There is always a simple solution for the government because they have mechanisms that can manage almost any situation. Printing money is the only thing that saves them at the moment, and they will do it regardless of what the implications are for ordinary people. I read that many, including Powell himself, knew what was happening in SVB even 1 year ago, but they did not do anything, as if it was more convenient for them to have what is happening today.

I don't want to get into any conspiracy theories, but I think that in high politics and business, nothing happens by chance. In that case, we have to ask ourselves what is the ultimate goal of everything that has been happening in the last 4-5 years?

It would be good if you check which firmware version you have on the Nano S, because such an old device probably has a firmware version that cannot be upgraded. Practically, it is a device that may be completely unusable because it cannot work with Ledger Live, and most likely not even with Electrum, not to mention outdated coin apps that would represent a security risk even if you could connect the device with some software.

---

It is always recommended to have the latest Ledger Live before a firmware upgrade, and even if the OP tries with some older versions, he probably won't be able to upgrade a device with such old firmware. There is only one way to find out the answer to that question.


https://support.ledger.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002731113-Update-Ledger-Nano-S-firmware?

It seems to me that the wives of many forum members will be angry, and their mothers-in-law will not be thrilled that their sons-in-law are gambling with their wives' money. Recently, a member announced that he was going to sell his wife's jewelry to invest in Bitcoin, which is perhaps a little less risky than what the OP is doing.

If you take $200 and try to trade with it, you will probably lose it or make a minimal profit, but if you invest that same money in Bitcoin, you might double or triple it in the near future (1-2 years).

Some would say "nothing new in the West", except perhaps that this time all that money will be used to save the banks in order to prevent a repeat of the crisis that arose after 2008. As much as some are surprised that the US government stood behind all deposits in all banks as a guarantee, I wonder if they had any other choice at all? Of course, they could act selectively or not act at all, but that would certainly cause a domino effect and the collapse of dozens of US banks in the first wave, and then the spillover of the crisis to other markets.

The situation in the EU is currently stable (at least that's what they say), but the Swiss case is a clear example that even the best in business can mess up. Regardless of all the guarantees, no one should feel safe keeping their money in the bank, but most people simply don't know any better than that. Bitcoin is an alternative, but most authorities will do everything to make it an alternative for a very small number of people.

You can speculate on the price of BTC, but you cannot be sure that it will not be worth more than $150k or that it will reach less than $100k. No matter how much you rely on past performance and patterns, the fact is that emerging factors such as pandemic, war and inflation along with the recent failures of large banks can significantly affect the global market, which includes the price of Bitcoin.


Look, I'm not saying that you can't profit from trading with altcoins, but that it's about the fact that there are fast pump&dump schemes where you have to react quickly. The fact that overall you are in a loss of 10% while Bitcoin went from $15k+ to $28k+ in just a few months speaks for itself. If you really aim for profits of x20 and more, then you have no choice but to look for an alternative to Bitcoin.

I personally doubt that any of the currently active managers will decide to increase pay rates even close to what CM was paying, or in other words, to suggest it to a potential new advertiser. The standards have long been set, and the question arises, why pay someone more if he agrees to less?


Some may try it, but it is not against the rules of the forum to have multiple accounts and participate with them in different signature campaigns. Of course, there are those who work against the rules, but that is something that has always existed.


What has changed compared to the past is that today we only have two types of advertising, one is mixing, and the other is gambling. About 6-7 years ago, there were several different businesses that used signature campaigns for their advertising.

You have a good memory, I wrote it more than half a year ago, but I still think that every member should stick to it, because otherwise you could get into big trouble. Campaigns come and go, today they are still possible, but tomorrow they may be banned.


That's a long time, which can seem even longer if rank is your only goal. However, merits will be a much bigger obstacle for the majority, especially if there are less and less active merit sources that will reward quality posts.

This one seems even braver than the old John McAfee, who once advertised himself with the same speculations, and we know how that ended. I'm not sure how this bet works, but does that mean whoever wants this bet needs to have $1 million? To me, it seems like some kind of game for the rich, and for them that amount is obviously insignificant enough to gamble away it in this way.

No matter how euphoric and fanatical you are when it comes to BTC, that price can be reached in 90 days only if some big central banks and rich investors start buying BTC en masse and cause mass madness and FOMO that we have never had the opportunity to experience.

I was wondering when your next topic that starts with "have been in crypto just over x days, months..." will appear. Given that you always ask similar questions, the conclusion is that no one gave you a good enough answer or you did not understand what we were answering.


