Lol... I would imagine the look on Op's face wondering on how someone would be so magnanimous to send him the loan even without asking for his address and then realize that the joke is on him. I wonder what people takes other people for online thinking that someone somewhere is looking for how to waste money then come to the Lending section of the forum to achieve that objective forgetting all of the orphanage homes and non government organizations that would need a donation that would go a long way in the life of a child in far away country. |
|
|
|
According to CMC, since the beginning of 2019 the crypto cap has tripled, and daily trading volumes passed $70B. However, some are questioning the legitimacy of this data. With individual & institutional investors flooding into crypto, its time to evaluate how many people are really trading cryptoAfter a disappointing 2018, crypto markets are booming once again. Backed by institutional investors, growing numbers of individual enthusiasts, and broad support for its underlying technology, the blockchain, the entire crypto sector is seeing a resurgence. According to data collected by CoinMarketCap, the collective crypto cap has nearly tripled since the start of the year. Led by Bitcoin (which has also tripled its value since its low point in 2018) cryptocurrencies are outperforming many other investment assets, including stocks, bonds, gold, and oil. For those who witnessed crypto’s meteoric rise in 2017, this year’s activity might seem incredibly familiar. USDT fake volume Many Exchanges fake volume EOS fake how much they raised So, How Many People Are Really Trading Cryptocurrency? Article and more info about itWhat do you guys think? Market cap and volume trade are completely irrelevant when subjected to so much market manipulation and lack of regulation. There's really not much to draw from these numbers when they're a product of wash trading and the adoption rate still remains largely the same. Only coins with an intrinsic value can offer a semblance of indication regarding incoming capital volume. So, looking at their behavior is tons more precise than what coinmarket is measuring. Market cap and volume trade are relevant in decision making and the reason why its they are kind of gibberish in crypto that you are also thinking is irrelevant is because of the lack of trust in the which gives room for people to fake trades, manipulate data for their own selfish reasons. Not that all these manipulations are absent in stock market but there are rules which mitigate it to the barest minimum even when you flout the rule, there are appropriate punishments to be meted out which is why when they put out data from that end, people take not because its right but there are not enough substantive evidence to invalidate those figures. |
|
|
|
|
Its always a thing of concern anytime I read about compromise that are so cheap in services that relates to crypto especially when fault is linked either the CEO, the founder or co-founder. It shows that this crypto entrepreneurs have not learned to separate the business from themselves. I have not seen a bank gets compromised because of an individual even the MD or founder reports to the board and can even be removed should he decides to want to harness more powers. The solution is for self regulations be put in place that would be complied by everyone to forestall situations like this
|
|
|
|
I wholeheartedly agree that the world may not be ready for a cryptocurrency as a store of value. Cash is way easier to handle for the common Joe's of society. The only way that I can see people running to cryptocurrency is for a major institution to introduce it to the public. I Don't like the fact that Libra is centralized but it may be the only hope for the entire world to be educated about crypto. I've always wonder how would I explain the concept of Block-chain and Bitcoin to my grandparents or the younger generation without putting them to sleep.
Many people won't touch cryptocurrency period unless it has an institutional stamp of approval on it. The people that I do see adopting are the impoverished who have nothing to lose and tech enthusiasts. Libra could be that answer that get peoples feet in the water. Whether they decide to take the plunge is up to them, but at least their feet will be wet.
The best way to put it is that the majority of the world is not ready for crypto as a store of value because of people wants protection of their assets i.e they want a situation which at worse would keep their capital the same if it won't turn out profit which to crypto cannot guarantee at the moment due to several reasons and the why, that fiat can do that, is because of the regulatory factors of government and its agent, take that from fiat, people would start drifting towards crypto. On the institutional stamp, it means such stamp would connote trust and protection if that cannot be a guarantee, it would amount to the same thing with crypto current scenario being witnessed in crypto. |
|
|
|
Governments have done enough to dissuade common people from using Bitcoin extensively. Being charged with operating unlicensed money changing businesses is a possibility if you engage in cash-bitcoin conversion.
