But wasn't it in 2016-17 that there was already the blocksize war, resulting in the (unsuccessful) shitcoin cash hard fork? I think you don't have a new shitcoin cash in mind as a solution to the problem, and I would like to hear your idea.

I don't know if this is going a bit off topic in this thread but it is a thread I created, after all.

Well, if that were to happen to me, I would pay by credit card and then they would charge me when I collect my paycheck. If it's only a few days, I might even get charged a month later, since credit cards usually have a cutoff day. For example, if I pay between the 27th and 31st of this month, I will be charged in February.

I could also take out an online instant minimum amount loan and amortize everything except what I need, and then amortize the rest when I collect the paycheck, so I would pay very little interest, only for the amount of the medicines and prorated for the few days I had the rest, but I understand that not everyone has the same banking conditions that I have.


Just a point, if I have opened the thread, it is precisely to see other points of view and try to understand other perspectives and life situations in which people who ask for these loans find themselves.


I have not investigated the matter thoroughly, and I do not know if in all cases the loans with collateral are given if you give 100% of the collateral or there are cases where the collateral covers only 50% for example. In the second case it would make more sense. In the first case, it can happen like in banking that let's say you have $10K in an investment in the bank and suddenly you have to make an urgent reform at home (the roof falls down or something like that) that let's say it is going to cost you $10K. One option would be to sell the investment and pay but sometimes it is smarter to keep the investment and take the loan if it is low interest. If you get the loan at 4% and it is clear to you that your investment gives you significantly more than that (like an S&P fund that averages 10), it is smarter to take the loan, although here you would have to take into account market volatility, whether you have a stable income and other factors.

Applying this to crypto loans, I do not know if there will be any similar case of leaving the collateral and taking the loan because you do not want to get rid of the investment, because the interest is higher, but I guess that by leaving 100% collateral the interest would be in the lower range within the crypto loans.


Of course, that's one of the things I figured and said in the OP, that I assumed one of the cases is people from third-world countries. Still, the only sense I see in it is to pay back the loan as soon as possible, otherwise the interest eats at you.

Yeah, doesn't make much sense to me either, at least as adaseb puts it. In the stock market, it is well known that people who manage portfolios of stocks usually remove those they consider weaker at the end of December to offset gains of other sales of shares made during the year and pay less taxes, but selling at the beginning of the year? Never heard of it but I'm not saying that some people don't. You sell in January and don't pay until 15-18 months later.

I have the same opinion, and I think so far everyone I've seen commenting on the thread has said the same thing. That in the beginning the intention was good. Probably neither they themselves cared too much about keeping receipts nor the community to control it because if you get a $50 donation, another $20 donation and I give you another $25 donation, if you show me some pictures that's enough, but if you get a whole Bitcoin, you have to be very careful.


In the end I deleted my neutral tag and supported the flag, partly because of this argument and partly because of the fact that they disappeared from the forum days ago. If I considered myself innocent I wouldn't do that.

To me they consider themselves somehow guilty and defeated. bL4nkcode used to earn $100 a week from the Best Change signature campaign. That's good money for someone living in the Philippines. crwth didn't write as much but he also made money from the campaign. Think of them as people who have borrowed money on the forum, some as little as $200.

If I considered myself innocent, even if I didn't keep all the receipts, I would have come more to this thread to show my face and fight for my reputation and save my income.

I knew this part of the forum existed but recently realized that the interest rates are quite high. I have some doubts and I would appreciate it if you could help me clarify them.

(Incidentally, I am not 100% sure if the thread belongs here, as it is a meta-question about lending services in the forum. If you are sure it belongs elsewhere, let me know and I'll move it).

Since interest rates here are usually significantly higher than those of traditional banking, I can think of several reasons why people might take out these loans:

1) That they live in a third world country and have no access to credit.
2) That they receive all or most of their income in Bitcoin, and therefore banks won't give them credit either as they require a fiat payroll for it.

