Do you know by chance that if you merge the components of a Labo and a Ferrari and make a new car you won't get anything better nor more expensive?
Well... it's kinda the same with "all cryptocurrencies merged together", just here you'd merge the Lambo with Renaults, Audis, Latas, Tata and so on...

99.9% sure that you're not doing it right.
The copper membership page tells about Bitcoin, so you have to transfer Bitcoin, on the Bitcoin blockchain. That means on Binance either Bitcoin, either the newer Bitcoin SegWit.
Keep in mind that withdrawal for Binance brings withdrawal fees and it's not a good business to withdraw such small amounts.

Optimal would have been to have your own proper wallet...

The first thing that came into my mind when reading this is: it's overcomplicated, you may forget it in 5-10 years, if you are in trouble (brain damage, coma, ...) your family will have no chance to recover your coins.

Second, ... I may be wrong, but I don't think that such a long passphrase bring any benefits.

Third - everybody seems afraid of brute forcing, which happens rather seldom, while they forget to take care against 5$ wrench attacks and accidents/illnesses.

It's more than that, especially as OP would not really use too much memory: after Nano S+ is released, I'd expect Nano S (slowly) get to end-of-life status.


This is quite a correct point!


OP, since your plan to HOLD, not spend, for long term, you cannot really rely on a hardware wallet; it can break, it will need updates, they may no longer work...
Of course, even if the HW won't work, you'll have the backup seed... but then why don't you just generate safely the seed, write it down, write down a couple of addresses.. and you're good (of course, backup the seed in multiple places).

But... if you are not inclined towards computers, if creating a bootable USB stick is something you don't really understand how to do.. then just get a hardware wallet. It's a safer option for you, even if you won't use it much.

I messaged you, but I guess that I was too late: you thanked me, but you replied to bitbollo post, not to mine.

The thing is:
* if your IP is blocked, there are many ways to go around that
* if your user or browser is blocked, it's even easier to go around it
* if you get thought how to block those websites from your devices, you will use that knowledge to unblock yourself or find another device

All in all, this direction cannot bring you anywhere, so you have to work on beating your addiction for good.

And maybe this helps: the problem as I see it is not that you get the itch of gambling now and then; the problem is that you don't know when to stop/playing too much money.
Maybe you get help in not having too much money (in any form) at hand for gambling? It could be another direction.

You may want to use a reputed escrow for the funds for the next salary.
It would show that you are indeed serious and may get you more attention.

From my understanding, what's explained there with a lost of unnecessary buzz words is operating system linked to a blockchain that will allow or not your operations, based on your account level and how much you paid for using that OS.
That's imho an unnecessary use for blockchain.
* If it's a proper (public, decentralized) PoW blockchain, I don't want to wait for a new block to be mined to allow me start calc.exe (and I won't even discuss about who is paying the miners for the job!)
* If it's a private blockchain, a simple database would have been faster.


Well, the internet is more or less decentralized even now and you can browse it.

If you can't wait until Microsoft will charge you for every move of your mouse... all I'd say is that you have strange tastes.
If you can't wait until your smartphone will record on blockchain, forever, everything you do on the phone, .. well, I've said it already.


TL;DR; Imho that's not the proper/normal/expected use for a blockchain; as @BlackHatCoiner correctly said it, blockchain is just a special database.

I've seen today a topic about an open source web wallet that doesn't need local blockchain: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5392903.0
It does calls to various servers and block explorers to do the job, so privacy is zero.

It's a HD wallet, so it works based on a seed, not PK. But it's open source; I don't know, it may be close enough to what you need, and if not, at least it can be a source of inspiration.

The local storage is probably not a problem. Just the notes will not be synced between multiple devices.
I also agree that since it's a feature with a rather limited use case, there may not be anybody willing to implement (and maintain) it.


If OP really wants to save info into browser, maybe a Firefox extension like Very Simple Notepad could help, although I'd prefer a proper local text file.

Actually it's not the same.

Trust wallet/coinomi create and send the transactions. Most people use those wallets without HW, so no safety net at all.

On the other hand, hardware wallet "only" signs the transactions. If one uses Ledger (one of the bad examples), he can use it with Electrum, for example. With the correct settings Electrum will show every step done.
Can Ledger do bad things after a certain update? Probably (but after that bye-bye business). Will Electrum "play along"? I hope not. Of course, if one also uses Ledger Live, he's more exposed.

