Surprise and by my opinion it explain current price rise Crypto press is not sharing that news yet Take close look and read The bill would clarify which virtual currencies qualify as commodities, provide optional regulatory structure House bills with bipartisan support would direct regulators to examine new ways to oversee digital assets and protect them from manipulation, as some lawmakers strive to make financial technologies more mainstream. In the U.S., a group known as the Virtual Commodity Association has been working to establish an industry-sponsored regulator tasked with governing digital assets. If the idea moves forward, it would function in a similar manner to stock markets, where conduct is partly policed by the industry itself. https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/house-bills-revisit-regulation-cryptocurrenciesIf that bill will pass then even ETF will be possible “Virtual currencies and the underlying blockchain technology has a profound potential to be a driver of economic growth,” Soto said in a statement. “That’s why we must ensure that the United States is at the forefront of protecting consumers and the financial well-being of virtual currency investors, while also promoting an environment of innovation to maximize the potential of these technological advances.”
Dunno about this one. Firstly, it's only a bill which means that it's obviously not enacted. Secondly, will classifying certain cryptos and bitcoin as a commodity do any good? A shift in classification doesn't mean much if it doesn't come with some positive consequences, whether from a tax standpoint (which is unlikely in my opinion), or regulatory standpoint. In fact, it could even mean tighter regulations and restrictions in some areas. Also, where did you obtain the information that bitcoin ETFs may get passed solely because they may be reclassified as commodities? I personally think that whether this regulation actually gets reconsidered or not wouldn't have a significant impact on adoption, as hugeblack mentioned as well. |
|
|
|
|
Wait - if you are transferring them their BTC by the end of each month, why do you need to hold funds for them? I'm terribly confused.
But if you do need to hold funds for them, I think that they will obviously appreciate control over their funds to the fullest possible extent. Multisig in this instance could certainly work.
I still think that a hardware wallet should be discounted. I don't think that it's that technical intensive given ledger/trezor's intuitive UIs. In this case, you'd only have to worry about sending the BTC to the correct address at the end of each month, instead of actually holding a key in a multisig. They would have full responsibility of securing the BTC which I don't know if they would be comfortable with. Please do correct me if I got your scenario totally wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
I definitely wouldn't jump to conclusions here and say that google's attitude towards bitcoin is all of a sudden changing.
They simply have this domain in the possession, for whatever reason. It could be possible that they just see resale value in terms of passing it off to the next buyer for a much better price than normal registration fees. It could also have already been reserved by someone, although that's just my speculation and could be completely wrong.
It's really probably going to turn out to be just a normal, business decision as opposed to anything that they're trying to get across to the market. But yes, it could certainly be used for good given the quality of the domain, if someone ever obtains it.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it depends. Bitcoin is a pure decentralised cryptocurrency, and it is obviously the most trusted and most adopted, while a lot of these other cryptocurrencies try to address different niches and needs that simply aren't what bitcoin is trying to target.
Is bitcoin's value diluted by this? I think to some extent in the short term, especially in bull markets where money may be flowing to other cryptos instead of solely to bitcoin.
But in the long run, what matters is still adoption. I think that people looking into other cryptocurrencies that offer different functionality won't necessarily have a negative impact on bitcoin's adoption levels. Plus, there is really no way to stop the creation of new cryptos. Bitcoin's supply will still be capped, and that won't be any different, which is a reason why I personally wouldn't get too excited about "fad" coins.
|
|
|
|
As a trader the transaction fee factor will be considered first because it directly affects the total amount of money that we are investing.
Let's review the transaction fee of the top 10 crypto exchanges 2019  Please share your opinion (I will continue to update the list of other exchanges soon...) Thanks for the list. Though I think that it would be helpful to have something similar, except also including metrics such as any deposit and withdrawal network fees (I don't think that there are lists of both actual trading fees and deposit/withdrawal fees available that are actively updated). Though lower maker/taker fees are obviously better than higher ones, a lot of smaller investors will care more about how much it costs to withdraw, because of the low volumes that they are dealing with. Furthermore, I think that some exchanges have rewards programs or tiered exchange fees. Would there be any way to incorporate that info into the chart as well? |
|
|
|
If anything, not TA itself is manipulation; selling TA to others is.
