're also completely ignoring the utility that bitcoin brings, in terms of being a global means of exchange, and store of value. I would certainly take what they say with a huge grain of salt overall.

There is absolutely nothing that's stopping a bank from adopting bitcoin.

This is also a reason why I think the argument bitcoin will replace banks, or the fact that bitcoin is in direct competition with banks, is somewhat untrue. If bitcoin does somehow become the dominantly used currency across the world, it's unlikely that banks will simply go out of business, instead of adjusting their business model to denominate their services in bitcoin as well.

I personally think that it'll only be a matter of time before institutionalised adoption occurs, although, such adoption really has no net effect on the actual runnings of the bitcoin blockchain, since their business will mostly be conducted off the chain.

Excellent points.

One of the things with transacting in gold and silver is that, often, you aren't transacting in the real deal. Under the gold/silver standards there was still a central bank, or authority, that issued notes that were representative of its value in gold/silver. That is not a trustless system, and it's next to impossible to not abuse this system through fractional reserve, and eventually defaulting on the promises of paying the bearer on demand in precious metals in physical form.

That's essentially what happened that brought the gold standard era to an end. At the end of the day, it's all an illusion.

Bitcoin is different. You don't need a central entity in order to transact with it efficiently (as opposed to the bulky nature of precious metals), and intrinsically, there can be no fractional reserve. The fungibility of currency is also preserved much better than precious metals, since purity and weight don't need to be tested.

I think that right now, the countries with the highest adoption potential will still be the ones where the government is actively trying to regulate crypto businesses, and legitimising crypto as a viable form of payment. These are countries which exchanges are most likely to go to in the future, and governments are able to gain tax revenue from, like Malta.

South Africa could be one of those countries in future. Though the stats suggest that currently this is more likely happening from a grassroot level rather than because favourable government regulation, which isn't bad for sure.


I don't think that it's fair to assume that the BTC is used in illegal ways, or necessarily on the dark market. Political and economic instability prompts people to invest in alternative assets that are independent of the fiat system to seek a store of value, which bitcoin certainly is one.

Do you happen to know why so many scam sites happen to use your exact script (just modified)?

Because as I mentioned before, I've probably seen at least 10-20 similar sites with all the same layout. I understand that you guys aren't affiliated with them obviously, but is there anything that would explain why these sites would prefer to use your front end code over others?

Also, I doubt that reporting itself would do much. This isn't the only iteration of the scam, and it seems like that a feature of this type of site is constantly evolving domain names, which makes it hard to report them to any central host.

I agree. Obviously people who are affiliated with/have used a service personally are more likely to advocate for it.

I personally think that it's not necessarily that there is a clear cut answer, but rather what features you want to use. And research on that front needs to be carried out by the individual who is using the mixing service, e.g. whether you'd like to have private keys (chips), or simply have funds sent to an address.

At the end of the day though, I think that all else being equal, and you're looking at the two options, the objective thing to say is that Chipmixer has a much longer history and track record of being responsive and reputable, compared to other mixers that have just popped up. They may still be legit, but there is a higher risk.

Both scenarios are possible.

I personally wouldn't necessarily short bitcoin at the moment though unless you're trading on high leverage (which comes with higher risks), because I don't think it's very likely that prices will drop below the $3k bottom that we've seen as the floor thus far even if we do correct below $3.8k as you say.

A recovery is imminent at this stage, and we'll most likely see some sort of major rally before the end of the year in my opinion. But in the short term, prices can certainly continue to move down, when given the fact that the market sentiment has still not reversed imho.

To be completely frank, I still struggle to see why this news is relevant to the decentralised cryptocurrency space.

Even if Citi was to adopt some sort of blockchain technology, they will be doing so in order to streamline their own transaction processing facilities and processes. The entire system will always be in the control of the bank, its value will most likely come from fractional reserve banking, as opposed to bitcoin which is decentralised.

Thus, there is no difference to this on a fundamental level compared to the current electronic payment processing that is currently in banks. If Citibank decides to invest, good for them, it may lead to long term benefits. But if they don't, it won't affect anything that current decentralised cryptocurrencies already do.

You're essentially buying in order to get the advice of certain "analysts".

It's no different to some form of signal group of telegram, or copytrading previously on platforms like BTC-e. Except with this app, you're doing this externally and automatically.

The risks are obvious, the signals may not turn out to be profitable, and the so called "group leaders" may go rogue and pump up prices of coins that they currently hold already. I personally would rather formulate my own research and invest according to that, rather than having to buy a subscription and having potentially even more counter party risks.

A lot of exchanges are already doing this, and this should have been done way earlier. I'm fairly sure that Binance has been doing this kind of thing for at least a year, since you can't withdraw if I remember correctly until you add a 2FA method.

2FA does not guarantee security, but at least now there is a much less likely probability that hacks will occur into user accounts.

Also, interesting that Kraken haven't added SMS/phone calls as a means of 2fa verification. Perhaps setting that up would present too much of a cost for them? I'm not sure, but there are certainly people who would prefer SMS over authentication apps.

I don't really see any kind of sign of recovery that is happening within Venezuela.

The governmental structure has not really changed, and the bolivar continues to depreciate as we speak due to widespread hyperinflation. You're right though about the businesses within Venezuela wanting to move out of the domestic markets, which is obvious considering the circumstances.

This power cut will probably affect mostly bitcoin holders within Venezuela, and perhaps prompt innovation in terms of offline bitcoin payments. But other than that, I don't see any global implications.