Can someone quickly summarize what happened here? Were most users affected by this? What coins were taken?
So would this exchange be safe to use now? I notice some coins i like... they have it and there is lot of volume in it.
I guess you are a few articles behind! Cryptopia is done, gone, *POOF*! They tried to reopen but they were very slow in resuming the trading functions and they also rolled the loss % to their customers. I don't remember the exact loss %, but if for example they lost about 20% of their BTC, then they reduced the customers' BTC holdings by 20%. With this way of operation, the users didn't trust them again and they sow their decline, so they decided to shutdown and liquefy their assets. https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/ |
|
|
|
From the article, Limitations
At this point, you probably noticed that you can not run or import everything in
your file, this includes the DOM, external packages, node builtin APIs. That is
because your plugin is running through a sandbox, all thanks to the vm2
package we are using in Desktop Wallet. That's understandable, but does the phrase "at this point" means we'll be able to run such interactions in the future? I'm a full-stack web developer and I work on Node.js, I'd like to keep in mind your future plans so that I may be able to catch an idea and develop a plugin in the future. |
|
|
|
Just like you, I want the Ark to develop and be successful, as I myself am the holder of the coins. Regarding the fact that the ark in tandem with the dollar does not give an effect, I do not agree because I think that this will increase the coin levity and its rapid growth
I agree with you on this, Ark need more cooperation and legit exchanges. I see this in EOS, this scam shit not even have a blockchain or wallet but it's on all the exchanges, then the pump and hype start from there to now. Shit scam copy lisk even have more exchanges than Ark. Also I think Ark team need to work with Asian people with events and marketing, China, Japan and Korea. These Asian people can't code but they can pump and hype. Oh, and the Ark team have 0 Asian right now. Japanese have created some of the best video games and set a few standards years ago you know. Bitcoin creator's alias name "Satoshi Nakamoto" is also Japanese, though we don't know if the real person/group behind this name has any Japanese origin. |
|
|
|
Please don't spread misinformation. The US Government is not recognizing Craig Wright at all - anyone could make this filing. It doesn't confirm anything and just shows further that he doesn't understand bitcoin.
When I first read the article it was a bit confusing for me. My logic-circuit was telling me that this is only an application which any madman can do. Then I read the following part which is supposingly quoted from the registration, The registration recognizes the author as Craig Steven Wright, using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto The grammatical tense which is used here makes the statement sound like it's decided, but again I couldn't believe the US copyright office would be so incompetent and clueless. The article also writes "Wright is now legally establishing that he is Bitcoin’s creator after being dismayed to see his original Bitcoin design" but I guess since they're supporting BSV, it's normal for them to be delusional. To all BSV supporters, I've an idea you can consider for whenever you want to spread your news! Here, I made an image for you to visualise it,  |
|
|
|
A kind reminder of the following issue; please do something about it! Dear team, I believe that your altcoin deposit is broken : https://777coin.com/deposit.php?ref=1584422At least with the link with my BTC deposit address returns the error: "Oops! That page can’t be found."I believe that with the rising BTC fee costs, people would like to use some altcoins for deposits. Sending an altcoin to an exchange (tx fees), trading it for BTC (trading fees) and withdrawing it to 777's account (withdraw fees) is probably too cosy right now. Shapeshift might be better, though I don't know their exact fees. |
|
|
|
Depends mainly if the devs are going to load another bulk of their tokens to make more bucks for the company as usual. Issuances into uptrends can go unnoticed due to FOMO and other ongoing events while it's much more difficult to do the same during a sideways phase of the market. I'm sure they know about it.
