It was a political decision back then, it will be a political decision whenever they'll re-enable that. You don't know when and what Elon and the Tesla board decides behind the closed doors. Then they'll pack that nicely and make an announcement, or not.
If they go full predatory/business mode, they may even bash Bitcoin a little more and buy some, since the time looks right.

You're paying too much attention to things you have absolutely no control of and may also not affect you much (or at all).

As I said, the most reliable information can be found in the ANN thread. You'll see there it's posted that the .com (clearnet) domain is down/disabled.
So no, you cannot access it with Chrome. But don't be scared of TOR browser, you don't need special setup for it, just download, install and run it. The link was posted in the previous post.

I think that you've missed the point of this topic.
The idea is not how would you make a really good system. The idea is: what if the HW contains a ticking bomb?
And since the point is to *not* create actual randomness while pretending to .. even software generator may do.

Why you keep spamming here and shilling that wallet when people discuss here about keeping really safety their funds?

Just ask yourself: would you keep a couple thousand of dollars worth of crypto on those wallets, or would you get hardware wallet or set up cold storage?

Maybe OP won't invest that much, but what if his investment grows that big in a couple of years and when he wants to spend he will notice that his funds are gone because he got malware on his computer or smartphone?

Interestingly some news came out today - some about this or that institutional investor that bought Bitcoin, some about big names writing to the senate on the "bitcoin is bad for environment" bs, some (probably fake) about Apple buying bitcoin. Is is that some try (too) hard to increase people's trust in Bitcoin (and the price), or just a coincidence?

Price falling to 35k? Possible. 30k? Maybe. Still, with mining hash rate getting ATH after ATH I think (or just hope?) that even if the price goes low(er) it won't stay there for long. Also even today's evolution has shown that there are some that are watching the price and buying in when it's profitable enough.

I didn't say it's the best reason, I said I can't argue. It's the same as they would have said "because we no longer want that".
And for the rest... there used to be a saying: "do what the priest says, not what de does".


This is easily a feature of centralization and a result of getting far too popular.

I'm not sure it's so much relevant. If they're evil enough they can easily show nice hardware and use internally their own rigged software random generator.
I mean if we go paranoid, there are plenty of ifs and buts...

The usual answer is: multiple copies in geographically different locations. Of course, this won't work with expensive/collectible items, so we're back to basic/cheap ways to store. If you have enough of them in enough places, at least one will prevail. Of course, you have to be cautious enough to keep it safe from "curious eyes".

And if you like more complicated things, multisig wallet or "Shamir Secret Sharing Scheme" together with the multiple copies.

Actually it was presented quite well not long ago: Bitcoin price is no longer fluctuating as wildly as in the past, in the last ~150 days it was less volatile than known stocks.
Bitcoin volatility is decreasing with the price increasing and with the inflow of institutional investors.


Clearly it won't stay pegged to USD, for example, but I think that the days the price fluctuations will become "boring" (kind of like we usually see with gold) are not that far.
That's stable enough, I think

It looks like we have an official confirmation. Audi and Porsche will come to F1 in 2026.
But, despite the rumors, it looks like they will not buy/take over a team and also will not come as a new tem, instead will work it out with existing teams.

I'm not sure I understand; maybe I'm missing something...
Indeed, this is the way to gamble - have fun, no matter you're probably losing some money in the process.
But if PD is no longer fun, what keeps you there? I am sure that it's not so hard to find another reputable bitcoin casino/dice site.

Whether they've done something malicious, or they have some bugs, or you're simply less lucky than before, I cannot tell. But for somebody not playing there (for quite some years, actually), this post looks more like bashing/complaining without proof. Yes, I can understand that the situation may be somewhat vague and it may not be easy for you to produce valid proof, but PD is a provably fair casino, getting proof for your claims should be possible.
Of course that without proof people may not believe you or may think that you have a hidden agenda (like promoting somebody else).


This forum is a place of free speech, I don't see why you could not complain. But I will say it again, and try to emphasize it: in 2022, complaining without proof can easily be ignored, attacked and so on.
The problem is not the complaint imho.