The problem with government not stopping bitcoin is not that they cannot its because they don't want to. Government of countries can be so radical that anything they want can be forced down people throat depending on how far they are willing to go. Although, when it comes to bitcoin, they might not achieve 100% compliance but they can achieve some maximum result and the rest of people would stay away because of fear that they might be punished. I have seen a country shut down its internet because they want to ensure certain action and ordinary citizens in that country could not access internet in within that period. The reason why government does not want to go that route is one, the commercial value of those involved in bitcoin or its related activities is not enough to attract that kind of enforcement and secondly because they don't want to lose out of what is to take sway in the nearest future. |
|
|
|
The growth of crypto apps on mobile devices is good for crypto currency ecosystem because it will bring crypto to more people, but using phones or mobile devices to store crypto, and trade is one of worst things crypto enthusiasts can do, in my opinion.
Firstly, you can more easily lose your mobile devices (by absent-mindedness), much more easily compare to laptops due to smaller size of mobile devices.
Secondly, most of people don't pay too much attention on security of their mobile devices (AV softwares).
Thirdly, when phones broken technically, you are nearly not be able to fix it yourself, and have to bring them to Maintenance Officies. It is another risks. With computers, people can fix issues themselves, or at least don't leave important data to others.
I only dedicate very small funds on mobile devices, and most of time, wallets are empty. Whenever I hang out and have plans to do something, I send a few bitcoin to mobile wallet, just in case in need to use it with urgent need.
Yes the growth of crypto apps on mobile phones are good development but what phone manufacturers are doing are not making any much impact for several reasons based on my evaluation. 1. There are several trusted third party app developers that have made their software open for download on either playstore or AppStore which over the years have become trusted by people. So, I don't see any crypto enthusiast who will buy a particular brand of phone simply because it has inbuilt crypto wallet. What about the support or private key security that is germane to any wallet holder. 2. Now for those new people buying those brands that we might think seeing the crypto app on their phones can lead to their curiosity which might then push them to crypto. Today, I have seen several apps on phones that serve no interest to the users because he does not understand its functions which could have been deleted if there is a way. So, without understanding of what crypto is all about, the app will be fully useless. |
|
|
|
I have been seeing this too. One would wake up only to see he has been added to a particular group. I understand that of WhatsApp of addition to group without your approval because someone must have your contact to be able to add you and with a quick look at other members of the group you can guess rightly where its coming from. But for Telegram, I think its a deficient on their software because most of the times, only usernames is used in Telegram and I wonder how possible it is to just add people randomly who cannot comment nor respond to what is being posted. I have even been added to group which is for scam purpose and after a while, the group is gone. For telegram users, if you want to avoid such a hassle of being added on random groups:
1. Open telegram app
2. Go to Settings
3. Click Privacy and Security
4. Under Privacy, click Groups
5. Select My Contacts, instead of Everybody
6. (optional) Under Add Exceptions, you can add users on Never allow too
Explore the Privacy and Security page to see what else you can do (ex. Manage your Blocked users, Who can call you, etc).
Done this and hopefully it will stop. |
|
|
|
|
Except Hillary joined the race as being tormented by Trump, its more of Biden than any other candidate and the advantage he has is the fact he served with Obama which many people loved and used as a yardstick to the presidency of Trump and won't mind having it back. In essence, except something strong happen on the contrary even the scandal that could pull him down on account of his son relationship is being fought from all side by them focusing on the role played by the President other than whether what he did was wrong of right, he is expected to sail through.