Also while Trust wallet or coinomi basically doesn't risk anything if they do something fishy (no liability), a business that makes hardware wallets is basically gone after that and also faces lawsuits to recover those funds.


All in all, you do have a point, I don't deny that, just it's not entirely correct.

1. A device can be hardware wallet even if it's a closed source. It's not a nice/desired situation, but it happens. The name hardware wallet comes from the way it works...
2. You've made a confusion. Trezor is open source, Ledger is the closed source one.

If the price stays closer to 90k than 30k, more miners will mine, the difficulty will rise and the price range can shift towards 100k.
Also you may have been forgetting about the next halving, which, at the end of 2023 may have to start be counted into the price.

So even without taking into account a big bubble, there are still chances for 100k get at least touched within that time frame. At least "never say never".
Of course, you may have been also misled by OP "math" and assumed he was talking about 1m instead of 100k.

After the governments have pumped shitloads of money to attenuate the problems created by COVID and lock down to economies, now it should have been the time to rise the taxes and partly cover that.
In 2020 and 2021 a lot of crops were not harvested because of the lack of cheap workers from Eastern Europe.

Now gas and oil prices rose a lot (and consequently electricity too) and we don't know whether they'll stop rising in the near future (the supply chains may have to be changed and rebuilt to avoid Russia).
More expensive (especially because of the green certificates) coal based electricity will be produced for the next few years even in the developed countries.
Everything that heated, produced automatically and or/transported will be more expensive. And it's very difficult to assess by how much. Not yet.

In the eastern countries the prices did and do rise. If this was not happening yet in Germany, it only means the supermarkets had longer term contracts with fixed prices and the suppliers have worked at a loss (which they will recover now).

So don't panic, still, expect tougher times.



Will EU decrease for a while the price of the green certificates? That could help, but I'm not sure it's something we'd really want. And neither them...
But... do you expect solutions from... ECB? What solutions? More paper money?! That happens anyway, since instead of the planned reduction of inflation, will be an even bigger rise of that.

Sorry, nope. However, since the LoG contains the public key too (which my guess would be that it would be used to verify the signature), it probably can be spoofed fully by a phishing site.
One proper way could be to publish on the website, but also on Bitcointalk and other reputable areas (eg github) the asc file with the key to verify the signatures.

Can you try to rename it to .txt? It's basically a text file with multiple sections, public key, signature format (?), signature and an actual json only at the end.
Maybe it helps; I've opened with notepad++ under Windows and looked pretty good/understandable (not that I've checked anything else than recovering the session, which can be done with the link too).

I use my Ledger with Electrum using my local Electrum server linked to my own Bitcoin Core (yes, it means 425+GB spent for that). I even wrote a tutorial for it.

Of course that if you've used their wallet, your addresses will be traceable, at least the first some (10-20), so best is to reset to new seed.
And of course that (especially in case of Ledger, since it's closed source) one doesn't know 100% sure his addresses are not tracked even if he resets it and never use the wallet part of their HW platform (since the info may be already leaking at firmware updates or installing the bitcoin app into the HW). You can follow my answer here and maybe that whole topic.

1. I’ve started with the link from this very page. First note: it’s a clear net link and when doing proper mixing one may look only for TOR address of the page. I’ve found the TOR address at the bottom of the clearnet page, but it tells "Office Tor Mirror". I think that’s a typo and some may think it’s an office/contact page, you may want to rephrase that and also put it on the ANN pages and closer to the top of the web page. Ah, and a copy button may be more appropriate than connect, since another browser would be used (at least in my case).

So the TOR page does exist, you need only small cosmetic changes imho.

2. Since I don’t want to make mistakes, I did a quick look into the FAQ. I’ve found a little funny the part about hardware wallets. Not incorrect though, since those problems are real. I find it funny because you may scare off HW users. I don't know, maybe a rephrase could be needed, or maybe it's just me, especially as it's not a problem only for HW, one can have cold storage and use Electrum with online servers.
Nothing big though.

3. The question mark near Transfer Delay has only the tooltip “transfer delay” and nothing happens when I link it (both on Firefox clear net and on TOR browser).

4. I’ve noticed noticed the different amounts and delay/receive times if more final recipients are chosen – nice touch. For my small amount I’ve used only one recipient though.