Only 10% considering that you invested 70% in altcoins? Consider yourself lucky that this percentage is not even higher, because most altcoins are completely meaningless and lose value even when the price of BTC rises. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that you should invest 100% in Bitcoin, but that you are taking a much greater risk by investing in altcoins.


x10 to today's BTC price? I won't say it's impossible, but that would mean 1 BTC would be worth $280 000, and the last big bull run only pushed the price up about x3.5 from the previous ATH ($20 000 - 2017). I personally don't expect the price to go that high, but that's just my opinion and it doesn't have to be correct at all.

If in the end you successfully received the transaction, then without any doubt your "delay" has to do with the fact that you are using a non-custodial wallet. With the custodial wallet (if it is synced with the network) you will see the sent transaction almost instantly. I recommend you to change your wallet, because every customer will not feel comfortable if you doubt whether they have made a payment or not.

Use the exchange for what it is intended for, not like some kind of bank account, this is not only the wrong approach, but as you yourself have seen, it can create very unpleasant situations.

Has it ever been profitable? It's one of the biggest scams when it comes to Bitcoin, but apparently it still sells very well today considering that people are constantly asking questions like this. If a so-called "respectable CEX" decides to offer something like this, then I wonder if they are just greedy, or if their business is going so badly that they take money in this way.

It seems that you have a lot of free time, because if it weren't for that, you wouldn't be so focused on the forum. If logging in worries you too much, you can browse the forum as a guest. Be that as it may, I don't think you need to worry too much at this point, for most people, the "addiction" you mention disappears after a while.

There is no doubt that what the OP is asking is possible, but is it possible for a banned account to send merits? I am primarily referring to permanently banned accounts - because they still have access to their accounts and can send and receive personal messages.

I share your opinion about that, because most of the time I had (like now) an avatar and personal text that were not part of any paid campaign. I understand that whoever pays for the campaign wants maximum exposure, but it seems to me that most of those who are interested in something will still click on the signature because it is a direct clickable link.

---

By the way, I'm not part of the sig campaign that I currently have a signature on, but it's one of the oldest projects on the forum I'm a member of, so why not promote something that's been around for a long time and maybe get some more referrals.

As far as I know, all sig campaigns that promote gambling require their participants to be active in the Gambling board, so it's a bit strange that someone who doesn't gamble and doesn't know the business can successfully advertise anything. However, it seems that quality and knowledge are not too important in this case, because after altcoins boards, that part of the forum is polluted with the most spam.

This is just proof that it does not mean that someone will necessarily look "smart" if they use AI, but the exact opposite will happen. If you don't understand some of the basics of what you're asking the AI, then you can't even correct some mistakes that the AI can make.

What is certain is that some will try to "disguise" artificially created posts in a similar way (but also in some new innovative ways) as they do with plagiarism. However, as long as there are those who do not like such behavior, all of them will have a problem, regardless of how intelligent the AI they use is.

Does this mean that in some way you admit that you used forged documents? Regardless of the fact that you claim that you use the same documents elsewhere, maybe those "others" are not good enough at discovering such things.

In my opinion, this whole approach deposit -> game -> KYC is completely wrong, because it should be the other way around. Imagine how much time would be saved if you were caught before you even managed to make a deposit?

It is something like a double-edged sword, on the one hand, money leaves the banks and part of it probably flows into Bitcoin, and on the other hand, for some, the rise in the price of BTC may be a trigger to sell and thus try to compensate for the losses that will occur due to the more or less everything else loses its value. It is true that no one will hesitate too much to sell BTC if they do not see another way out, but we can hope that the demand for the same will also increase and that there will be no major crashes in the near future.

Realistically, the price of BTC is approaching where it would be if Kwon&Bankman didn't happen, which is somewhere around $30k.

You wrote that well and I agree that for them Bitcoin was and will remain only a stepping stone in achieving their goals. They actually said everything about Bitcoin with their works, because if Bitcoin was enough for them, they wouldn't have created something else, which is the complete opposite of what Bitcoin represents.


Always the same old stories, but we should not forget that the audience is changing and that it sounds very interesting and new to some, because they are beginners who need advice, guidance and vision. According to CZ, the average investor is not intelligent enough to be his own bank anyway, and instead of teaching them about it, he advocates a custodial service because it suits him personally.

But even at this moment you are in some way an "influencer" because you have something in your signature, don't you? Most projects can turn into a scam at any moment, and even those that are not can be misused in such a way that someone uses them for bad purposes. In principle, I agree that we should be careful how we influence others, although it is not the tool's fault that someone uses it in the wrong way.