|
|
|
|
WSJ has finally come out with something that all of us already knew. Amazon has been rigging their search algorithms to benefit their own products. This isn't surprising, and it's something that most (if not all of us) have already noted is happening. Though now we know to the degree that it actually happens. So here we go. If you are to search for something along the lines of 'mens button down shirts' or 'paper towels' a large amount of the products that will be shown to you are products that are owned by Amazon through a private label brand. That's not something that is shown to you, as they are displayed alongside the likes of other brands. All of this is happening while the EU is currently looking into this very issue, and they're seeing if there is anything wrong with a company owning a marketplace and selling products on that very marketplace . I'm assuming they're looking at this under an antitrust lens, as Amazon also controls about 37 percent of all online sales. Here is the WSJ article as well - https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-changed-search-algorithm-in-ways-that-boost-its-own-products-11568645345?mod=hp_lead_pos5For me I don't see anything wrong in this except there is a superior argument to the contrary. Companies can acquire another company for several reasons. I have read how a company acquired another company that provides its raw material and this is due to the fact they want to ensure consistency in supply of the raw material. Companies have always been biased against companies that is not related to them compared to one in which there is an established relationship just like human endeavors. So, if Amazon can have a company that produces what the client is looking for and they suggested in addition to other sellers, so far they are not forcing customers to buy from their preferred supplier, then there is nothing wrong in it. |
|
|
|
Everything that surrounds Brexit seems there is more to the eyes. Most times people outside the corridors of power are the good critics until when they get they get to that seat, they understand that their predecessor was actually not playing around which is exactly what is happening to Boris. As a proponent of Brexit himself, he has now see that Theresa May was not just joking around. If he can pull it off, then that would be a legacy that his generation who wants to go into politics would continue to capitalise on. But until then, this is serious hard work for him to navigate out of. |
|
|
|
One of the first approach to ignorance is to go on the attack mode which is exactly what is happening here. This is not even applicable to Latin America countries alone. I have read about a country central bank issuing a statement absolving liabilities of those who chose to invest in crypto related activities after they have tried the ''illegal card'' which eventually didn't play out as much as they wanted. in the future there may be only a few countries that will approve cryptocurrency and bitcoin in their countries to facilitate traders and also people who trade outside the city, but there are also other countries that are still hesitant to consider bitcoin in their countries such as Latin America their government has not been able to declare to formalize bitcoin in their country because they might be afraid that cryptocurrency and bitcoin will become obstacles to the economy.
The future is too complex to predict just like you have said here because you won't know. In the past, the cannabis market is one that people would not even touch but today its legal in countries and even on the increase expected to spread. The point is majority of countries that are forming hard on crypto are only doing so because the advance countries have not made a position known. The moment they do, you will see them seeing reasons why crypto would be the best thing to happen. |
|
|
|
I am just curious: Why do we need institutional money coming in to Bitcoin as if it is the one that can rescue Bitcoin from going down? Is this not an obvious sign that as a supposedly P2P currency Bitcoin is failing on this aspect?
Bitcoin is supposed to be in the hands of the people and not with institutions, or so that is the impression I got by reading some articles about Bitcoin and it should be taking the many traditional institutions by storm, right? Now, I am seeing that it is the other way around.
Please correct me if my impressions is really wrong. Or maybe I miss something here. But please don't insult my ignorance...
Your analogy is correct really concerning the objective of bitcoin but the issue is about the unsatisfying nature of human beings. We are always in the quest of wishing that bitcoin price goes to the roof. The all time high period be return without knowing or understanding the cost of it. One generally accepted ways to which price would achieve that objective is that there is need for news funds to come in which can either come from individuals or institutions. The question is that can we be patient enough to allow the needed capital come from individuals or because of motives accept the inflow from institutions which could make funds from individuals a joke. Each of those options has its implications which is what we are seeing now. |
|
|
|
While the PBoC has yet to confirm the launch of "DCEP," China's finance tsar Huang Qifan says that the central bank has been studying it for almost six years
Huang Qifan, executive vice president of the China International Economic Exchange Centre, has confirmed that the People's Bank of China plans to roll out its own digital currency, which will be called "DCEP" (digital currency electronic payment).
China Finance 40 Forum (CF40), the organization that focuses on finance policy research and academic exchange, published a video that features an excerpt from Qifan's speech during the inaugural Bund Summit that is taking place from Oct. 27 till Oct. 29.