Exactly. And regardless of what the intentions of the OP is, I think that he does bring up some good points. Most of the articles that are presented by media with some sort of price prediction and the so called "analysis" are complete bogus. And I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of ulterior motive other than purely gaining publicity that these predictions are still being published and pushed. I think that in any given moment, TA could probably give multiple different predictions that may completely contradict each other, depend on the way you are actually analysing. And it is this that can be used to manipulate the markets, if you can somehow get others to buy into this narrative. |
|
|
|
I have repaid my recent loan of 0.03/0.035. I am requesting a 0.02/0.024 BTC loan for 1 week. I have a deposit of 0.04 BTC incoming by Monday, so it can cover this. The address to send to: 3NXHcYyooCGhGFUAhzfKNHNGre1hRq6398 Signed by my staked address: Address: 12hYBWiPqfwdveGzpbRdGxeqnoMcNvGNSq Message: 3NXHcYyooCGhGFUAhzfKNHNGre1hRq6398 Feb-22 0.02/0.024 Loan Sign: HBmCKCCfdYCjdJERqVUIPMm2KN0QZwCcIqkJGTSV6QYUFFZXmXMQxllk0qAxwk9SRRebkGqmYESSOoh ffhS+lt4= Thank you. Fixed, extra space or something mis-copied. New signature message posted and checked to verify.
Loan funded through TXID: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/d67dcbca6e4ac967cb74d16dca233576b477867cd04a186edd019a9aa91d94beYou can repay to the same address that sent the loan: bc1q45n2uvxt3h9ta5zfnhtfcslgeyv5rk9qt7fav6 Quoting OP for reference.
EDIT: Marcotheminer has requested an additional 0.02 BTC loan via PM, so please be aware that total amount has increased to 0.04 BTC. Repayment date remains the same as before and repayment amount is doubled. Will attach txid. Sent: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/af9b8a86ededd67166981cdea66caf041e40b7ac6d52f25ad91ed58c5af955eeIncreasing loan amount to total 0.04. So an extra 0.02 is being sent willingly by original lender.
Signature: G9QcpQlY64Z+gStkG1owJ//3kJ5DeD+R6lAKKl/k4qETU1DN3XgevWq8WYkpsk53raWquO2qIlYBnHfCevnruGk=
Message: 37Tg5YwdWu16JT9X76qtjqajRGwJhJYnNj. Additional loan funding, 0.02 BTC, return 0.024, 1 week
Signed by the same address. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
I have repaid my recent loan of 0.03/0.035. I am requesting a 0.02/0.024 BTC loan for 1 week. I have a deposit of 0.04 BTC incoming by Monday, so it can cover this. The address to send to: 3NXHcYyooCGhGFUAhzfKNHNGre1hRq6398 Signed by my staked address: Address: 12hYBWiPqfwdveGzpbRdGxeqnoMcNvGNSq Message: 3NXHcYyooCGhGFUAhzfKNHNGre1hRq6398 Loan request 0.02/0.024 Feb 22 Sign: G1ISB9Jy13Duj5+qTsfzx8PQ2BMw8/GWSm7PBnhM4jp1Eo8ybi3UqgFqL63ZVniyVaObiYp7SDZ9OToazkEWfg4= Thank you. I can't verify the signature, showing a wrong message: http://prntscr.com/mojmlu or http://prntscr.com/mojmxqShowing the wrong message for me as well on multiple platforms.
Marco, I can fill this loan either to the staked address of 12hYBWiPqfwdveGzpbRdGxeqnoMcNvGNSq, or if you are able to produce a valid signed message from that address. I'm fairly sure that there is probably just a spelling/formatting mistake that is invalidating the signature. Let me know either here or via PM. |
|
|
|
I'm researching them and can't find anything to back-up their huge claims. Including the 600M they claim to have given in coin loans, I suppose most of those are institutions, name one, get it confirmed by the institution itself.
On top of add I find it funny how they mention that the coins are kept in BitGo and OTHER custodial services, well which?
Can BitGO confirm they hold crypto for Celsius and how much. They claim they are all up for transparency, how is that not public?
In the app when you are about to deposit they say they keep the coins in Bitgo but "from time to time" they move them to exchanges and others to short the market.
Well you have to do that more than "from time to time" to pay 5% interest.
On their site they explain how great they are and how everyone else is worse, kinda like a child would.
Honestly if it wasn't for the CEO established name I would have scrapped this in the scam folder, long time ago but because he is so established I'm trying to find out something that makes them legit in a provable way, not just claims.
Anyone help me?
