<...>
I’ve added three new columns to the Google Sheet, to the right hand side of the Trust field, containing the values for the stripped Positive, Neutral and Negative trust (all resulting values are non-negative values mind you –> the negative column values should be interpreted according to the implicit field name semantics, which is negative). I figure you only ned it on the above sheet, and not on the actual data columns within this thread. |
|
|
|
This is a thread that summarizes the hacks on Exchanges since 2011: Hacked Exchanges since 2011. Cases from 2021 are not yet on the list (the OP has barely been able to be active lately), but if someone adds 2011 cases to the thread, I’m sure they’ll be included in the lists eventually. Besides hacks, Exchanges are subject to the possibility of accounts been frozen, regulation changes, exits scams, and so forth. Obviously, it’s not the everyday norm, but something to consider. On the other hand, not everyone is ready to be their own bank, and unfortunately, many people lose their bitcoins because of this (lost keys, malware, phishing, etc.). It’s not all black and white. |
|
|
|
<…>
There’s nothing really to compare (they’re not even on the same scale, as the comparison is 1:n), so just by placing the two together brings light on an association made by some, and refuted by many. That does not mean that early investors or miners don’t have a cutting edge advantage in terms of accumulated volume, and thus, in results (if they played their cards right). Bitcoin has to be read with the lower cap "b" (currency) and the upper cap "B" (protocol), and the legacy alone to a new breed of currency and technology should wither away those associations. |
|
|
|
Theoretically, if Vod didn't return then it would likely be that he would drop off DefaultTrust. <...>
He’s currently on DT2 ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5139250.msg56701585#msg56701585) due to being inactive (not posted) for at least 30 days, but he’ll remain on DT2 as long as DT1 have him on their Trust list, and there are many inclusions (see https://loyce.club/trust/2021-04-24_Sat_06.06h/30747.html) that trust his judgement. The 30 day restriction, I believe, applies to DT1 candidates, but not DT2 inclusions (which is the default level people will be viewing in general). Regardless, people should make their judgment not solely based on the trust scores (which is a first level indicator), but on the underlying feedback itself (+ credibility of the people who provide it). |
|
|
|
<…>
Ok, gracias por el feedback. Ahora es cuestión de ver si quiero coger el toro por los cuernos y meterme a probarlo, aunque estoy en medios de algunos cambios que ahora mismo no me dejan demasiado tiempo para ello (veremos). En todo caso, el objetivo de este hilo era dejar pinceladas trazadas de elementos a ponderar al utilizar Ledger, y este tema apunta a interesante de ver. |
|
|
|
Otro factor más de hibridación de las criptomonedas … La aprobación de la nueva ley que permite a los Spezialfonds tener hasta 20% de su portafolio invertido en criptomonedas a partir del 01/07/2021. Esto significa que, potencialmente, hasta 4.000 fondos de este tipo, orientados a instituciones según entiendo, tendrán la posibilidad de tener inversiones en bitcoin con una cartera mixta. Según cita el artículo, también abarca a los fondos de pensiones, además de aseguradoras e instituciones financieras. Actualmente, los Spezialfonds gestionan $1.8 billones, así que hay potencial (al 20%) … ver: https://www.criptonoticias.com/comunidad/adopcion/mas-4000-fondos-inversion-alemania-podran-invertir-bitcoin-criptomonedas/ |
|
|
|
<…>
Cierto. ¿Qué te tarda a ti con tu topología actual en sincronizarse tras, pongamos, una semana sin estar en uso? Sé que la respuesta va a variar en función de muchos parámetros, pero es sólo por tener una orden de magnitud de alguien que lo utiliza. Por otro lado, había leído, no hace demasiado, la relación de bugs y limitaciones (ver https://support.ledger.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017551659-Setting-up-your-Bitcoin-full-node). ¿Has tenido problemas con algún aspecto en concreto de los mencionados? ¿y el estimador de fees (que dicen ellos mismos que debe ser mejorado)? |
|
|
|
<…>
Rather than humble, a better-suited concept would be private, which is something that people are not normally concerned from the get-go, but instead, often they develop a sense of privacy awareness as times goes by. Of course the amounts of crypto you have may play a role, but to a thug that may be after it, it may boil down to being sufficient knowing it on Boolean terms (whether you have or don’t have crypto). In terms of risk, it’s a bit similar to fiat stashed at home and blabbing about it, with a couple of variants: - fiat at home is easier to do away with, leaves no trace, and requires no skills to master (for the thug). - Crypto on the other hand inverts the above qualifiers. Regardless, the two potential bad case scenarios are being robbed whilst at home, or being robbed whilst away from home. The former reduces the difference in the above two cases, since one can be cohered to collaborate. All in all, the more private, likely the better, just to be on the safe side. |