Qifan reveals that China has been working on the project for about five or six years. After the launch of the DCEP coin, the PBoC will become the very first central bank in the world to issue its own cryptocurrency.
Tongues have been waggling about the state-backed Chinese digital currency for quite a while. As reported by U.Today, it could pose a serious threat to AliPay and WeChat Pay.
Latter, it seemed like the "China Coin" was temporarily shelved -- a source close to the Chinese Communist Party revealed that the cryptocurrency would not be launched anytime soon.
However, President Xi Jinping's embracement of the Blockchain technology has put China at the forefront of the crypto conversation once again. A senior Chinese official also opined that Blockchain needed "special attention" after Xi's comments.
At this point, China is poised to become a leading crypto force despite formally opposing it. Bitcoin remains banned in China despite the fact that local miners are responsible for 70 percent of its hash rate.
SourceNow that Chinese Government is boldly showing their development in issuing the world’s first state-backed digital currency, will other countries follow the same path? What could be its implications to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies? Its actually a long one coming and for those who have been following the turn of events, you will not be surprised. Just recently I had read about the Leader giving some accolades to blockchain, I just know its a prelude to something coming and now this is it right in our face and its a good development. The shame is on countries that decide to outrightly ban when China was attacking from all sides without even bothering to understand how they can harness the potentials of blockchain, now I wonder how they would feel that China is like 10 steps ahead into the future. |
|
|
|
What if all those big corporates and businesses starts using crypto as a mode of payment just to avoid tax which will cause a direct loss to the government which uses tax for the betterment of the country. This might not affect corrupt countries as it doesn't matter because tax money goes to politician's coffers but what about developed nations?
The lower part of your statement actually got my attention because countries that politicians spends their taxes for their own purposes even are more stringent with tax compliance than their developed nation counterparts because since that is the only source of ensuring their lifestyle continues, they will do everything reasonable to keep their bottom line and because tax payment is not a function of reciprocity, argument of politicians spending the tax does not fly because that what the law says. Now to the developed economy, majority of companies are run by board of directors that even the managing director or CEO can be booted out just by calling for extraordinary meeting which means the avoidance of tax via crypto use is not the decision of the MD to make and if brought to the board, you are sure to have a snitch among them. |
|
|
|
Inside The Final Days Of The $3 BILLION Chinese Crypto Scam... And There's ANOTHER One Soon To Collapse!Remember Bitconnect? Well, the scammers behind PlusToken would call that child's play. Bitconnect held the record as the largest crypto scam to date, pulling in around $1 billion - then came PlusToken which grew to 3X that size, and showed no signs of slowing down when they pulled the plug. >>>Full article continued @ https://globalcryptopress.com/2019/10/inside-finals-days-of-3-billion-chinese.html This has me wondering - if China has two $ BILLION + crypto scams collapse within months of each other, how will their government respond!? When some scams happen, its always difficult to blame to the victims because of the nature of such scams as the various obvious signs to show scams are not present at the same time does not stay long for it to attract the attention of analytics to critique it and bring light to those to who might be caught in the web. The same cannot be said in the case of BitConnect especially as I remember vividly at the time that there was noise in and outside the forum but those affected felt its is 'right' investment move for them eventually they got bitten and the same thing is applicable to PlusToken and another one will come with another approach where several other people will fall for it as well. |
|
|
|
Dear all,
This is my first post on the forum and I would like to share my experience.
At begining of september, I wanted to test some Cloud mining services so I invested in several actors as Dualmine, Bitdeer, Mastercloud, Virtualfarm AND Ecos.
In a month, all the contract made some gain; some of them more than others, but hey, at least something. I quickly understood Ecos was the worst investment of all. I asked for a refund in a week after contracting with them and then my gain suddenly went up.
Since BTC falled last 25th of septembre, I asked again for a refund again then the told me they would not do it.
My gains went slower on all sites but with Ecos after my message, ladies and gentlemen, it went negative!
