Problem sa solarnim isplatama je što je sranje ako isplaćuješ veće iznose. Prvo je stvar povećanog rizika, drugo što je to teško onda uopće uplatiti na račun.
Pogotovo je bezveze što moramo tražiti takva rješenja iz razloga što u pravilu ni ne moramo platiti porez. Sav moj kripto je stariji od 2 godine i 99% je stečen trejdanjem i investiranjem (ne majnam, nisam se baš usrećio ni s airdropovima) ali što mi to vrijedi kad ne mogu to dokazati.
Pa da. Upravo to. I što ti onda preostaje? Samo solarna zamjena za fiat gdje te nitko ništa neće pitati. Prije se dosta koristilo zlato gdje si mogao kupiti zlato direktno za Bitcoin i onda ga prodaš za fiat bez poreza jer na investicijsko zlato nema poreza. Je li netko probao takvo rješenje? Naravno da se dosta gubi na proviziji za kupnju i onda prodaju zlata, ali opet imaš novac koji je "čist". |
|
|
|
98% of people want to be part of bitcoin world because of it usefulness or benefits.
A very strong and confident remark. Do you have concrete confirmation of such "statistics" or is it just your desire? Show me a link to such wonderful news. It would be a big win if bitcoin was popular at that percentage.  Maybe the OP thinks that 98% of the people in crypto wants to be a part of it because of all the benefit Bitcoin brings. There's no way that 98% of the world population is even aware of Bitcoin. I'm sure that substantial percentage of the world population have bigger concerns in mind than buying some BTC. |
|
|
|
/snip Slackovic, počni pisati više u engleskom dijelu foruma a cryptofrka, gdje su one tvoje čuvene crypto analize, koje su ti donijele hrpu merita?  A što se tiče ostalog, slackovicu, počni otvarati zanimljive teme na ovom lokalu pa ćemo se i mi ostali više uključiti. Počeo sam pisati... Misliš da bi se u našoj sekciji uspio približiti 50 postova tjedno? Malo sam se angažirao budući da je najavljeno da će ova kampanja trajati 2-3 tjedna pa da iskoristim. Ali ako nastavi s radom, sigurno ću smanjiti broj postova. Naporno je ovako puno pisati. Problem je što više ne pratim toliko nove projekte kao prije. A i nekako imam osjećaj da su više počeli prolaziti razni meme-projekti koji na brzinu naprave x1000, dok neki normalni projekti koji imaju pravi usecase jedva uspiju napraviti +50%. A u meme-projekte ne želim ulaziti jer za svakog mislim da je sranje koje neće uspjeti. |
|
|
|
Ronin bridge has only 5 validators and all were hacked by the hackers. The only problem is if the team didn't aware if there was a bug that can still be exploited and in this case if validators are not the main problem.
The main problem if the team was not locking the allowlist. It's still allowing the validator that used by axiedao to sign in.
This must be blocked. Man, more than 150k ethereum were lots. Axie team needs to do a hardwork to recover it again.
OK, does anyone know was the problem in some sort of a bug or was that an inside job? Because I too read somewhere that it could have been an inside job but never could verify that story. If that's true, then unfortunately it just serves as the evidence that multisig wallets are not the best idea when it comes to security because at some point someone won't be able to resist a temptation to steal a lot of money. |
|
|
|
~snip
Ali opet ni to mi nije problem ako sam siguran da me nitko neće mlatnuti po glavi nakon što mu prebacim crypto.
zar nije to poenta regulative? platis proviziju drzavi u vidu poreza, da bi ona obezbedila odredjenu sigurnost svojim gradjanima? problematicna je stavka sto je porez komplikovan (cak ne bi rekao da je veliki), a drzava mora da naglasi da je u pitanju rizicni element, inace bi dobila gomilu socijalnih slucajeva koji bi izgubili sve tako sto bi ulozili u neki "rug pul", jer ne razumeju, a svi zaradjuju, i jos niko ne prica da je rizicno Naravno da je. Smatram da je porez sasvim pristojan i ne bi mi bio problem prijaviti kad to ne bi bilo toliko komplicirano s FIFO evidencijom. Ovako mi preostaje dati nekome 2-3% za velik iznos ili bez provizije prodavati par tisuća kuna vrijednosti crypta. |
|
|
|
Izgleda da nije Ledger samo problematičan kad se radi o curenju podataka. Ljudi su počeli dobivati phishing mailove o tome da su Trezoru procurili podaci i da trebaju preuzeti novi softver kako bi se zaštitili. Da budem 100% točan, podaci nisu iscurili tvrtki Trezor nego MailChimpu kojeg Trezor koristi za slanje masovnih mailova. Prema ovom tweetu izgleda da se radi o zaposleniku MailChimpa koji je iskoristio mail adrese ljudi koji su se prijavili na Trezorov newsletter kako bi poslao phishing mailove. |
|
|
|
Dajem ruku u vatru da onaj naš antikvark ili kako se već zove trol radi za tako neku agenciju. To je baš pitanje ko stvoreno za njega. Neka nam se izbori da kada je već bitcoin samo broj i nema vrijednost da tako i država gleda na to  Zar nije netko bio napisao da je lako moguće da se radi o osobi iz Fine ili tako neke agencije? Mislim da je bilo i nekih dokaza s drugih mjesta koji su upućivali na to da se radi o istim osobama. Ne mogu se sad sjetiti tko je to pisao i gdje ali bilo je u vrijeme dok je antikvark žario i palio po našoj lokalnoj sekciji. Solarne transakcije su uvijek i bile i uvijek će ostati najpovoljniji način razmjene kripta za fiat. Jednostavno ne može bolje od 0 provizije i dodatnih troškova za obje strane. Malo postaju škakljive kada počnemo govoriti o većim iznosima. Kada mjenjaš par tisuća kuna lijepo popričaš, popiješ cugu i laganini zajebancija. Mislim da bi sa par stotina tisuća već tenzije i osvrtanja preko ramena bile poprlično izražene.