You're referring to https://celsius.network/, right? I took a look at their site and I would avoid them. They operate on a model where you, even as a borrower, have to trust them to hold the collateral in escrow. Do they have enough reputation to hold collateral 200-400% of the loan amount (which is way, way above what is standard for lending on this forum)? I think not. They also claim that they hold funds on exchanges and BitGo which opens up a whole array of risks including the fact that their accounts may be suspended and funds frozen if anything goes wrong. Then, what would happen to your collateral? There's virtually zero liquidity for their token, even though it says on ICOBench they raised $50M in their public offering which I find quite sketchy. Though, where did you find the info regarding $600M in loans being funded? I couldn't find that. |
|
|
|
|
It's a move that will not benefit anyone other than the institutions and investors that JPMorgan are dealing with internally, yet Bloomberg is trying to make it seem like it had some kind of positive influence on bitcoin's price increases over the past few days.
These centralised digital assets shouldn't be put in the same category as decentralised cryptocurrencies. Period. They are not store of values, they are not trustless (in fact, there is every possibility that JPMorgan is does not have a full reserve structure backing the value of the coin), and they are certainly in full control of the corporate.
I do see though that in the future more corporates roll these blockchain based assets out, because of the fact that it'll greatly increase efficiency in their business. However, I don't see any association with BTC at all here.
|
|
|
|
I got snookered for $14 worth of ETH last autumn by this fake. It could have been a much more expensive lesson, luckily it wasn't.
The article says the malware was released on Feb. 1 2019, but I know for a fact this malware has been around longer than that. The scammer must keep trying the same trick every few months.
It's likely going to attract a few victims, since has been recent news about MetaMask publishing a legitimate Android app.
Jeez, makes you wonder how much these fakes have scammed, and how many more of them are there. It's definitely a reason to not blindly trust Google Play or App Store in terms of the security of the apps you are downloading. Not only can they possibly be complete scams that you're downloading (since these app hosting platforms have no control over the actual service that the apps are providing), they could even contain malware in this instance. Whenever you are copying a bitcoin address, whether on your phone or on your laptop, make sure that you at least glance over it to verify that it's the one that you copied. There has been a ton of these malicious applications that modify the bitcoin address which you copy into your system when you're sending funds, and it's reasonable to take these precautions. |
|
|
|
I think that What is happening with Binance is exactly what happened with Bittrex before, even tho Bittrex had 2 BTC limit for unverified users they started to force KYC on accounts that have no 2FA then slowly they forced KYC, so even if Binance is not forcing KYC they will start to force it soon that how things always work especially after they introduced their credit card options.
That was what I'm thinking as well. Bittrex and Poloniex both had similar stories of dealing with having to crack down on KYC and country restrictions. Binance seems to be following in similar footsteps. This could certainly have been a result of them trying to get into the fiat to crypto exchange space. I don't think that it's necessarily a coincidence that these stories of restricted countries and increased KYC strength came just some time after they announced fiat deposits. As I said right now if I'm using Binance I'd be extremely cautious. Keeping balances on any exchange is a risky business when future regulations are uncertain, even when it's extremely trusted. |
|
|
|
I was forced to use coinbe.net (polish exchange I think). You're never forced to use any service. You make the decision which exchange you use and which ones you don't - and it's certainly not a good idea to go around using random exchanges that have little to no recognition within the bitcoin community, I'll tell you that. I placed a withdrawal, they took my btc's and did not trasfer them from 9th january. I was trying to contact support but they are not responding to my emails. I see my withdrawal and its state is PENDING..
Did someone have similar problems and are we protected as users of exchange? You have to understand that using an exchange is always risky, especially with ambigiously regulated ones. Coinbe certainly doesn't look very professional simply from looking at their design. In future, understand that you're in no way "protected". That's why you should only use reputable exchanges - you are trusting them with your coins when you deposit. I found a way to retrive a COINS FROM THIS EXCHANGE..
If anyone is intressed, just contact me..
Did your issue get resolved? Why not just share it in public so that everyone can see? |
|
|
|
I think so, there are some institutions that play an important role in the market, in fact, there are many operators that have enough money and that operate. I do think that institutional investors will play a role in fuelling the next bull market. However, how large or small this role is is still unclear, and that will ultimately influence price movement as well. Personally I believe that right now we are still in an accumulation zone. Smart money should be buying in instead of selling off. I don't necessarily see a very large bullish outbreak in the first half of the year though, because markets are still mostly bearish and we see that the $4k resistance is quite strong. The magnitude of the next bull market I think will be significantly less than the previous one because of the extent to which markets have matured. I don't think price swings will be as large. But still, this is an excellent time to buy. |
|
|
|
|
There is a reason why I think that bitcoin will continue to dominate the crypto space even when future innovations come.