I've never seen anywhere in the world about such a vast majority of population protesting against anything, hence I expect, like most of informationdata in this.. thing.. to be utter bullshit.
And... where this Peso story came up from, really?!

There were, indeed, protests, and I expect most being orchestrated by the political opposition. People can convert to UST instantly when receiving BTC, so those protesting were misled and I expect their problems were with the use of technology (wallet) than anything else. And I can guess that they didn't complain about the free money they've received.


The volcano bond is another story. I could say, with same accuracy as yours (ie with sarcasm) that the bonds were doomed because of the problems Bitcoin had 20 years ago.
For example, the opposition came at (or maybe even before) the moment Bitcoin was legalized as legal tender, i.e. way before the bonds. So I find your causality logic is badly twisted.

However, the bonds were explained even on this forum that they're badly made (one would almost surely lose money with them), hence I'm not surprised they're not a success.
But linking this to whatever fantastic stories is...

---

PS. I tend to believe that this article is intentionally so incorrect, simply to create controversy.

You could have been quoting a little more from that news.


Although I find this overly harsh words against crypto (yet another naysayer), the actual points are clear:
* Wiki seems to have received very few donations in crypto (which is normal, since very small % of world population uses crypto, so it's imho not a valid problem)
* Wiki doesn't want to look like they would be endorsing cryptocurrencies, which actually I cannot argue

However, seeing Wiki as a pretty "hungry" organization - they do put big banners begging for money now and then - I think that's a losing move on their side. Although they've received "only" 130k worth of crypto as donations, it's much better than nothing.

If one uses the most common solutions, he cannot weaken the security since the thieves will clearly seek for those if they come for bitcoin.
Of course, this is correct as long as one won't give extra details
It worth mentioning that one of the best solutions to not "weakens the security of funds" is to avoid boasting about owning bitcoins.


The more non-standard is the solution, the more the need to keep the seed at hand to avoid forgetting about it, hence weaken it.
The more complicated is the solution, especially if it contains steps or passwords only you know, the more the chance those funds will be lost, sooner or later (memory is sooo unreliable and fragile...)
So even if it's based on known and reliable algorithms, I recommend to be used something very simple and known.

And I agree though about metal plate like solutions. I've even written to such a solution that the metal plate looks better as a collectible to be displayed than something to hide with the seed.

Wow, this is a bit extreme, ... having somebody appointed as "head of sanctions"... I would be laughing if it wouldn't be as much concerning (as lame).
And about concerns on centralization... we both know that whoever keeps there more funds than he can easily lose, he deserves his fate. Not your keys, not your coins.

Since I don't want to pollute ChipMixer ANN thread with this, I'll go here.


Shouldn't we stop advertising the .com link in our signatures (and put the onion link on both sides)?
Especially as the .com link is the first one, some may click that one, see it's not working and seek for another mixer.

My advice was made in a way even if ChipMixer stops its signature campaign, the correct "source" for the link should prevail.
And while I could argue that my signature has the onion link too, you do have a point and I will ask why we keep the (troubled) .com link.

Not long ago somebody got his money stolen by getting directed by Google to this .xyz site.
And these (malicious) clones get bolder and bolder; the actual Chipmixer site may get demoted/removed from Google searches because of infringement complains made by the scammers.

So for now, I think that the safest way to get to Chipmixer is to get the (preferably onion v3) link from the ANN on Bitcointalk.

The thing is.. especially since it was noticed how unsafe brainwallets are, most probably others have done this job already... years ago (this is usually one of the big problems in reinventing the wheel).

Most I prefer paper since it can be easily put anywhere and I can easily make as many copies as I want.
Second would be steel washers, since they are very easy to hide, cheap to be made and very durable.

As you can see, I am not too fond of things that cry "this is your bitcoin seed" to use, although I find most of the collectibles - from coins to banknotes - very nice.
In this chapter I think that DYI coins, where you can add you own private key, are somewhat too few on the market (but I may be very wrong, since I am not that much a collector, hence it's just a feeling).