From what I see the reason was valid.



Now think: what if somebody would have given you that loan?
But no, I see that same mindset here, hence imho the negative trust is still well deserved.



You'll have to ask those who left you the negative trust. But I think that you'd just waste your (and their) time.



Not unfair at all. The warning is there. You may convince some to trust you, but it will convince more to use escrow when dealing with you. Which is just about right.

This only shows how many use centralized wallets and services, which are known for overestimating the fees big time.
I've been following the blocks and I do know how many blocks were not full or just. In many occasions one would have had the same result with 3 sat/vbyte (or even 1!) and still paid 400 sat/vbyte. Here's where these numbers come from.

The fact that the fees are low could tell that traders are not that active. In a normal situation.
Just after the hash rate drop we had, the situation is not so much normal and without more info this indicator can mislead you big time.
All in all, when OP has posted we were at the end of difficulty adjustment period. The hash rate grew in the last 2 weeks and that's why the tx fees are still low. With the new diff period I expect that next week, if the price goes in a similar way, the tx fees will no longer be nicely low.


Edit: I just noticed that the diff period has already ended not too many blocks ago.

As written in the other posts, at least for Ghana it doesn't look at all as a step in the right direction.
And you seem to be contradicting yourself too - if it's that good why wouldn't you use it in trading?! 

Gandeste-te ca 99% din populatie nu stie si nu intelege ce-i aia crypto. Normal ca bajbaie. Apoi mai vin si consultantii, consilierii si poate si lobby-istii, care vor aduce argumente cand pro cand contra. Iar statul/politicienii vor sa nici nu supere pe nimeni (ca le trebuie voturi), dar si si sa taxeze cat de mult posibil (si sa fie fair, si fiidca statul are in general o foame continua de bani).



In El Salvador exista si foarte multi care nu inteleg ce-i cu bitcoin asta care le-a picat in cap peste noapte, si precum la noi vaccinul te va face sa prinzi 5G direct, si la ei probabil Bitcoin o sa le fure banii din portmoneu cand nu se uita.



Chestia asta merge mai degraba cu firmele. Si nu cred ca vor sa alunge potentiale afaceri platitoare de taxe. Nu. Doar bajbaie.



Nu as baga mana in foc ca ar exista tot timpul o tara care sa sustina crypto (ca presiuni la nivel guvernamental exista, iar guvernele se mai schimba, si nu neaparat in bine), dar suficienti oameni  vor exista. Si asta ar trebui sa ajunga. Daca se poate la suprafata, e super. Daca nu, si underground este o optiune. Am incredere ca rasa umana este per total suficient de inteligenta.

This is how one does proper DCA. He's just doing it by the book.



For institutional investors the "coin" functionality of Bitcoin doesn't matter much, or at all. Let's face it, for (all of) them it's just "digital gold", whether some of us like it or not. They invest to make money. Don't we do the same, whether we expect or not to spend in some years like we do with cash now? It helps the price, it helps the ecosystem with advertising and liquidity, it's a win-win situation.

Cred ca sunt batran. Mi se pare ciudat sa zic la o piesa doar din 2007 "oldies but goldies"  
Totusi "Pentru inimi" imi place mult mai mult.



Eiii.. mere si pere...
Pe cand, da, ai dreptate, la asemenea produse ai nevoie de un dram de incredere (si apoi sa verifici pe blockchain, si apoi si speri ca intr-adevar nu mai are nimeni cheia..), nu as pune produsele fizice legate de Bitcoin in aceeasi oala cu Bitcoin. Si deci o tranzactie cu un Casascius nu o vad ca pe o tranzactie cu bitcoin (desi na, "deal"-ul contine si bitcoin).

Mare grija mare. Si pe AliExpress gasesti si produse bune, si produse facute cu picioarele, si produse fake (probabil ca unele mai bune si altele nu). Si exact aici e problema: chestiile facute in China sunt ieftine, dar controlul de calitate lasa de dorit, deci poti foarte usor sa iei un rebut.

Faza cu Muntenegru e de antologie si arata cum China da cu o mana si ia cu doua. Acolo cred eu ca scopul a fost ca China sa puna mana macar pe o parte din garantiile oferite. Prea au facut acolo totul cu chinezi fara sa se intrebe ce ar putea sa mearga prost. E clar un exemplu ca se poate (usor!) chiar mai rau ca la noi!   (Banuiesc ca au uns chinezii acolo juma' din clasa politica, altfel nu-mi explic...)

Dar cred ca discutia aici nu era despre ceea ce produse se pot lua ieftin din China (ca AliExpress exista si acum 3 sau 4 ani de exemplu), ci ceea ce zice China ca face (de la politica pana la infrastructura "ieftina si buna" -> vezi Muntenegru). Si de fapt am avut noroc, ca altfel am avea 10G Chinezesc, cateva reactoare nucleare in lucru (forever?) si asa mai departe. Daca nu ma inseala memoria ceva tronson de autostrada au castigat (sau au fost pe aproape?) dar macar nu singuri.



