An e-mail account is not necessarily unsafe.
People can choose to make e-mail visible in order to get contacted, especially if they don't spend much time on the forum.
The forum offers a method to recover account even if the e-mail is compromised, but for that one has to put a safe bitcoin address here. The method may be slow, some specific steps need to be made, but one can be much more careful at keeping safe a bitcoin address than an e-mail account.

Does it sound safer now?

The truth is that warnings are necessary. Far too many may FOMO and go head first into Bitcoin, then panic-sell at the first significant drop in price.

Of course, from warnings to bitcoin could be “worthless” there's still quite a leap.
I mean, we can start preaching that the sun will turn into supernova and we are surely right, and at that point bitcoin will probably become worthless, but that doesn't mean that one should fill the newspapers with that.

While some do invest like it would gamble, investing is not like gambling.
One can properly check for himself and invest in what he think it's fit. He can choose for himself what risk he can take, he can choose a more or less reliable investment (of course, if he doesn't check this, then it would be gambling indeed). My point is that if one uses his brain when investing, he has a very chance for profit.
In gambling it usually doesn't matter much how well one uses his brain, the odds for winning are not big.
Gambling is for fun, some adrenaline and some occasional wins. Investments are for earning money.

I use Bitwarden (personal free). Of course, not for seed/private key. And of course, most of those services I keep the passwords for have 2FA which I've clearly enabled.
Bitwarden is also open source, also uses AES-256 end-to-end encryption; I find it a good option. You can also export the passwords ("vault") - encrypted or unencrypted.

https://bitwarden.com
https://github.com/bitwarden

While this looks wonderful, maybe too good, I'd advise:

1. Use escrow, at least until you earn some trust. As it is, anyone trying this "business" may risk to just "donate" you those bitcoin. I don't say that you want to scam, but you can do that too easy if you want to. So, again, consider using escrow (and learn how to use it so you also don't get scammed, obviously).

2. You should tell what country is this working for, or if it's restricted to internet purchases.

3. Consider avoiding to pay for services that may automatically turn into recursive payments.

Lately it's basically the only way an exchange can remain in business after a hack. Of course, some will prefer to give up. And of course, in some cases it's inside job too (probably here it wasn't).
But one cannot know for certain what will actually receive in such a situation and there's always a delay.

As said: not your keys, not your coins. One has to be very careful and avoid keeping too much money on exchanges. As I said, one cannot rely that the exchange will reimburse him.

Lucian Croitoru, despre criptomonede: Există o cerere pentru alte active/ Unele dintre ele vor fi validate, altele nu/ Toate băncile centrale vor avea monedă digitală. Ar fi aberant să nu aibă

In interviul dat de Lucian Croitoru, consilier al Guvernatorului BNR, acesta a fost surprinzator de la subiect in discutia despre criptomonede.
Nu le ataca, chiar observa ca exista inovatie si cerere. Altii ar fi zis cel putin ca e o bula speculativa, el nu.




Bineinteles, un subiect este CBDC pe care el ii numeste "bani digitali" si despre care subliniaza corect ca "sunt ceva diferit de criptoactive sau criptomonede".
Singurul minus este ca nu zice nimic de ce posibilitati (de supraveghere) aduc CBDC, dar hai sa fim seriosi, ar fi fost strigator la cer sa le denunte
Dar le si compara - corect - cu banii din cont. Deci singura "minciunica" este ca le considera la fel si cu banii avuti in lei (adica bancnote).


Am fost destul de placut surprins de ceea ce am citit, adica de abordarea avuta de Lucian Croitoru.

Good luck with that. I would just add that, unfortunately, in the same way you didn't bother to do a minimal check before sending them your money, many others will do as you did and get scammed.

This forum is already full of scam accusations (and flags) against them. Of course, one has to spend a couple of minutes and check.

I still use it. A lot. Maybe a bit changed like "only invest an amount you can afford to lose or to keep locked in bitcoin for very long time".

While indeed fiat is getting printed at an incredible rate, we should not forget that some simply cannot afford to put away a couple of bucks on the monthly basis. They may see bitcoin as the goose that can lay golden eggs and, when the price falls, they get panicked. I expect people who "don't afford to lose" lose the most when the price falls suddenly, because of their FOMO-buy and panic-sell actions.

I completely agree on heavily educating. But I also think that until the moment somebody understands fully good how the bitcoin investment works (and how much the price fluctuates too), until the moment one understands good enough why the price rises more than falls on the long term, the "only invest an amount you can afford to lose" is a simple starting point. Later on he can already decide better whether he should or not invest/buy and will probably no longer need our answers.

