I agree about the generation of keys, it does make it sound suspicious. Even if the company's CEO is not trying to scam people, it could lead to a potential security breach, I guess. And how is this wallet unique, why is it the first multi-currency wallet? Nano Ledger supports 25 cryptocurrencies, and it's also offline. Plus, it already has a good reputation, it's very famous and considered one of the best wallets out there. And there are Crypto debit cards (though not issued by Ledger). Why is this weird form of the wallet being a card good? It makes it very visible that it's a Bitcoin wallet (on the photo, at least) which may attract the thieves, for instance.

I don't think this is true. Surely, some of the earliest members left the forum, and I guess the majority of people active on the forum are earning money from signature campaigns/bounties or planning to do so. Still, though, even those who are somewhat working here can also be interested in discussing the topics. I, for one, like this forum, because if there's important news, someone will write about it here and offer to discuss. It's interesting to see what people think, what they believe and what they worry about. So in a sense, Bitcointalk has a strong and motivated community.

I don't know, it does not seem true to me. Critical bugs can be a problem, especially with such projects that are not on top (obviously, there's way more budget to develop Chrome than Tor, so the latter is potentially more vulnerable because of being underfinanced. However, I don't think this was the point in this message. I think it's more about Tor being associated with illegal activities or something, and the problems of downloading files while using Tor and becoming exposed because of that. Plus, there might be some hackers looking specifically for Tor browser users, because they are way more likely to have some Bitcoins than people who use Chrome. But overall, I think the issue is overstated and Tor does not really increase the risks of having the funds stolen...

Welcome! I actually believe I came across your website multiple times when I was trying to find information about the reputation of certain casinos. Right now your website seems offline, though. At least, it's not loading on my PC even though everything else is. I also wanted to ask you what kind of factors you evaluate when making the rates of casinos. I can see on a Google preview, for instance, that Bitstarz has 9.3/10 on your website, even though just today I came across a scam accusation, there've been multiple accusations over the years and their official account has red trust on this forum. It's not good when the information gets people confused. I am just curious how that kind of stuff happens.

Bitstarz is not among the well-known casinos. It's also not the one with the best reputation. If you just google "Bitstarz reputation", you'll come by two scam accusations on this very website: this one and this one. Moreover, you can see that the member on this forum that is affiliated with the casino has negative trust (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=307265) specifically because of the scam accusations. Taking that into account, I wouldn't hope to get the money back, but making another scam accusation on this forum here would not hurt. Next time, you should really at least make a quick google search before depositing money. You can also use this table with trust and its absence of casino owners (well, accounts that work with the casinos/affiliated with them), this might help to minimize the risks of being scammed.

Welcome to the community! Your website seems fine but not organized logically. First of all, why does the navigation in the header simply mentions the casinos in specific countries? There are lots of websites for online gambling that offer their services to various countries. Moreover, in the navigation, sometimes it says "casino" next to the country, and sometimes "casinos". I think this system needs improvements. Secondly, here's a link I think you may find useful, it contains the list of casinos and the trust of Bitcointalk community towards them: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5154971.0.

A weird question from the op indeed. Of course, there's no regulatory body controlling the price dynamics. There are, though, other things, somewhat related to it. Firstly, there are regulatory bodies assigned by certain governments that are controlling cryptocurrency projects operating on their territories, require identification of crypto users from this country, etc. And there are also things that can affect the price. I think that the biggest impact comes from the news releases (both good and bad), then there are whales which might make a difference form time to me. But it's largely just us, the Bitcoin community, that set the price by trading.

The scrambled private key is in the description of the video:
This is exciting. It's a nice way to get people attracted to the topic and the channel by giving them puzzles. Since we know it's not a scam, it's a good game to play. I, however, am not very strong with puzzles, unfortunately. I am pretty sure I cannot solve this one, but I'll just leave everything that seemed potentially important here. Maybe it can help others

• Cherry
• Green herbs (corn?)
• Something is reflected in the glasses in the green light
• Bitcoin.org
• Some white dot/a fly near the end of the video.
• And we know that not all of the characters are scrambled (from the comments under the video).

Good luck!

Wow, this is an interesting story. I  didn't know about such a way of scamming people (writing a thousand times smaller amount of coins which is truly easy to confuse). I probably would fall for the trick, because in my country we don't have this distinction of dots and commas, so it would be especially confusing to me. But a very nice rate (too good to be true) and a rushing person are good signs of something being wrong in the whole situation. So I am very glad you did not lose your money and also warned the community about the scammer. I hope DT2 members will put a red flag on the account as well, although the person is not likely to use it again anyway after this failure.

If we are talking only about Bitcoin and if Segwit is not a must for you, I'll can you about the wallet I use. I enjoy my Blockchain.com wallet. It's online, easy to use, has a high reputation, rather safe. And I've never been asked about my funds there (neither was my friend who had 1 Bitcoin there for a while). You can check their policies to make sure you won't be disturbed, but I guess Blockchain.com does not do that kind of stuff. Moreover, they cannot do anything with your money, which is good. But the big downsides of this wallet are a very limited number of cryptos they accept and the lack of Segwit.