Devs can't "load another bulk of their tokens", do more research about the topic before posting  Nope, that's not true. The devs can load another bulk of their tokens because it's part of their concept. Last time, they did it only a few weeks ago: https://ambcrypto.com/ripple-releases-1-billion-xrp-from-escrow-wallet-as-new-month-dawns/Do more research about the shitcoin before investing. OK, so its not that you didn't do research, its just that you didn't understand what you found, lol LOL, please read it carefully. Here again for you: In its recent Q1 report, Ripple outlined that it sold approximately $169.42 million in XRP in Q1 of 2019, and that its sales accounted for 0.32 percent of the global XRP volume. https://ambcrypto.com/ripple-releases-1-billion-xrp-from-escrow-wallet-as-new-month-dawns/This is a smart contract and it's a monthly procedure we all (should) know about. Did you know that Bitcoin's monthly inflation is also 0.30% ? The difference is that, 1) XRP is given to the development company through a smart contract and then they use it to promote their software (which in the end will also benefit XRP holders). The XRP price is not directly affected because they don't exchange their coins in public exchanges but privately OTC. This could be viewed as a centralisation of the rewards, but at least their goals align with their investors. If XRP rise, both them and XRP holders will benefit. If it drops, they stand to lose a lot as well. 2) Bitcoin is distributing the new coins in a similar rate through mining. This might seem a decentralized reward system, but most of these coins are going to farms (therefore rich people are getting richer). Neither system is perfect, but personally I prefer Ripple's distribution system for the long term. I'm afraid of what will happen when the BTC block rewards get reduced so much that the big miners will stand to gain more by the using the equipment they own to attack the network rather than support it. At least there's no such fear in XRP. |
|
|
|
Well... I don't see a spreadsheet in the thread but if you have this user on your campaign, you might want to consider removing them, they give you a bad credibility if you can't notice this spam-fest, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1929411;sa=showPostsThe deterioration of this forum is sickening, don't keep rewarding those bots/spammers. |
|
|
|
Since US recognized him as the Satoshi the creator of Bitcoin, does he have the right to also file a trademark to blockchain?
This could be seen as if he owns this technology and that all other who copied are going to be illegal. It must be anther story one day but if this happen can they take down all the altcoins using blockchain technology?
They'd achieve just as much as PUBG developers achieved when they were bitching about Fortnite... this is, nothing! I would think that the blockchain is similar to any other technology the world has achieved in the past. eg: Somebody developed the mp3 format, but we don't have to get an approval before encoding a sound file into mp3. Wow! Watch the BSV price action. +100% already. This is getting ridiculous...
Where can I short this? I don't suppose any credible exchange is still supporting them, huh? HitBTC where the most volume is, is a sure scam for me. |
|
|
|
This man!! Has anyone told him...  Really this guy! He claims to have created Bitcoin "to works within existing legal frameworks" I must have the wrong place, so. Even if he assigns the copyright registrations to Bitcoin Association, it doesn't change the fact that he is lying to people.
Those who already know Bitcoin (even without using it) know the truth very well. But what will it be for future generations? It's like school in history, the truth is often different. This guy should be sued for a cult organization, he even infested the U.S. Copyright Office lol . I hope that a day Satoshi will return and prove his identity, just to get fun on this thief.
When that day comes this would literally be a huge slap to this mans face and make a huge shame on him, Of I forget he doesn't really care about it since he is so persistence of his act. But no matter what they say we would always know that he is not the real creator of Bitcoin and the real creator would always be a mystery for us . Unless he has knowledge of who the real Satoshi is and he's 100% certain that the real one won't ever be revealed. It could be a team that has been disbanded and if revealed Craig would just say "I was the leader of that team, but we fought and they lie about me now". Another possibility is that the real one is not alive anymore and Craig knows it. |
|
|
|
...
Today max dropdown to 3 level, no body lose money.
...
"Nobody lose money"!  Sounds legit! How awesome it'd be if everyone would be making money out of thin air... though someone tried and this was the result...  |
|
|
|
Such sites need to be "Provably fair", but the users also need some skills to read the proof and check for yourself if the random outcomes are indeed legit. At least with sites like 777coin which are around a long time now you can have an ease of mind. |
|
|
|
As long as you run a validator and only validate your own transaction you are not a money transmitter but you also have to keep record for every transaction for 25 years as by law.
The moment you touch anyone else's money (validate ) you come a money transmitter and must have license.
If only Ripple would validate, it's central banking.
I read through a big document and wrote to you a wall of text in order to explain what you were misunderstanding, thinking that there's a chance you're not troll but a misinformed person, but I guess I was wrong. You don't seem to understand very simple English and you deny established and public facts (eg: Ripple isn't running all the nodes). Money Transmitter is someone who is holding digital assets for at least a moment and then resells or exchanges it for someone else. Have you ever seen a simple XRP transaction in the blockchain? When wallet A sends to wallet B, then the transactions goes like this: A -> B, not A -> NODE -> BWhen I wrote about the miners, I wasn't talking about a miner confirming the transaction other users are sending, that's does not classify them as transmitters. Since they receive block rewards though, if they exchange those rewards then they might be considered transmitters. It's not very clear how it works for mining but this discussion would belong to the Bitcoin section. As far as XRP and Ripple is concerned, running a node doesn't require any license. Just read my post again and please stop spreading lies. 1) This looks like an explanation of existing rules, not a new law. I spent some time reading it and it just explains to not-crypto-related people many things we're already familiar with. 1st page, 2nd paragraph, This guidance does not establish any new regulatory expectations or requirements.
