I would immediately choose the monthly option if it existed in any campaign run by a respectable manager - although I don't think it makes sense at the moment, given that the payouts for my current campaign come directly to my casino account. However, I understand those who prefer weekly payments because they probably depend a lot on that money.

---

You will probably be punished by negative karma in a parallel crypto universe where Mr. Mars advocates the use of fossil fuels, and Jamie Dimon and Mr. Buffett are the biggest advocates of Bitcoin

The seed is generated inside the device anyway, so it doesn't matter if the device will be online at the time of generation, or if you will connect it to the internet at some point later. What I want to say is that in case the manufacturer has malicious intentions, the seed can be extracted from the device at any time.


The Nano X has a battery, but the S model didn't, and I'm not sure if the S+ (or whatever it's called) has one. Considering what we know about Ledger and that practically they have the option that your seed can be shared with third parties and even be handed over to the authorities if they request it, I don't think you should go in that direction. If you want more security, maybe you should consider an airgapped wallet such as Passport, where you communicate with the interface exclusively via QR codes or an SD card.

I wonder how many of those who invested in BTC through ETFs did so because they were convinced that an instant bull run would follow after the halving? Judging by everything, it seems that the halving was a cold shower for them. Maybe funds should make a survey among investors and ask them what actually happens with the halving - what percentage would answer that the total supply of BTC was reduced by half

The thing is not ideal when it comes to security, but considering that you can buy an unlimited number of cards, then you can choose the amounts on them in relation to whether you want to use them for online purchases where you have to enter the card data, or you will use the card exclusively to add to Google/Apple wallet on your mobile phone and pay through POS devices that way.

I think that the possibilities of abuse are very small and that it all depends on how you store the card information. It is important that the e-mail you will use to receive the card information after payment is secure, because it seems to me that this is one of the ways that someone could get hold of the card information, unless of course you enter it yourself on a phishing site.

Once upon a time, I was in a situation where someone I helped to invest in BTC did something stupid and allowed someone to hack him - and of course that same person blamed me for his loss of money, and then I decided to return that money to that person. Since then, I have been careful about what I say (and who I say it to), and when it comes to any investments (especially risky ones), it never occurs to me to advise anyone to invest in anything similar.

I would advise you to learn a lesson from what happened to you and never do it again. If anyone ever asks you about Bitcoin, say that you are no longer involved in it, that someone hacked you or that you lost it - otherwise you will only have a lot of problems in life, not only with neighbors, but also with thieves.

There are at least two reasons why Satoshi decided to withdraw into the shadows. The first is that some of his closest collaborators began to question his role when it comes to BTC, wondering if he might be making too many decisions independently, and from what we can read today, in those first days, Satoshi was not as well-liked by some as is the case today.

Another reason is that Satoshi may have realized that Bitcoin will never succeed if it has a centralized figure, so it is logical that he decided to leave everything to others. Anyway, why would it be a tragedy that Satoshi can't answer your questions when the answers already exist, you just have to look for them.

Something interesting to read if you are interested -> what-happened-when-bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-disappeared

It's a strategy that I sometimes use, but if you don't have enough sMerits (and many don't) then you can't practice it often. However, as in everything, it is necessary to find a balance between what you have and what you can do with it. Also, multiquote and editing of posts to which we reply and what I personally do (changing the font size) to make the visual impression more pleasant is also something that makes sense to me.

In addition, if there are really a lot of posts that someone thinks should be answered, and at the same time these posts are more or less similar in content, we can thank everyone who contributed, which certainly seems polite and indicates that we have read all the posts.

This is the first time I've heard of gold being sold in a supermarket, so I'm wondering if that supermarket might have security guards patrolling the store with automatic weapons? I assume that buying gold is not something that takes place according to the principle of buying an ordinary product from the shelf, but what kind of risk is taken by the person who buys gold and needs to transport it from the store to the place where it will be stored?


In some EU countries there are specialized shops where you can buy or sell gold, and there is also a service where you can buy gold online and then have it delivered to your address in an armored vehicle. When you look at how complicated and risky the whole process is compared to buying/selling Bitcoin, and how much less profitable gold is than Bitcoin, the conclusion is self-evident, right?

This is just a logical continuation of what has been happening for some time, and it is no secret that mixing is a big thorn in Big Brother's side. Therefore, I don't understand why anyone who provides such services still hasn't realized that it shouldn't be done right in front of them, regardless of what someone says that it doesn't really matter where you are if "they" want to find you.

Given that I see that the Russians are mentioned in the context of this story, will the feds do something about the USDT issue, given that there are allegedly serious indications that the Russians are avoiding sanctions in this way?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5493020.0

The topic already exists, I suggest you close this topic and publish your post in the first topic. As for the avatar, I had the same one for a while.

I just wrote that it doesn't have to be a great fortune considering that it is a figure that represents 1 million something - but of course wealth is a very relative thing in relation to how one thinks about it and where one lives.

Let's say for example that the OP is from Nigeria and won 1+ million in local currency which is a little over $800, and even in that country that can't be considered wealth - or maybe it can? For more comparisons, we can take Argentina as an example, where 1 million pesos is worth about $1100, or 1 million Turkish lira, which is worth about $30 000.