If you were investing and not trading, and if you invested only money you can afford to lose, then there are 3 direction I see:

* buy more (buy the dip, maybe DCA too, especially if you have more funds to invest - and afford to lose)
* sell and buy back when the price drops more (if it will drop more)
* hold and learn patience, since the price should grow again eventually (of course, it may or may not happen, and if it'll happen it may take any time between hours and years)

Of course, anything you'll do are risky moves. And one should not tell you what you should do with your money. The decision is yours.

Somebody did. Yesterday that topic was (still) in Beginners and Help. (Clearly not the best place, I know.)

This was already posted 4 days ago: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5376340

And although I can understand that it's not related to bitcoin, the fact mods have buried that thread in Off-Topic looks a bit unfair. Probably that's also why you've missed it.

While I agree with the comprehensive conclusion of TA ("chaotic mess"), shouldn't this news be bullish (if it's for real)?

On a more festive note (as opposed on arguing over whatever Mercedes will do), Sebastian Vettel has won Crypto.com Overtake Award

At the first glance I don't see anything unusual about the images.
Did you try to log in from another browser and see that topic again? Maybe something cached wrong, I don't know. (Also CRTL+F5 may help).

If the problem persists, maybe you tell more clearly where to look, maybe make a screenshot too?

Actually they do work, just certain apps won't work on won't update.
(I do agree with your conclusion though).


I don't know how long after the production has stopped they have become (more or less) unusable. It could give us a hint for what to expect, although it also depends on what vulnerabilities are found and when.
For example, you can see here an obsolete Ledger HW.1 still working, although only with legacy addresses (including nested SegWit).
So, while I agree more than 90% with you, I find you a bit too harsh 

---

Something else has also occurred to me. Although they'll discontinue Nano S, after some while, I expect that for many years to come they'll get support tickets from people keeping their money on a Nano S and "now" no longer working.

I was not sure what you've missed, since the "what the hell happened after" 


I don't know what to say. Lewis was clearly pushing. He was aware that his tyres don't look great, but not too bad either. He was already warned to stop cutting certain corners, especially as another car with Mercedes engine (I think that it was Lando) got a puncture because of the sharp-ish edges in those curves. Those tyres have already shown this year that they can go boom without a warning. But clearly, these are just speculations. The truth is that with the latest engine, the Mercedes car should have been unbeatable. It has shown that in Brasil.


I'm not sure I understand what you mean. After the tyre change, Max returned into second place, the other few cars were one lap behind.
They would have gotten blue flag anyway; the only thing is that they could have made Max waste some extra time which may or may not have helped Lewis.
However, speculating on what could have been happening are counterproductive.


From what I've read they are only considering that. I'll wait until 100% clear info comes out.


And many would say "indeed". But it's actually not so easy. The cars have different properties and one pilot can do better than another in the same car. Clearly the RBR car, especially since it has Honda engine, not Mercedes, has different posture and aerodynamics, hence the driving experience may differ.
So while I agree that for most of the races (but not all!!) the Mercedes was more powerful and the faster car, I don't agree with Max' statement.

1. Your strategy to hide info makes it hard for us to understand where the problem is, but it's not well hidden and if one wants to find out source address, recipient address and everything - it can be done with the info still on that picture.

2. I see it has 118 confirmations. I'd start with checking the recipient address if it's exactly what's expected, since clipboard malware may "help" you send to unexpected addresses.
Then you should see if the recipient did check correctly (is it you? is the wallet properly connected to a node and synced?) and if you check the recipient address on a block explorer (blockchair.com, memplool.space) you can see for yourself whether the money is there. Also the recipient may be hacked or lying. The transaction history for that address should tell the story, but since you didn't post the address, you'll have to check for yourself.

Anyone in the world can take over the code and continue developing it and releasing it. This is the beauty of being open source.
The community will then decide if they want to use the new releases or not, based on what has been changed in the code (which should be again, publicly available).

So the question, as @Lucius also pointed out, is a non-question, probably meant to scare newbies.


TL;DR: There's no real issue there. Period.

Human mind is very complex. One cannot rely on human mind to correctly remember things. Not 100%.
There may be that OP is trolling. There may be that OP tries to "rewrite history". And there may be that OP just doesn't remember some things right and the year can be anything, even 2015. (of course, it may also be 500 mBTC)
I agree with Franky here, OP should get his story right first.