Rather, it consolidates current FinCEN regulations, and related administrative rulings
and guidance issued since 2011, and then applies these rules and interpretations to
other common business models involving CVC engaging in the same underlying
patterns of activity. 2) This is from "Bank Secrecy Act", it's only affecting US. All US based cryptocurrency projects already require KYC from their customers, this is nothing new nor related to XRP only. 3) You make it sound like it's something terrible, but a company needing a license isn't that big of a deal. You probably didn't realise this, but this document you linked would be more damaging for Bitcoin and it'd probably wouldn't affect XRP at all. Let me explain (3), In page 9 of this document, it is stated that FinCEN regulations, specify certain activities are excluded from the definition of “money transmitter.”
Specifically, a person is not a money transmitter if that person only: provides the delivery, communication, or network access services used by a money transmitter to support money transmission services;From the above quote we understand that XRP nodes wouldn't be affected by this even if it was something new, they do not received a mining/staking reward for their services... even though I believe getting an extra licence and being reviewed by one more agency isn't a catastrophe. Now read pages 20-21, section 4.5.2 which talks mainly about anonymity-enhanced coins, but the same principal should apply to BTC as well. Quoting paragraph (C), note that CVC = Convertible Virtual Currenciesa person that develops a decentralized CVC payment system will become a
money transmitter if that person also engages as a business in the acceptance
and transmission of value denominated in the CVC it developed (even if the
CVC value was mined at an earlier date). The person would not be a money
transmitter if that person uses the CVC it mined to pay for goods and services on
his or her own behalf.
From what I understand from the above paragraph and the rest of the document, being a node doesn't qualify you as a "money transmitter". Ripple Labs themselves should still be qualified as "money transmitters" since they're selling XRP to companies, but this is nothing new and it hasn't stopped them from doing their business. It makes me wonder though, how are Bitcoin miners viewed under this law? The moment they sell their coins to another entity, they are considered "money transmitters" and the obligations mentioned in section 2.1 should apply to them. I'd like to see how an average person who is mining Bitcoin will operate within the law! |
|
|
|
Hehe not bad! Thanks! And what I wanted to see was the gold/BTC relation during the crypto-winter. It seems that Bitcoin didn't give a lot of space to gold after all, both had a similar fate. This doesn't make sense to me though, shouldn't either "safe heaven" asset (if not both) flourish during an unstable stock market? I guess since both assets cannot be faked and printed, they have a common enemy who is fighting them both equally. Nonetheless, it's obvious which of the two assets is more resistant to manipulation/suppression. Here's a focused chart starting on May 2017, the first month the daily BTC volume consistently reached a billion $.  |
|
|
|
Gold Bar 400 oz =   1 BTC =  Not sure what this is supposed to show, but it'd be interesting to see a chart of the BTC/Gold price over the last few years; Especially because the gold prices are constantly falling (aka manipulated by paper futures). |
|
|
|
XRP is a gamble not an investment, never was, never will be (property, stocks, mutual funds, shares ..... are investments)
A gamble is just a other expression of "stupidity tax".
Junk XRP is ridiculous overprice (ever product has base price, whats xrp base price?)
No potential, node operators are illegal unless purchased license and comply with MSB (Liberty Reserve operated 15 years before being shut down)
Right... I'm sure you Mr. Random Guy on Internet is more knowledgeable than a multinational fintech company which operates since 2012. Maybe you're more knowledgeable even than the government, why don't you write the government a latter to let them know Ripple is using illegal operators? But I guess they are too busy right now with fighting Huawei so that they can sell more iPhones. All saved on Bolchchain, 2020 will be an interesting year. https://bico.media/1f8e0c5f47b470f3df0f06f3d2939adccc1f2b7dafa0b4a32a69663cda2c6760.pdfSEC ruling that node operators must have money transmitter license (cost 6 figure sum) and comply with AML/KYC and also every user must scan ID. 1) This looks like an explanation of existing rules, not a new law. I spent some time reading it and it just explains to not-crypto-related people many things we're already familiar with. 1st page, 2nd paragraph, This guidance does not establish any new regulatory expectations or requirements.
Rather, it consolidates current FinCEN regulations, and related administrative rulings
and guidance issued since 2011, and then applies these rules and interpretations to
other common business models involving CVC engaging in the same underlying
patterns of activity. 2) This is from "Bank Secrecy Act", it's only affecting US. All US based cryptocurrency projects already require KYC from their customers, this is nothing new nor related to XRP only. 3) You make it sound like it's something terrible, but a company needing a license isn't that big of a deal. You probably didn't realise this, but this document you linked would be more damaging for Bitcoin and it'd probably wouldn't affect XRP at all. Let me explain (3), In page 9 of this document, it is stated that FinCEN regulations, specify certain activities are excluded from the definition of “money transmitter.”