|
|
|
<…>
Depende de lo que queramos decir por contraseña, que parece obvio, pero no lo es tanto: Cuando creas la cartera en Coinomi (*), te dará el mnemónico de 18 o 24 palabras (conocía 12/24 como habituales en otras carteras, pero no 18 -> yo usaría la opción 24 para facilitar la compatibilidad), y luego te pide la contraseña. Esta contraseña es para la cartera sobre tu dispositivo, y sirve para validar el acceso y, probablemente, encriptar la información. Esta contraseña es sólo para la cartera en tu dispositivo. Cuando crear una cartera nueva, y le dices que partes de tu mnemónico, la contraseña anterior no entra en juego, dado que es sólo para proteger la otra cartera física creada, pero no está vinculado al mnemónico. … salvo que hayas intentado realizar algo más complejo, que es añadir una passphrase, que si es necesaria para restablecer el mnemónico en otra wallet, otorga mayor seguridad, pero también complejidad.No todas las wallets lo saben manejar. Ver: https://coinomi.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/29000009680-how-to-add-a-bip39-passphrase-to-my-existing-recovery-phrase-(*) Según he visto, no soy usuario de esta cartera.¿Qué has añadido: contraseña de wallet o passphrase? Al crear la segunda wallet a partir del mnemónico, ¿ves el contenido de tus direcciones y saldo? (si es así, habrás usado una contraseña en la primera wallet, no una passphrase). |
|
|
|
<…>
Lo tenía presente como una opción a probar, pero como mi full node lo pongo en marcha de uvas a peras, al estar sobre mi portátil, lo dejo para más adelante, si en algún momento tengo tiempo y lo monto sobre otra infraestructura tipo Raspberry Pi (de ahí que indagase al respecto un tanto el otro día). Es abrir un puntal más de inversión de tiempo, aunque no parece complicado (salvo por el hecho de que tengo Unix/Linux ultraoxidado). Me apunto lo que indicas en el otro hilo al respecto. Ya veo... ya contarás la experiencia. |
|
|
|
Data as of 30/04/2021Updated the lists in the OP (and subsequent post) to reflect the forum members that still qualify in each of those lists. Currently, on those lists there are, lacking <= 20% merits to rank-up (activity may not be met though): - 44 Heroes (on their way to Legendries) - 72 Sr. Members (on their way to Heroes) - 52 Full Members (on their way to Sr. Members) - 44 Members (on their way to Full Members) - 207 Jr. Members (on their way to Members) Added this week (12): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
1166480 Julien_Olynpic Active 5179 1330 Y* 811 Hero Member Full Member =+1 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1166480
2789889 cryptomaniac_xxx Active 1218 392 N 410 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2789889
1280964 MinoRaiola Active 1180 1008 Y 400 Sr. Member Member =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1280964
2862749 Zilon Active 250 168 Y 80 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2862749
2853789 TheBitcoinWardrobe Active 31 31 N 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2853789
2868443 BevNation Active 65 65 Y 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2868443
2759121 btb88.com Active 232 232 Y 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2759121
1978664 tread93 Active 61 61 Y 9 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+1 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1978664
3271296 gms_btc Active 49 42 N 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3271296
2842708 Badmanthought Active 117 117 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2842708
2856367 ser_trader Active 501 210 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2856367
2752168 villain_Mr.Burns Active 86 84 Y 8 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =1 / -2 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2752168
(*) this week (5): user_id name Status posts activity activity_Met merit rank ProbableInitialRank trust url
2771581 Yogee Active 1255 434 N 253 Sr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2771581
1414395 lupandina Active 92 92 N 10 Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1414395
1186951 jinxing Active 214 210 Y 10 Member Old Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1186951
2891853 LogLux Active 30 30 N 10 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2891853
2667345 Slon55koz Active 41 41 N 10 Jr. Member New Era Newbie =+0 / =0 / -0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2667345
(*) Due to enough merits for the next rank, or being banned.