Apsolutno! Zašto isplaćivati kripto lovu na tekući ako možeš razmjeniti s nekim tko želi kupiti crypto? Ima rješenja i za veće iznose, samo što u tom slučaju treba platiti proviziju. Barem za rješenja za koja ja znam Ali opet ni to mi nije problem ako sam siguran da me nitko neće mlatnuti po glavi nakon što mu prebacim crypto. |
|
|
|
Opa, svaka čast! Bome, četvorica u CM-u od 20-ak aktivnih korisnika, stvarno govori dovoljno o našem lokalu. A i ostali su isto u ponajboljim kampanjama.
Ima'l ko jači?
Evo čestitke Rikafip i od mene. Ma nema nitko jači od našeg lokala što je ovime valjda i dokazano. Još samo kad bi vi ostali krenuli malo više pisati da ne moram po engleskom dijelu foruma pisati i popunjavati kvotu  |
|
|
|
I completely agree with you. If you do not make a profit for a long time, you can fall into the trap of always thinking that the profit is too small, and it is too early to make a profit. In my opinion, it is worth remembering that profit only becomes profit when you cache out and fix it, when you close the deal. If the ultimate goal is to make a profit, why not make it?
I know I said that there is nothing wrong in cashing out, but not everyone in crypto is here necessarily for profit. There is a lot of people, especially long term holders, who are here because of the technology. Those guys will probably never sell and will buy stuff they need or want directly for Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
This is very unfortunate since such regulations go against the vision of Satoshi, which is to create a freedom of transactions without any government/third-party intervention in our finances. Though this may be the first step in creating the law, I hope that the bill somehow limits the power of the government to meddle with the transactions in our exchanges, etc.
Assuming that the law/s will be enacted, will there be a big impact of cryptocurrencies in their price? Will we see BTC becoming something that is stable on its price, removing its volatility and inflationary nature?
I don't think this law will have much influence at the stability of Bitcoin price. It will be traded as it is traded now, the only difference is that the traders will have to do KYC if they live in the EU. And as we can see now, it seems as though majority of traders doesn't mind going trough KYC procedure. |
|
|
|
Dakle, biti će sve teže postići anonimnost i izbjeći kyc. Zapravo je to i očekivano jer vlade i porezne službe su očito shvatile da već veliki broj ljudi kupuje i prodaje kriptovalute anonimno preko kripto mjenjačnica i da se tu već radi o velikom novcu na koji se ne plaća nikakav porez. S jedne strane ne žele pojednostaviti FIFO i prijavu kripto poreza a s druge strane postrožit će rad kripto mjenjačnica i pokušati sve da stave svoju šapu na kripto sredstva koja se svaki dan vrte preko kripto mjenjačnica. Kada država nema novaca, tada je i kripto dobar i nije važno što su prije govorili da to nije nikakav novac ili financijska imovina. Sada im je i kripto dobar i zašto ga ne oporezovati kad ga već ima toliko u opticaju svaki dan. Mene zapravo zanima na koji način misle sve to postići. Jer ne spominje se samo KYC svih korisnika burzi koje rade na području EU nego se spominje prikupljanje informacija o svakoj transakciji i to tko je pošiljatelj, tko je primatelj, odakle je došao pošiljatelj došao do tog kripta... I naravno, tu se onda ne radi samo o prikupljanju tih informacija nego i njihovoj zaštiti. Što se mene tiče, možda sva ta pravila potaknu cvjetanje P2P trejdanja kriptovaluta. Osobno nemam ništa protiv P2P trejdanja. |
|
|
|
Damn, can't we just say we are sending money from one wallet of ours to other? They won't know shit TBH.