It's okay. It is not hard to guess why banks would not want to cooperate with crypto exchanges. For one, cryptos are banks' serious rivals, because with cryptos it's possible to own money and perform transactions online without the banks being involved and under control. Moreover, the money itself does not depends on the banks if the money is crypto money. Another reason might be the one related to risk assessment. Perhaps, the dangers of being sued because of cooperating with crypto exchanges outweigh the potential benefits of such cooperations for banks.
Oh, and if you (op) represent a crypto-insurance company, I think it's pretty cool, I really think it's a mainly an unexplored area that can get huge in the future.

That's a nice thought experiment. Let's start with the powers of the US President, though. I realize that Wikipedia is not among the most reliable sources, but I find it fairly accurate is such formal matters.
Just as I suspected (because it's similar in my country), the President cannot intervene in economical matters. It seems that executive orders should be dedicated to important governmental priorities, so I am not sure that pulling this stuff with cryptos off is even possible. However, since thought experiments usually require us to accept the initial conditions, let's assume it's possible, and Trump does that. It's known that there are quite a lot of Bitcoin users that come from the US, but it's hard to determine how many. I think it would affect the price in a negative way, leading to a 20% drop or so, but eventually, Bitcoin would recover.

Crypto gambling websites definitely impact cryptocurrencies, I think. There are different aspects of it, some of which can be better and some can be worse, but I'd like to mention the two that seem most relevant to me. The first one is that gambling websites basically offer use cases for cryptocurrencies. That is, people can see how cryptos can actually be used, and not only as money but also for other blockchain-specific things like provably fair gambling, decentralized apps, betting based on smart contracts, etc. This is a very positive aspect, and online gambling is a great example of an area of implementation of cryptocurrencies. On a less positive note, quite some people are strictly against gambling because of the problems it can cause (gambling addiction), so if cryptos are mainly associated with casinos, it can significantly limit the number of potential users of cryptocurrencies.

No system is perfect. Unlike martingale, this one does not make big steps forward, so one does not lose everything so fast. But all these strategies are dangerous when people truly expect them to work and keep losing more and more money without really noticing (because of being focused on the future win which may not actually come in time). This strategy seems to make the process stretched in time, but I agree with xSkylarx that eventually it will stop working, just like everything else, because it's in principle impossible to maintain regular winnings in a game that is not based on skills.

I guess it depends on what's meant by the recession, because it can refer to various kinds of things that are decreasing in price. So if it's the Bitcoin's recession, then Bitcoin is definitely not the best investment. However, if we are talking about the global economic recession, I'd say there's a serious threat of fiat crushing, so Bitcoin would probably be my choice. Surely, Bitcoin can drop as well during this time, but it has the habit of recovering eventually, which is not really a treat of the fiat. And if we're talking about something like the World atomic war, then no money can save us, I'd buy some non-spoiling food, weapons, warm clothing, and cures.
So the answer is that it depends on the specific situation.

I access the wallet I use from the link on my email to make sure I don't accidentally end up on the phishing website. I also use a multi-factor authentification system, and I feel fairly safe with it. I know some people prefer paper wallets or at least offline wallets, but I truly believe that the chance of my 2FA (actually, not just the 2FA) being somehow hacked is lower than the chance of me losing the papers with essential information or the drive where the wallet is. And besides, I use it on a regular basis, so it would not be convenient for me to access it otherwise. I lost my money once, but it was my mistake to use an Ethereum wallet that was considered pretty good back then but was not the most popular wallet (the owners decided to scam everyone at some point).

I don't understand how Bitcoin outperforms PayPal, honestly. PayPal is obviously way more commonly used than Bitcoin. In fact, I remember a comparison of Bitcoin, Paypal, Apple Pay and We Chat by the number of users, and Bitcoin was way behind even the closest competitor (Apple Pay, I believe). And this is, unfortunately, the objective thing that truly reflects the adoption. Not to mention that Bitcoin can probably handle way fewer transactions than these services. So I agree with the article that there's a lot of speculation, but way less of the actual usage.

It's nice that this artist accepts Bitcoin as payment, of course. It can boost awareness and adoption is certain circles. But at the same time when I was hoping for something bigger under such a name of the thread. Like a contemporary artist making a painting, devoted to cryptocurrencies or something like that. That would indeed be promotion via art, and what's really the case is not as big of an event. Oh, and by the way, it seems that Bitcoin art exists as well, it's just not nearly as popular as this Lincoln guy:  https://www.artforcrypto.com/.
That's more like it! This is the real promotion and a very sophisticated one. I like it!

They cannot control it like the USD, because the latter was their creation and is fiat (meant to be controlled by the government/central bank), whereas the former is a new independent form of money. The article is about a stronger KYC procedure. So the US government wants to know who uses Bitcoin in their country and thus be able to track the transaction, partially knowing the real people behind them. But it's more about Bitcoin used by the US citizens, they probably don't care about anything that does not concern their country.

I don't understand why you're saying that Bitcoin is low. It's bravely holding its $10k barrier, which is amazing after more than a year around $6k and below. Bitcoin's price almost tripled over the last half a year, and I think it's an amazing success. When it surpassed the $6k-$7k barrier so fast, it was very impressive. And even though some people panic from time to time when the price starts going down, it actually does not go down significantly. I prefer Bitcoin being stable around $10k than around $6k or rising to $20k and then rapidly dropping to $6k once again.