|
|
|
|
Update 30/04/2021:The dashboard gives you access to anyone’s complete merit history in the TX tab, surpassing the 120 day limit. Link: BitcoinTalk Merit Dashboard. Updated the Merit Dashboard to reflect the most recent sMerit available data: Total sMerit: 888.324 Total TXs: 481.162 From Users: 23.385 To Users: 38.725 minDate: 2018-01-24 22:12:21 maxDate: 2021-04-30 02:07:15 Aggregate awarded sMerit for the last complete week (19/04/2021 .. 25/04/2021) is 3.400, which is down 8,18% from the previous week. There are no new Legendary nor Hero Members this week. Note:
-Copper Members and non-native ranks (staff, etc) are displayed as real (regular) ranks.
|
|
|
|
<…>
It may be better not to rush things, and take a wee amount of time to try to learn these things on your own first, or asking whatever you need to know here, on Bitcointalk. What you must be wary of though is clearly stating that you are willing to pay for the said tasks, and undertaking it on a one-on-one private basis. The warning is that, unfortunately, there are scammers around who would thrive at the opportunity to take a Newbie on a road trip through some virtual back roads, and rip them off. Rule number one: faceless is shameless, and you need to be alert at all times, especially if you don’t know much on the matter, and are willing to let someone guide you privately. If you keep things open on the forum, other will chip-in, reducing the chances of being scammed in private. It’s unfortunate, but you need to be on alert. |
|
|
|
<…>
Banks can freeze your account if is flagged for suspicious activity, and you won’t be able to withdraw in some cases until the situation is clarified. The flagging is normally not going to be manual, but likely Machine Learning based nowadays, and will take into account multiple aspects from the data it has on you, and other people from the entity. That means that one person may get flagged, but not another using the same bank, despite both having made TXs to/from Exchanges. On top of that, there’s the general bank policy and procedures, the country’s Central Bank directives, the country’s stand, the global or local regulations, and so on. Overall, the experience from country to country is likely rather different, with some countries being more laxed than others. Unfortunately, from a user’s perspective, it is seemingly random on the surface, although the above are likely under the hood. We tried to list pairs of <Bank, Exchange> results on my local board (Spanish), but we don’t really have enough volume, and the cases seemed to vary from one experience to another, even using the same pair <Bank, Exchange>. Many seem to resort to proactively talking to their bank, in order to try to ensure that the TXs will go through without any hassle, which has its pros and cons, and is not going to achieve absolute certainty for all operations there on. Others wait for the problem to arise, if at all, and talk to their bank reactively, generally clearing the air after some stressful sessions. |
|
|
|
|
All three alleged offices seem to be located at rental office spaces, which doesn’t say much, except for the fact that you can try to contact the directory service of the building of any of the addresses where the offices are allegedly hosting the company.
I’ve done this in the past, and uncovered a case where the company allegedly has an office, but the reception directory service informed me that no such corporation existed at the given address, and that, furthermore, there was a long standing corporation headquartered there for some time.
Anyhow, since there is barely any information (I’ve come across some site linking it to a scam, but the site itself seems to be bot content created), it wouldn’t be a place I’d even venture to consider in the first place.
Note: Normally, you find similar sites (normally scams) by searching strings that appear on the site or TOS of the site you are scrutinizing, but I didn’t find anything meaningful.
|
|
|
|
El detalle del informe parece ser éste: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/Eurosystem_report_on_the_public_consultation_on_a_digital_euro~539fa8cd8d.en.pdfRespondieron 8,221 partícipes, que no está mal para sacar insights globales a nivel europeo hasta cierto punto (Alemania está sobrerepresentada), que no por país, tal y como indican en su informe, donde por ejemplo España tiene menos de una décima parte de partícipes que Alemania por cada 100.000 habitantes (ver páginas 2, 8 y 32 del informe). De hecho, en el resumen ejecutivo reconoce el sesgo que se produce en términos de representatividad de género, industria y país de residencia. A éstos, añadiría el relativo al perfil de partida, dado que no es lo mismo colgar la encuesta en una web relativa al tema, que ir al mercado del pueblo. En todo caso, si da un contexto respecto de los interesados en el tema, y de eso se trata mayoritariamente. En la pregunta clave que da pie al insight acerca de la privacidad, ésta está muy por encima de otras características que se preguntaban a la vez (se pedía priorizar la lista siguiente): How would you rank, in order of importance, the features that a digital euro should offer?