Specifically, a person is not a money transmitter if that person only: provides the delivery, communication, or network access services used by a money transmitter to support money transmission services;From the above quote we understand that XRP nodes wouldn't be affected by this even if it was something new, they do not received a mining/staking reward for their services... even though I believe getting an extra licence and being reviewed by one more agency isn't a catastrophe. Now read pages 20-21, section 4.5.2 which talks mainly about anonymity-enhanced coins, but the same principal should apply to BTC as well. Quoting paragraph (C), note that CVC = Convertible Virtual Currenciesa person that develops a decentralized CVC payment system will become a
money transmitter if that person also engages as a business in the acceptance
and transmission of value denominated in the CVC it developed (even if the
CVC value was mined at an earlier date). The person would not be a money
transmitter if that person uses the CVC it mined to pay for goods and services on
his or her own behalf.
From what I understand from the above paragraph and the rest of the document, being a node doesn't qualify you as a "money transmitter". Ripple Labs themselves should still be qualified as "money transmitters" since they're selling XRP to companies, but this is nothing new and it hasn't stopped them from doing their business. It makes me wonder though, how are Bitcoin miners viewed under this law? The moment they sell their coins to another entity, they are considered "money transmitters" and the obligations mentioned in section 2.1 should apply to them. I'd like to see how an average person who is mining Bitcoin will operate within the law! |
|
|
|
HUGE announcement today!
Announcing: Axie Infinity and Loom Network Alliance!
https://medium.com/axie-infinity/axie-infinity-and-loom-network-alliance-b713ae84adbdTLDR, - Axie Infinity is launching a PlasmaChain validator.
- We will announce when staking with Axie is available. If you’d like to be notified when our Validator is up and running please sign up for our newsletter here: https://axie.substack.com/
- We will be combining staking and gaming in entirely new ways, sharing rewards with the community and offering prizes to top delegators.
- Stay tuned for a special crossover Relentless / Lunacia Land item
- We’re making the partnership official with LUNA + LOOM token swap to more deeply align incentives.
|
|
|
|
XRP is a gamble not an investment, never was, never will be (property, stocks, mutual funds, shares ..... are investments)
A gamble is just a other expression of "stupidity tax".
Junk XRP is ridiculous overprice (ever product has base price, whats xrp base price?)
No potential, node operators are illegal unless purchased license and comply with MSB (Liberty Reserve operated 15 years before being shut down)
Right... I'm sure you Mr. Random Guy on Internet is more knowledgeable than a multinational fintech company which operates since 2012. Maybe you're more knowledgeable even than the government, why don't you write the government a latter to let them know Ripple is using illegal operators? But I guess they are too busy right now with fighting Huawei so that they can sell more iPhones. |
|
|
|
OK so there's something that's confusing me a lot regarding cryptos and liquidation. Particularly with MTgox and what happened to their customers and apologies in advance if I've got the wrong idea regarding this.
MTGox repaid their customers in USD value at the time of the liquidation, they did not return the coins users had.
If cryptopia does this in a few months and say we still go at the parabolic rate the market is going in now, can they do the same thing and pay back what the USD value is now?
What happens, if they do pay the $$$ value, to the coins left over. Who gets them?
Same question with MTgox, who or what entity is now owners of the bitcoins not paid out?
My general understanding is that every time there is a pay-back to customers who lost their money, the method which results in the least possible returns is chosen. If the BTC price drops, they'll return you the amount of BTC you lost. If the BTC price raises, they'll say that they'll refund whatever value their users were holding on "day x", so if you held 1 BTC on whatever day they like (hack-day or liquidation day? I dunno) and they'll refund you in 2 years when BTC's price could be $20k, then you'll receive $6k~$8k instead of $20k. |
|
|
|
Of course we officially entered into bullish phase and current volume is showing how big potential is ahead but that is just beginning of this new cycle surely soon it will get more power and we will see more big figures on the board. At the moment majority of the people just waiting for the right time to enter into this ecosystem and it will make this more interesting.
Is "big potential" what you're seeing? Because what I'm seeing is a problematic scaling which sends my Axies breeding cost sky-high, a semi-centralised mining system which is controlled mainly by farms and, as IncludeBeer mentioned... I think the majority of people are waiting for the right time to sell.
|
|
|
|
I'd better guess Bitcoin's price tomorrow rather than a winner between these two! Guessing Bitcoin's price would be easier !  (Though both cases seem close to impossible to guess) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