Exista niste discutii intereante pe tema asta, cum ar fi "ce cauta cloudflare in ecuatia asta?", deci proiectul cred ca mai are de lucru/finisat. Dar na, fiind de la un Hackathon nu ne putem astepta la minuni, se pot face imbunatatirile in timp.



Incredere? Pe bune?! Asta ai invatat tu la Bitcoin?!  
Nu. Tranzactiile fara internet sunt o poveste, o gluma proasta. Pana la momentul unei confirmari tranzactia nu exista (ca si din mempool poate sa zboare oricand).

There's still long way until all the funds are recovered. Let's not be calling the hacker "nice" too early 



If he wanted to be a white hat he could have asked for a reward for telling the flaw. Now he's more like fighting to not lose his freedom.

I don't know that well all Binance requirements. But since you've already sent all the info to Binance, maybe you could ask guidance on what they didn't like/what you can send different. (This way you may also get to discuss with a different support operative since the first one was not helpful).

Again, it's just an idea. I'm really sorry that you got caught in this crazy situation.
Clearly the SEPA part will get fixed at some point and then the communication channel with the bank should get back to normal; but I don't know who can give a proper time estimation for that...

I've read the initial story and this new part too and more and more I think that there may be a deadlock situation.

Something like Binance received the money, but cannot fund the account because now OP needs to be KYC for that.
.. and also cannot send the money back because of the recent SEPA issues.


Maybe I'm wrong, but there may all may be fuzzy:
* Binance support is too scared to be bit more malleable with the rules
* The bank just give back to Binance generic "wait more x days answers" because they wouldn't care less to save Binance's image
* For some reason the full KYC was rejected too and OP is too angry (I clearly understand that!) to try more on that path


Unless one of the 3 parts becomes more malleable, I think that it's a deadlock situation.
I'm not affiliated with neither of the parts and I can't say for sure that I'm right with my assumptions, however, this is my tiny attempt to help.

Michael Saylor has also tweeted about this.


It was a crazy year, but the roller coaster just goes on. They were one of the more vocal institutional investors and Michael Saylor was one of those who tried (and still trying) to open the eyes of the other possible institutional investors go on this path. Although not too many said it publicly that they went on this path, I'd still say that he's a trend setter.

You are exaggerating and yet again I will be questioning the motifs why's that.
China problems did not shut "over half of the entire network", not even half of the hash rate, if that's what you wanted to mean. (Although hash rate and network are... different concepts.)
Then "US and UK also starting to turn their back to crypto" is plain FUD and complete misinterpretation of reality. The fact they tax crypto businesses sound as acceptance to me. Yes, the tax law is not properly written and average Joe may get in trouble (financially) and that could affect decentralization on some degree, but not as big as you (or your sources) inflate it.

I wish I'd be you! I just can't confuse a working day with week-end... 

Seeing the time of this post I tend to believe that wherever (whenever?) you've been wandering it was not Wednesday there 
Beware with so many hops, you may break something!

This is the actual point.
People write on FB, Twitter, Youtube (i.e add text/media onto their servers) and then they are surprised that those companies do whatever they want with that data.
Same with phones/tablets. I don't think that the data stored by Apple (or Google or whatever) was ever that much private. The fact that some new rules were made by politicians and the companies are eager to comply (to avoid later fines for this or other things) is just a detail.

One discussion could be about the (fake!) illusion of privacy they give for the personal data. But whether their intentions are good and bugs or evil employees ruin than, whether their intentions are bad and hide when caught behind bugs... the result is pretty much the same: there's no real privacy when data is on others' servers.


There may be one exception: the zero knowledge cloud providers. But it's their infrastructure, their software, their.. everything, and even that should be taken with a grain of salt because bugs or intended loopholes may exist.


So for privacy, your own stuff, maybe even buried in the backyard... meaning 100% old school... that's the way.
As we know: "if you want something done, do it yourself!"

We all know that whatever Elon tells has to be taken with quite a pinch of salt...



OMG LOL! You are quite an optimist, aren't you?
I really liked your view on this. Good luck! (for real)

Gold is better than the stable coins you've mentioned. Imho gold can be considered more stable than fiat and the stable coins, since fiat and the fiat-pegged stable coins are hit by inflation. So it's usually not the gold rising, it's the fiat falling, but the chart is no different.

I wouldn't be surprised if some money is basically stolen by being moved here and there and free services are marked as paid with large sums.
Since Ghana is testing out D+G proprietary CBDC solution it could be fair to be.. paid for that.
So the politicians will move around some money, of which a big part will go to their pockets. Typical poor/corrupted country "job".

However, ... is internet so widely developed in Ghana? Or will they pilot it, then decide it's not possible to do it on full country scale?



They may indeed save the cost of printing, but still CBDC has to operate alongside with fiat, especially on country side.
On the other hand, for CBDC you need some infrastructure that also costs money...

Gold is not more profitable, but, at least in theory, it's safer since the daily price fluctuation is rather small.

Also, while we are now in the middle of bull run, clearly gold cannot match investments in bitcoin.. but the history tells that bitcoin bull run doesn't last forever. When the fiesta ends (temporarily) and price will go down, then gold can become a good place for storing wealth until a new bull run will start.