But from there, I don't really understand why people are willing to pay such high rates. Especially when I see people borrowing (or trying to borrow) $10 or $30, which sounds to me like gambling, extreme poverty, or ruinous management of their finances, which should not be lent to them because of the high risk of not getting paid back. What other reasons are there?

From the lender's point of view, I suppose there are two reasons for charging those interest rates:

1) The volatility of crypto. You lend x crypto today to be paid back in 6 months and the price (fiat equivalent) in 6 months may be significantly lower. This would not be such a problem if you only lend Bitcoin (or only Bitcoin and stablecoins) and you are a Bitcoin maximalist, who believes firmly that Bitcon price will continue to rise in the long term.
2) Risk of default, especially on uncollateralized loans (for people with great reputations on the forum). Even if people put their account on the line, it's not like if someone takes a loan from a bank where they have their payroll domiciled and the bank knows they have assets they could seize in case of default.

I don't know if I'm right on this too or there are other reasons.

So it's not very likely that that kind of transaction would be made by someone who comes to my coffee shop to pay me for coffee, unless they're not sane or something like that.

These questions had come to my mind because of the issue of day to day payments and, although LN is better, I see that it would not be so difficult to accept small payments via blockchain, without waiting for confirmation or waiting for just one, because with cash and cards there is also the risk of being scammed and not for that reason coffee shops stop accepting them.

I guess a bigger problem for Bitcoin to be used for day-to-day payments would be scalability.

Yes, you are right, never say never just in case.

Let's hope that the loans situation ends up positively and they pay back what they owe.

If I understand correctly, he asked for $2K in June that he was going to pay back in 2 or 3 months and at most 6. He should have paid it all back already and according to row 174 of the spreadsheet (if I understand it correctly) he has made a partial payment of $500 of the total $2,686 he has to pay back, plus he has left BTC and bnb as collateral, but he has not paid it all back yet.

I guess now that his bitcointalk account is ruined the temptation to not pay may be even greater.

Incidentally, I see several people I know from the forum in the spreadsheet and I am surprised. No way you're going to see me paying 2.70%-6.60% monthly interest. I must be financially very healthy because it seems crazy to me.


It is certainly curious

Edited to say that I see in row 213 that crwth has an active non-secured loan. The same. I hope he is honest and pays it back but in a non-secured loan where the only collateral is your Bitcointalk account, if the account is ruined, there may be a temptation not to pay back the loan.

My technical knowledge is very basic but no, I wasn't thinking about that.

What I think is: suppose I have a coffee shop and I decide to accept bitcoin for coffee payments (let's leave aside LN), but I will accept the payment as good as soon as I see that the transaction is retransmitted to the blockchan. How likely is it that someone will slip me a transaction that won't be confirmed (and that doesn't have a very low fee, which I could check and reject the transaction based on that).

After seeing the answers that have been given to what the OP asks in this thread:

BTC as "every day" spending currency vs. 10 min Block Confirmation/Mining time

A couple of questions come to mind, which I thought it would be pertinent to ask in a separate thread.

The first one is how easy it is to create a fake transaction and transmit it to the whole blockchain without it being instantly detected as fake.

The second is: once we have a first confirmation of a transaction, how could it happen that the transaction is rejected by the rest of the miners? Would it mean that the first one is part of the scam if he validates that fake transaction or not necessarily? What would be the level of difficulty of doing this?

This comes to my mind because for day to day payments if the difficulty is high maybe some businesses could accept a transaction as soon as it is transmitted to the blockchain. There is a website where I have made several purchases and lately they show the payment as confirmed  as soon as they detect that the transaction is transmitted to the blockchain, without waiting for the first confirmation. Obviously they are small amounts but quite larger than the price of a coffee.

I am very much in favor of responsible gambling and one of the things I don't like about many crypto casinos is that they don't have responsible gambling features, although if they are non-kyc it is almost impossible to implement them.

As for the case you tell us, we can not check if it is a mistake or not. I can believe that it is a mistake and I can also distrust them, neither would surprise me.