1. I want to be able to use it throughout the euro area.
2. I want my payments to remain a private matter.
3. I want to be able to use it with my smartphone and at payment terminals.
4. I want to be able to pay even when there is no internet or power connection.
5. I want it to be easy to use.
6. I want to use a digital euro without having to pay additional costs.
7. I want it to take the form of a dedicated physical device.
8. I want it to be a secure means of payment.
9. I want my transactions to be completed instantaneously
Con el siguiente resultado: Para mí, creo que hay propiedades que se le supone, y están valoradas a medio camino de una commodity (como es la seguridad y los costes), pero la privacidad es algo que no se supone, sino que se ha de intentar pelear por ella. Y si, en mi caso es la opción que marcaría con Rank 1, además de solicitar por la no desaparición del efectivo (que aún hay mucha gente mayor, o que pasa de este tema tecnológico, amén de la privacidad). Ahora, son los bancos los que saben todo, con una visión parcial si usamos varios bancos y algo de efectivo. Con las monedas digitales de los bancos centrales, lo sabrán los entes gubernamentales sin tener que pedir nada a los bancos (quizás no el detalle de lo comprado, pero si lo gastado, dónde y cuándo). Tendremos los algoritmos de machine learning trabajando a tope para responder a preguntas de estas entes, o categorizar a los ciudadanos… |
|
|
|
<…>
That’s how the systems worked before the Merit System was introduced on January 2018; it was solely based on Activity, so that is the time it roughly too to reach Jr. Member back then. The post was modified to include the Merit requirement just above what you read and elsewhere, but the Activity table heading could perhaps do with a "you’ll also need to gain the required Merits to the Rank" caption. Broadly speaking, Merits take longer to reach than Activity, when it comes to meeting the requirements of a given rank. |
|
|
|
En todo esto siempre pienso en la vertiente impositiva que se deriva. Supongo que los compradores y vendedores tendrán presente que cierta información podrá llegar a las entidades gubernamentales, y que, por tanto, su tenencia/uso de criptomonedas para la operación deberá cuadrar con lo que se declare luego al fisco de turno (en función de los parámetros que apliquen en el país). No sé cuanta gente lo tiene todo atado y bien atado por allí, como para poder realizar la compra sin complicaciones derivadas, aunque lo ideal sería, lógicamente, que la mayor parte de la gente poseedora de criptomonedas pudiese realizar la compra sin más. <…>
A veces, en las capturas de pantallas se nos puede colar información que no queremos desvelar. No creo que sea tu caso, pero alguna vez he visto (y avisado) como se podía ver una pestaña con el email de la persona, o algo por el estilo. Lo digo por si acaso. |
|
|
|
<…>
Habiendo software de por medio, desde luego es posible; otra cosa es calibrar cómo de probable es que tenga efecto. El equipo que desarrolla Bitcoin ha tenido que lidiar con vulnerabilidades en el pasado: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposureshttps://bitcoincore.org/en/2018/09/20/notice/Pero siendo software, y estando colgado en internet, por muy archiprobado que esté el software, siempre cabe la posibilidad de que exista algún resquicio explotable, por poco probable que sea. También la red, aunque esté distribuida, podría llegar a ser atacada, e incluso el sistema criptográfico que lo soporta, a futuro, podría verse comprometido. Este último aspecto se ha comentado muchas veces en relación a las posibilidades de que sea franqueado por las máquinas quantum, y aunque no hay evidencias de que llegue a suceder en el corto/medio plazo, sí que se podría migrar a utilizar algoritmos de encriptación anti-quantum (para ello, espero que se esté muy encima de esta posibilidad). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