5. At actual mixing, from start, you provide OrderStatus link, UniCode (the name may be misleading when one asks for support, since Unicode usually means something else), order Id, yet I was expecting the Letter of Guarantee. At a second look into FAQ I understood that probably the Letter is generated only after the 2 confirmations (it may be good that you write about confirmations in the FAQ, for clarity) and I’ve also found that the session link is enough for getting to that page (I recommend to add explanatory [?]) to Order Link and UniCode. I find Order Id a bit redundant (as it’s in the order link).

After getting reassured I’ll recover easily the session, I’ve closed the browser completely and didn’t pay attention to the confirmations since I’ve sent with pretty low fee; I returned later to the session.

6. After 2 confirmations I was able to download the letter of guarantee. Then I’ve also seen how much I should expect to receive back. Here some cosmetic changes would be in order:
* show from start, on the main page how much one should expect the fees to be (although it’s already in FAQ, I know)
* after the 2 confirmations, after the amount to be received is shown, it won’t hurt to add info about the fee (the amount and the %) so those not reading the FAQ don’t get surprised. I’ve calculated my fee to be: 1.69%

7. I’ve set a couple of hours of delay and around the expected time I’ve got the incoming transaction, which had a quite big tx fee and got confirmed very fast. Here I’ve done the math again and that fee was subtracted from the amount "they’ve promised" when the funds I’ve sent got confirmed. Which is normal, since (for my small amount) that tx fee was even bigger than their 1.69%. Whether that bit of information needs or not to be written down, I don’t know; maybe.

8. Internals. Since it boasts CoinJoin basically even in its name, I’ve been somewhat afraid that the funds will be combined with other funds, but the link between source and destination will not be broken. But I’ve checked the deposit address and at the moment the coins were sent to me (mixing is over), those initial funds are still at the initial deposit address. Nice! (actually - even after the second mix the initial inputs were not touched!).

9. Forgetting. At the moment the (mixed) tx is sent to me, the page shows "This status page and all your personal data are now deleted and will not be available anymore." If I restart the browser and try to open by the order link it’s no longer reachable: link not valid (and a proper explanation why). Good.

10. TOR again. I’ve made a second mixing using the TOR browser. Everything went good, including recovery from the Letter of Guarantee, but I’ve also found two bugs:
* here the Order Status Link is also a clear net link
* I’ve set mixing time almost 25h and not long after confirmations, the page has shown 00h 37m 25s. It’s a display bug, since after the 37m have passed it has shown correctly 23h59m59s and at the expected time the new tx was sent to me.


Conclusions:

While I find the UI is fancier than necessary, there are still some cosmetic things that could be improved and made more informative. There are minor bugs, but the only one that actually somewhat scared me (because of my schedule/plans) was the delay time display problem.

But overall the mixing simply works as expected: the money is delivered to the expected address and at the expected time and the link with the initial input(s) is broken.

I think that's more than the fact the coins are locked in this wallet instead of that (decreasing the chance to be used as fractional reserve, for example). It's also that the companies acquiring Bitcoin tend to create a domino effect, getting other companies do the same (for reasons ranging from more trust to making sure they don't fall behind the competition).


I think that you have overthought this a little. If one business has a reserve of US Dollars is it endorsed by USA, or even legit? No. Same goes with bitcoin. I know that some may not understand this; but those are also prone to send their money to any "Elon Musk" on twitter promising to double them. I surely hope that in 2022 the average crypto investor is smarter than 2017 FOMO-driven

Better than similar projects? That's something only time can tell. Bitcoin can rise and fall, hence it can be debatable if it's a good reserve for another cryptocurrency, especially as the other crypto nominal value is not pegged to Bitcoin. But the huge reserve and advertising seems to work, even Bitstamp is listing UST.

While I agree about the fact that owners' extravagance / throwing out money can easily mean "be wary", I find a stable coin's main use to transfer value between different platforms. The huge reserve looks to me more reassuring than USDT's not-100%-what-it-consist-in reserve and it's still the most successful stable coin. Can UST get some of USDT market? Maybe. I kinda hope so. And in 5 years we will see if UST is successful or at least still relevant. Then also holding UST (for whatever reasons) can probably be seen safer than holding USDT.

I didn't really see scammers that simply decide to become correct.

Since then there were new people claiming to be scammed by 1xbit.
Since then there were also new accounts claiming that their problems were handles well by 1xbit, but they tried so hard to prove that I am 99% sure it's accounts made by 1xbit staff.

Do I have to add anything? Ah, right: a simple search could have been revealing all this without bringing up their name once again, which can be seen as advertising/shilling.