If it is an amount that is in $ or EUR, then that is impressive, and if it is a local currency in which millions do not mean a great fortune, then the OP is not one of those who can not say that he got rich on sports betting

---

He was online a few days ago, but maybe he was just too busy spending his winnings

Joking aside, such things are best clarified by visiting the local tax office. Everything else is just speculation, considering that we don't know where the OP is located, possibly even in a country where cryptocurrencies are partially or completely banned. There are always ways to sell crypto without paying taxes, whether it's p2p or virtual cards, or maybe even paying for goods or services directly with cryptocurrencies.

Some members of the forum published such information publicly, and some names appeared in Top reporters. Also, if you look at the links from my previous post, those who make reports in them are usually recognized by other forum members and awarded in the Bitcointalk Community Awards

Registered accounts don't make much sense if we take into account the number of quality members on both forums. Regardless of members who "teleported" to another forum and members who have been there before, I think that BTT is still far ahead when it comes to the number of quality members, and therefore the content they create.

The pay rates on the other forum are still almost half as much as here, and at the moment I don't see that there will be any big increase - because top mixers used to pay $200 + per week for 30-35 posts on BTT, and now they pay about $50 for the same number of posts on another forum. If they could raise it to at least $100+ per week, I'm sure they would attract more quality members from this forum.

I hope I'm wrong, but apart from some developers who used to be active on the forum or are still active, I think that those who decide on the winners won't really take forum members into account. @o_e_l_e_o was one of the best members of this forum, and the members have recognized him several times by choosing him as member of the year in the annual competition.

---

This is something that everyone should know because it shows how bad someone as a person is in evaluating other people, not to say naive enough to believe in fairy tales.

---

These are good candidates who definitely have a chance of being selected. The selection will still depend on the criteria of the commission that will decide on it, and their names are in the article. What is certain is that it will not be easy for them to choose, because there are a lot of good people who have made a great contribution to Bitcoin over the years.

Laszlo certainly has its place in BTC history, but that event took place in 2010, and Hal was awarded for that period. Gavin is also one of the candidates, but it's no secret that I personally wouldn't give him the award for several reasons - one is precisely that he went where he shouldn't have, and he himself admitted that he might have scared Satoshi that way. The second thing that disqualifies him in my opinion is that at one point he gave support to CW Faketoshi claiming that he is the real Satoshi.

Also, the @theymos explorer is from 2010, and the next three awards will be given to people for their contributions in the period 2012-2024. I think that the winners in that period should be looked for in those who had a key role in the development of SegWit and Lightning Network, and maybe those who stood up to CW Faketoshi, like @Hodlonaut.

Most of us know who Hal Finney was, and I think we can all agree that for his work when it comes to Bitcoin, he deserves a special place next to Satoshi Nakamoto. Although Hal has not been with us for 10 years, it is nice to see that people still remember him and that the Human Rights Foundation decided to establish an award that will bear his name, and that the first winner will be Hal posthumously.

HRF allocated a total of 33 BTC, of which 1 BTC will go to Hal, and given that the prize will be awarded every four years, there will also be prizes for the periods 2012-2016, 2016-2020 and 2020-2024.

It will be interesting who will receive the awards for the remaining three periods, and of course it will also be interesting what the members of the forum think about it.

More info at the link -> Bitcoin Pioneer Hal Finney Posthumously Wins New Award Named for Him

First of all, you must know what you can/need to report, and for that it is best to be familiar with the unofficial rules of the forum. As for the reports themselves, I think they should contain the reason for reporting the post, and in some cases a link that can help the moderators make the right decision.

For example, if we report plagiarism or AI content, we should not expect the moderators to check such content themselves, but we should make their job easier and direct them to a link that shows concrete evidence. There are two topics where such evidence can be posted, and then a report can be made with a link to a post containing relevant information.

See links 1 & 2

I think that the rich have no problem with any fees, and if someone has a transaction value of $100 000, then it is certainly not a problem for him to pay $10 or even more for such a transaction. For everyone else who, especially nowadays, is trying to save on everything, every saving is valuable - and to me it's honestly a bit tragic that instead of Bitcoin, which should primarily be a cryptocurrency, we have to look for alternatives in some altcoins if we want to pay something that way. All this, of course, because someone is literally abusing Bitcoin for their monkey business.

I hope that we will not get into a situation where one day Bitcoin will really become a toy only for the rich...

I'm trying to understand what you actually meant by what you wrote, and maybe you think that there is not enough BTC to be used as a global currency or that its price is "too low" to be accepted globally. In any case, none of them make sense - because even though there are currently around 19.6 million BTC in circulation and the max supply is only slightly less than 21 million, you forget that Bitcoin has the smallest unit, which we call a satoshi, and it looks like this -> 0.00000001


It is obvious that as a means of payment, Bitcoin has a big problem when we talk about on-chain transactions that are not instant, and as we can see, they can be very expensive. I honestly don't see that this can be "fixed" in any way in the near future, but even if it could, the fact remains that most people who own Bitcoin do not want to use it as money. Besides, the decentralization that Bitcoin is completely based on is not something that any significant government would accept, because we all know that most of them think that what they can't control is not good.

Bitcoin has always been an alternative, and it will most likely remain so.