I think that bitcoin being the first and most proven cryptocurrency will always be the most trusted. The first mover advantage that bitcoin has in my opinion is far more significant when the majority of the projects are based off the open sourced idea of blockchain.
Also, most of these crypto projects that are coming out are addressing completely different aims and have different missions - a lot aren't even in direct competition with bitcoin. Bitcoin is a pure, decentralised cryptocurrency that has the most adoption and acceptance worldwide. Other crypto projects serve niches. Thus, I believe that BTC is still most likely the best crypto as a store of value in the long run.
|
|
|
|
I don't think that you can attribute criminal activity to a form of currency that otherwise serves a completely legitimate purpose. He is doing the exact same thing that mainstream media is trying to characterise bitcoin with. However, there is a high possibility that if bitcoin ever does go mainstream that the usage of cash and precious metals will both significantly decrease, primarily due to the fact that there is a lot of overlaps between the functions of BTC and these other assets, except bitcoin offers more benefits. Though I don't necessarily think that bitcoin will "replace" fiat, whether cash, or electronic versions. They will coexist in one way, or another. Central banks and governments simply won't let this happen. |
|
|
|
Or, instead of trusting these third parties to hold your funds safely just use a trustless wallet. Much less hassle. Wasn't BitGo somehow related to the Bitfinex hack that happened a while back? That hack had around $60 million stolen, which means that BitGo likely holds much more funds than the $100M insurance that they've taken out. Also, it's important to understand that having insurance doesn't mean they will actually redistribute all funds from the insurance (if a claim ever happens) to customers. They will have the final say on who gets reimbursed and who doesn't. Another reason to stick to trustless wallets that only you have access to, of course, with sufficient security. |
|
|
|
Co-founder of crypto mining pool Poolin, Zhu Fa, took to social media to share his bullish statement that Bitcoin will surge up to 20,000% in the next bull run.
According to News.8BTC, the Chinese Bitcoin bull predicted that the world's number one cryptocurrency would surge to all-time-highs of roughly $740,000, during the next bull run.
Despite the ongoing bear market, the operator of the world’s fourth-largest mining pool said that the price of Bitcoin 'will be in the range of $74,000 to $740,000.'
However, Zhu Fa couldn't be specific in regards to a given time frame, except by saying 'next round of bull run'.Source: https://www.chepicap.com/en/news/7476/-bitcoin-will-hit-740-000-despite-crypto-winter-says-chinese-crypto-guru.html?utm_campaign=cryptocontrol.io&utm_medium=cryptocontrol_web&utm_source=cryptocontrol.io
Too exaggerated prediction.It would even hard to tell surpassing previous ATH on next bull run. Exactly. I'd expect the next bull market to come somewhere around 2020-2021, due to the fact that there is likely to be a lot of hype surrounding the halving event. However, there is absolutely nothing that suggests to me prices are going to go up that much higher than it was in the 2017 bull market. It should be obvious that it's harder to make bigger percentage gains when markets have already matured and increased in total market cap, as there needs to be more money in the market to get prices up. As you say, given the fact that 2017's bull market was a huge event, it could be entirely possible that we don't even hit an all time high on this bull market. But more importantly though, I wouldn't ever listen to someone speculate on something without something to back it up, or even a specific timeframe. |
|
|
|
News simply can't be more fabricated than this  I don't see anyone even talking about what JPMorgan has did in the market. In fact, JPMorgan developing their own coin or whatnot has absolutely nothing to do with how bitcoin moves in the market whatsoever. They're really trying to push a completely false idea that JPMorgan has any sort of tangible influence on the crypto market. And aside from that, you've also got completely inconsistent commentary from Dimon, which makes the whole thing even more unbelievable. Prices have gone up in recent days due to a natural trend reversal after bitcoin apparently bottomed, and most likely with some FOMO element to it as well. It is not attributed to JPMorgan doing any of their nonsense. |
|
|
|
|
Unless you are able to convert your fiat into a liquid form of a crypto stablecoin i doubt anyone would be able to help you get a loan.
Also, non reversible payment methods such as Perfectmoney, payeer or advcash could potentially work as well.
Apart from that, I reckon the lender will find that there is too much risk in holding a collateral that could potentially be charged back or reversed, or be sent from a stolen or hacked bank account.
If you want to short crypto with borrowed money though, you might as well do it on a trading platform that specialises in bitcoin derivatives. But the risks are obviously there.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
