Great thread. The chances are someone has studied the project before you find it, so I'm usually also giving the projects a Google search like this: "<project_name> scam".

Most of the time BitcoinTalk threads and other review websites pop up if there are any accusations against it and, if the proof I find on the websites is enough, I don't need to check anything else. Might save some precious research time

I don't see any reason crypto to crypto transactions would be considered illegal without KYC? So can I not send you $1 in BTC without having to tell the government that I did? If that's the case, then bad days are coming. I know you're referring to exchanges, but fiat to crypto and vice-versa f2f transactions, theoretically, need to be declared. Hence, crypto to crypto would sit under the same rule.

This is what scares me: Amazon's successful patent back from 2018. Guess there's a lot of work already ongoing for years about identifying us and honestly, with all the possibilities of analyzing transactions and how transparent they are, it's not hard to gather a ton of data and just sell it to the governments.

I'm potentially interested. Please leave me a PM with an elaborated description of the job and your company/team so I can study what this is about and whether it presents interest to me or not.

Funny when someone who has provided forged documents in court and created a coin with a plagiarized whitepaper calls out someone for stealing "his work" which he never proved is his.

Start a lawsuit trying to prove something about what you can't even prove you own. This is just stupid AF. I'm still waiting for that first picture of him in the jail cell. This boy is apparently too addicted to lying.

Re-applying.

Username: 20kevin20
Post Count: 2052
BTC Address: 39k74QRU6yd2HSe46DNQjJk7yaquzbk6cC

Awesome. Thank you, that's all I needed. Will use bitaddress with the Wallet Details function on an airgapped PC.

They're the leaders in online payment methods, I believe. Increasing the fees by 0.09% looks insignificant ($900 in fees every $1M), so most businesses will not really feel it in their pockets.

There might be a very little and insignificant change negatively (regarding number of businesses partnering with them) in their merchant numbers but the income they're going to make will compensate with it.

Greedy move from them. I don't think it'd do to much to BTC though.

The one who owns the right information will always stay ahead in the race. Google owns the right info and a pretty significant part of the services we're using are provided by them.

There's no point in creating a decentralized coin when you can create a centralized one and store even more information about your customers than ever before. This is how they've been feeding themselves for so long, they're just going to continue.

But a Google coin would probably be advertised as decentralized one way or another, creating a fake decentralization aura around it. Just like that Blockchain Messenger on Android made me believe for weeks, until I read more about it, that all messages are stored in the blockchain and it's fully decentralized..

I meant a website that generates just the design and lets you copy-paste in a text field the private and public keys, automatically generating QR codes for them. All offline.

To me it makes sense, as this could then be used for basically any cryptocurrency in an offline mode. If you need a paper wallet for some unknown coin, you'd just open up that offline page and create it by yourself using the QT wallet of it.

I see. I know both of them but not knowing like anything about coding still puts me in doubt.

I also get caught in this situation more often than not. I like debates, for a fact. Hence, I'll provide my argument when I don't agree with an idea.

I just hate it when I go to a thread and see that, out of 10 replies, at least half of them are the exact same idea but written with other words. When a new thread pops up, it takes 20-30 minutes for someone to reply and then everyone literally copies the same argument.

Like come on, is is that hard to just think a bit about the subject and write your thoughts? It's so obvious all the time. I'd rather take these posts down, but that's hell of a work for the mods/staff.

I wanted to create some paper wallets just a few days ago too, and I didn't specifically because I'm afraid the websites I've used years ago are now compromised.

I'd rather create a core wallet and place myself the addresses and private keys on a text file & just print it.

Is there any offline website that offers just the paper wallet design and two text fields to manually input your private & public keys? I'm kinda afraid those offline auto-generating paper wallets are not really generating random keys and they're already known to the owner, if it makes sense.

I get your point, I don't have a problem with those starting threads with important articles either but it already became a trend out of it to create copy-pasted threads.

Can't recall how many times I've seen "Craig Wright" and "Justin Sun" on the same page as if they mean & provide any value to our community.

I wish there was a history page for those who got temp/perma-banned. At least we'd know if actions are taken against them.

Well, I mean there has to be someone at one point having a lot of money and willing to sell.

There can't be just buyers here. When you buy, someone sells their coins to you. Right? There's always going to be a person interested in buying and on the other side someone willing to sell.

The trend can't keep just like straight lines and parabolic upward movements, especially in this space where we basically can't really calculate how much Bitcoin should be worth, not even by approximation. There'll always be corrections.

Recently I've noticed that almost like every single new thread, at least on the Bitcoin Discussion board, begins with a copy-pasted article description + a link right under it.

I've started placing most of these users beginning such threads (at least those who've mostly done this in their history) on my ignore list because I don't think it's a good behavior on this forum at all.

It gets really annoying honestly, the Bitcoin Discussion board is pretty much turning into a list of articles with comments being the replies to the threads. I wouldn't have had a single problem with these threads if the OPs had written using their own words a brief explanation of what the article says vs their opinion and then place a little link for the source.

But they're literally just copy-pasting and using the link at the end so it wouldn't count as plagiarism.

I haven't seen someone from the staff/mods mention anything yet about any action taken against these users. In fact, I have created two (1, 2) threads reporting large rings of alts used in promoting either scams or referral links and the accounts are still active 10 days after the first report.

If there's no action to be taken against these accounts, we should at least be noticed because otherwise it's gonna be just us losing our time on things we can't change anyway..

Don't think it works like that. You can use the same strat 100 times but even if you're doing it with very high chances of winning, you'd still have the risk of losing at least once.

It's like going for a 0.02% win chance in a dice game - you might play with $1 and lose every time & when you switch to $0.01 you win. It's a game of chances after all.

I doubt there's even the need of an AI learning your strategy to make you lose more often.. the game itself is addictive and the house has an edge, so the chances of it losing anything are pretty low.

There have been criminals sending bombing mails and demanding Bitcoin for them before. If this Netherlands situation is seen as a negative thing for Bitcoin and people start to FUD it again through "it's widely used in illegal activities and by criminals"-like statements, that's a plain stupid move. Almost anything valuable is and can be used in illicit activity. Bitcoin is only better because they can simply send an address without anyone knowing its source/owner, rather than demanding fiat payment.

That's called greed. You can't go in a casino and just lose anything you bet. If you've lost every single time, it means you didn't accept a win and you went for the big hit.

I don't think jackpots are needed to be earned in order to be a winner. It's enough to get a little profit off your initial deposit.

Awesome, thank you so much for the bot! I've been looking for a way to find the posts I've been quoted in for so long. Now it's just a click away

I have a question about the bot: does it send one message/24h or a message for each quoted post?

Sorry to hear about the flags. Seen you on the forum and I like what you're doing.

The suggestion you made about flags would then be abused in different ways by using alts and/or buying accounts in order to remove an accusation against them.

I'd rather make it so if three conditions are met (X amount of time passes, there are more than 5 total supporters+oppositions & the ratio is 1:10 (support:opposition) or less), the background of the flag gets removed and the entire flag goes 65% opaque so it would be less visible. Somewhere above/under it, there could be a text mentioning "Due to the very high ratio of opposition vs support, the flag will be considered invalid".

Yeah, look what Craig has gained! All this is going to finish with him behind the bars, so he better be living the best moments of his life right now 'cause it's not going to last much longer!

He doesn't say anything important because he's just a joker. Basically the troll of crypto. And people listen to him because they want that BitcoinShitVersion to turn into $20k so those who've missed the BTC rally would get another chance.

The dump this ShitVersion is going to have will surprise everyone who's put their money in Craig's pockets.