But once they have recognized their mistake and fixed it, what do you expect? That they would give you compensation? As they say in the screenshot, you might as well have blocked their emails.

I don't think it will cause it, but by making it more difficult to finance companies, many of which are overly doped, it may start a snowball effect.


Do you think that a lot has changed since then and that we are better off now?


Yes, but if there is a stock market crash, they will go back to printing like crazy, it's what happened with the subprime crisis and the only weapon they have with the fiat money system. I think they are now in a catch-22 situation, where if they keep printing they generate more inflation and if they reduce the printing of currency the economy goes down.


Call me an optimist if you want, but I think in the long run Bitcoin is going to come out a clear winner, even if we are not going to have the exponential returns of the first 10 years.

The point is to have more profits and less risk than with your mentality of playing roulette.

In my case I focus only on Bitcoin, which I am sure is going to be more profitable than 99% of shitcoins in the next few years if not 100%. But mainly I focus on Bitcoin because it is decentralized, limited in nature, decreasing in supply, censorship resistant, etc.

So, I'm not thinking about selling, I'm thinking about accumulating. Why on earth would I want to sell the best financial asset in the world? (Or the best currency that is also a financial asset, if you prefer).

Since the creation of Bitcoin, my mentality has proven to be much safer and more profitable than the roulette-playing mentality you have.

Well, even if in the end the customers don't use it much because the customers are low income or if in fact the company is doing it as a business move, this is of great importance. Can anyone imagine going to Wall Mart or your country's equivalent and seeing that Bitcoin payments are accepted? It is very important for mass adoption.

On the other hand, I still think that even if customers were wealthy, I don't think Bitcoin payments would be in the majority. What are peopel going to do? Save in fiat currency and spend Bitcoin? I think that only those who receive all their income in Bitcoin would pay in bitcoin at the supermarket, which is almost nobody nowadays. There are also other cases, people who bought a long time ago and spend small parts of it.

But all in all, good news and I hope we see many more like this in the future.

It seems to me questionable behavior to say the least. Here we could apply the saying: "if it looks like a duck...".

Have you contacted irfan_pak10? The rules of the campaign prohibit enrolling alts. The only problem is we don't know for sure it is the same person or buddies/a family/a farm, so in these latter cases they wouldn't be breaking the rule.

In the case of faucets, they give so little that I do not doubt that it covers the cost of the electricity or battery you spend. Then, if you withdraw a lot from different faucets you will have a lot of small inputs and you will have to pay a high commission to spend them (if you don't learn to consolidate inputs in times of low fees). But well, it's not all bad. Faucets are a first approach to Bitcoin. I think many of the forum used them at the time.

I agree with the second part of what you say, but not with the first part. I have more liquidity than ever, I follow a spending budget in which the first thing I do is allocate money to investments, and, in addition I also have a section for myself to enjoy. Why shouldn't I do it at this time of the year?

Regarding the second part, yes I agree, assets should not be sold to spend on Christmas/Holidays/parties. They should be separate things.

You'd better build your assets and also enjoy life.

But paxmao was talking about Bitcoin as enforcer of responsibility, not just about the price. That is why the initial reaction of governments was very negative, and since they realized that they could not put an end to it, they ended up regulating it.

I would only add that I think we are yet to see the profound effect of Bitcoin on society as more and more people use it.

The only thing I would add here is what I usually recommend to these newbies. Don't just be interested in the money. Get to know the forum, learn about bitcoin, and don't be in a hurry to make money. If he makes good use of the forum and posts regularly, he will be able to make money in the future. We have too many cases of newbies in a hurry to make money who end up buying accounts, or plagiarizing.

The supercycle theory as formulated by Dan Held is not going to hold true, at least not this year. We should be clearly higher in price. This is not to say that the theory does not have a certain logic (as they all do) and that it may happen in the future.

As for where we are, we are in uncharted territory. No one quite knows what is going to happen to the price in 2022, what is clear is that the bitcoin price is behaving differently than previous cycles.