That's one way to go around it, but I think they already have it figured out right before anyone even thought about it. Most probably they have diffent measures in place to make sure that the system will not be gamed and cheated by people, though for sure loopholes will soon be found by people to nullify what the EU is trying to do. P2P is the way to go, always has been, and regulations and laws like this will force people to go back to crypto's roots. I think that P2P trading will boom after this law passes. And I have nothing against P2P trading. It is much easier to sell crypto on some exchange, but those who value their privacy must give up on some commotion in order to preserve that privacy. |
|
|
|
I still do not get how we will continue down this path like this. Maybe it is my bad, maybe I do not understand it perfectly enough. But, by the looks of it we are not going to be mining the 21 millionth coin in the planned time, it is getting very closer. Maybe I do not know the math very well, but it looks like we are mining very fast right now and I am saying this as someone who has been here for MANY years, would love to see a chart of the trajectory we are in right now. Hopefully nothing goes wrong. As long as it is technically impossible to mine 21 million and one coin, as long as it stops where it should be, that is fine by me.
I'm not sure if I understood your post right, but you are asking how can it be that there will be only 21 million BTC and we are still mining it at a rate of 6.25 BTC per 10 minutes. Take a look at this chart and you'll see that it is getting pretty flat when it's compared to the previous time. With halvings that are embedded into Bitcoin's code, there is no way to mine more than 21 million BTC in total. With few million being already lost, I guess there will never be more than 18-19 million BTC in circulation. |
|
|
|
Actually, I'm tempted to sell for buying a new house. It's not as fancy as you think but I can say that it will be satisfying to call it our home.
I'm in the midst of it but probably going no for the meantime and will wait for further moving up of bitcoin, maybe a year or two more before I start selling huge amounts in my portfolio.
To some, 0.1 to 1 BTC couldn't be that much but that would be a piece of land already in some countries. But if it ever happens that bitcoin reaches back to $70k to $100k, I guess many will start picking their profits.
For me there is nothing wrong in taking profits. I did that right at the end of the 2017 bull run and I didn't regret it one bit! I would regret more seeing my portfolio dumping 80% after that. |
|
|
|
Više se ne sjećam je li netko ovdje spomenuo zakon koji EU planira uvesti (iako je glasanje prošlo, ima još nekoliko birokratskih stanica prije nego zakon zaživi), a tiče se zabrane anonimnih kripto transakcija. Korisnik o_e_l_e_o je dobro sažeo bit samog zakona u ovom postu. U principu se zakon tiče svakog kripto servisa koji rade s trećom stranom. Oni će morati saznati podatke o toj trećoj strani i tu informaciju dati na raspolaganje vladama. Privatne ostaju izravne transakcije između pojedinaca te ako trgovina prima izravno plaćanje BTC-om (što kod nas u Hrvatskoj nije moguće). Ako primaju BTC preko payment processora (poput PayCek-a), onda korisnici opet moraju raditi KYC. |
|
|
|
Evo na sad. Moram napisati post samo da vidim kako funkcioniraju ta pitanja. Moram priznati sa sam za prvo dobio gadno. Skoro da sam razmišljao da odem googlat ali to ne bi bilo to.
Pa nego što ćeš napraviti nego googlati ako ne znaš? Stvarno nisi upućen u način funkcioniranja današnjeg svijeta mladeži Ja ako znam, odgovorim. Ako nemam pojma, naravno da idem googlati |
|
|
|
In fact, an address should be prevented from receiving say more than 100 ETH per hour unless it has a special permissions, for example.
You made me laugh, if this line implemented, Ethereum will be centralized, worse than fiat money. So think about finding more creative solutions. Yeah, no one can and will implement a limit to receive or send funds in crypto. That doesn't make sense... But as I suggested, multisig wallets that don't withdraw funds often should require all signatures for a withdrawal. That wouldn't make it 100% secure but it would be more secure than to require signatures only 50% of the owners. |
|
|
|
Damn, can't we just say we are sending money from one wallet of ours to other? They won't know shit TBH.
That's exactly what I was thinking. I guess we'll have to wait for the law to go trough all the bureaucracy to see what can and what can't be done. |
|
|
|
The law will affect exchanges and non-custodial wallets, such as metamask, ledger and trezor, as I explained. So this mean you aren't even allowed to hold your Crypto on a Ledger/Trezor? No, it means that if you hold your crypto on a Ledger, Trezor or any other non-custodial wallet, you will have to provide information about a receiver when you are sending your crypto. The same will probably be when holding your crypto on an exchange. But how will they know who owns each address? There is no mention about mandatory KYC procedure for people who holds crypto on a non-custodial wallets. If there won't be a KYC, how will they know who are the owners? And if they don't know who is the sender, how will they punish him for providing false information about a person they are sending crypto. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