So now, for the last 12 days, my balance is slowly going down until it will reach 0btc (in less than 2weeks at this rate).
The contract is antminer 9 and the fees charged by Ecos are so important they represent more than 110% of the earnings!
You understood I hope, this message is intended to prevent any investment in this company.
Thanks and good mining for all!
Its safe to say you brought this upon yourself. However, you would have done more help to others who might be thinking of investing in any form of cloud mining activity under any guise when you put up some evidence such as screen grab of conversations and correspondences followed by a chronological depletion of your account so as to give credence to your claim. I believe this is not the first time and several threads have been created in asking for the viability of investing in a cloud mining business and it has been established times without number that, the era of profitability in cloud mining has gone. You looking for investment in crypto, try something else other than cloud mining because its simply going to bite you at the end in which you have just become a witness to. |
|
|
|
Its great to read this kind of news although holding might not necessarily mean much in terms of its effect on the market as we haven't seen much to run with but really it shows the level of confidence increasing and going beyond the report from the United States, I have seen increase in the people now interested in crypto even in my own immediate community as colleagues are much more interested than ever. I think the narrative is gradually changing especially the part that relates to crypto being ascribed to a pyramid scheme that would soon fail or crash and the price which it has been hovering is not enough to attract the attention of people who are only interested in the crash of the market put this together has been giving room for gradual development of the market. |
|
|
|
|
Here we go again. What surprises me is that, this guy usually find his voice anytime there is a form of price rallying on the upward side and not the other way round. In my opinion, I think anyone is allowed to make a suggestion and prediction on his/her wishes and not bothered to explain on the ways in which the prediction will come to pass and that is the beauty of crypto as anyone is allowed to make a prediction. I have not seen a director comes out to announce what the shares of its company will worth in a year without backing it up with fact neither have I seen a president that can say confidently this the amount of certain currency its own currency will be trading against. The joke is actually on people who believe him to be the everlasting seer. 2020 is just few months away and the end of that year is closer than we think...
|
|
|
|
OK So, CSW and nChain claim to have patents on both Bitcoin and the Lightning Network ! I assert that these patents are worthless and/or cannot be enforced ... - https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/5960/can-i-patent-open-source-project"You can not patent code. You can only patent an invention which is implemented in your code. An invention is a new and unique way of doing something. Most of all, it must be something nobody did before. If anyone used the same technique which you describe in your patent, that's called prior art and invalidates your patent. So trying to get a patent on something somebody else invented and implemented in code would be futile. ..."Discuss ... I think its a futile exercise to want to patent what you cannot control. People patent what they have proprietary right over, that the invention and control resides in them and without them, the invention can be said to be dead and nothing else. Going the route to wanting to patent bitcoin is a futile exercise because should it be successful, its going to be an indictment on the revolution we have come to believe as it means that the 'inventor' can wake up one morning and just decide to switch it off or maybe government can just acquire the company and everything that we have come to know becomes a myth. |
|
|
|
Hi folks, I miss directbet.eu days where we placed the bet and if we win bet is settled in minutes and sent directly to the bitcoin address without any BS like manual withdraws,KYC shit etc. What an amazing sportsbook it was.I wonder why no one yet came up with similar idea after directbet shuts it's doors  Anyway, I want the opinion of experienced betters here is there any reliable old sports betting platform that fullfill following criteria? 1. NO KYC. Not for withdrawals under 5 BTC. 2. Instant Withdraw I don't care if there is any deposit bonus or not. I just need a reliable betting platform where if i win the winnings can be cashed out immediately without struggle and waiting. Genuine users opinions please no paid promoters. Thank you all For the sites that have been suggested to fall under your criteria, just be careful to keep your funds because any site can change its policies over night and they are not under any obligation to notify you of such change because its part of the acceptance you have made for agreeing to use their services. When they change it, they might go to the extreme of ensuring that KYC is done before withdrawal can be done on any balance whatsoever. At that point, you are left with whether to either comply or leave your funds with them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
