The answer to your question is pretty simple, and it comes down to the following - if I can scam someone in a simple way, why would I use some complicated methods? Simple methods are sometimes very effective, and you yourself have noticed that it is true.

On the other hand, it is no lie that cryptocurrencies have allowed rather stupid people to place various simple traps by using social networks like Twitter or Telegram, literally without knowing any hacking methods or having advanced computer skills. If we turn the whole problem into just one sentence, I would say it this way - Stupid people cheat even stupider than themselves.

What kind of reputation are you talking about? Take a look at his posts from 2017/2018 and everything will be clear to you, he has lost his reputation a long time ago. Here are just some of the gems worth highlighting :

If you meant to be sarcastic then you should have used some kind of smiley to show that you are not serious - otherwise you confuse all those who read, especially beginners who are looking for a source of information here. If the topic is somewhat low quality and makes no sense to you, it may be better to report it rather than encourage pointless discussion.

Fake Musks have been using his name for years, it's nothing new - maybe just the amount is something that goes beyond the usual. People who can't tell the real from a fake profile are really easy targets, especially if they believe that someone is sharing free money by first asking for x, to get us back xx - this can only happen to people with very low IQs. According to research, in the first three months of this year, about $18 million was stolen in this way - what else to say but that scammers have a real little paradise in the crypto world.

---

He knows now is not the time for good news, it's time to accumulate as many coins as possible - and does anyone doubt that he won't try to pump the price again? The saying goes that everything is allowed in love and in war, and to that we can add business and profit.

Probably because PayPal news has already been sold to such an extent that it is no longer interesting to the mainstream media. Also, the possibility that the purchased BTC can be withdrawn to your own crypto wallet does not mean much to most of those who buy crypto in this way - and for most it may be better not to do so, if we take into account all the risks that await them if they decide to be their own bank.

For the average user who doesn’t know the difference between a public address and a private key and the dangers lurking from a fake crypto wallets, custodial solutions are sometimes a safer option.

According to the Coinbase site, this problem should not be related to the fact that the funds are on hold - because if I understood correctly, in that case the funds should be shown exclusively in fiat value. What is shown in the OP clearly shows that the account has more than 0.09 BTC, and at the same time Coinbase claims that there is no BTC to send, really strange, although there is probably some explanation.



If this is possible, then there is some kind of bug in the Coinbase site that prevents some users from disposing of their funds without any valid reason - it's not about "pending funds - or KYC".

How is it possible to ensure that each visitor will do exactly what you state? This implies that it is a kind of traffic that is predefined with the geolocation and duration of the visit, something similar that can be found completely free of charge at various autosurf services. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see that something is not bot/autosurf traffic if you can guarantee results like this ...

If people followed the idea of Bitcoin instead of such spoiled rich people, then his tweets would mean nothing. But as things stand, his flock on Twitter is only increasing (currently 56.1 million sheep) which is 2 million more than a few weeks ago - which tells us that he has not lost the support of all those who supported him before manipulative tweets.

It is my opinion that such a tweet would certainly have a positive effect on the price - people really don't care about anything other than to profit, and after a few days of cheap prices a mini bull run would certainly come in handy.

I think we are at a stage where people are waiting for something to happen and probably many think "EM screwed us up, it would be okay to correct it - please EM tell us you love BTC again"

Fortunately, some things change, although it took a long time for people to realize that long-term holding is definitely worth it. When we look at the fact that none of all the big investors have sold their coins, while on the other hand they are spreading stories about how Bitcoin is bad for the environment, it should be clear to everyone what this is about. I know there are those who constantly hope that the price will be below $10 000 again, but that is the same as hoping that time will go back to 2015 and that 1 BTC will be worth a few hundred $.

Some things are simply a thing of the past, there is no point in crying over spilled milk - but it makes no sense not to repeat the same mistakes again.

I don’t mind the idea of Bitcoin spreading around the world and more and more people being involved in that story in some way, but we’re still a long way from some global adaptation that some are dreaming about. I would also point out that many perceive Bitcoin only as something that will allow them to get rich quick or as some kind of magical internet money - which is the source of many problems that are especially manifested through financial losses which are again due to a large increase in crypto scams.

I wouldn't say that "Bitcoin is taking over", rather it is more accurate that Bitcoin is trying to fit into existing systems that are largely fighting it by looking at it as a competition.

---

Rruchi man, it would be nice to use a more appropriate size image, some members will surely appreciate it. Just insert the link in the next code and choose a size, say something like this :

I'm honestly really sick when I hear anything in the context of China & Bitcoin, because I have a feeling that this link is like a massive weight that is constantly pulling Bitcoin down - and China FUD usually always appears when it comes to destabilizing the crypto market. In my opinion, it is completely wrong that China has ever been so involved in the world of cryptocurrencies and has become such an important factor, given that Bitcoin represents decentralization, and China on the other hand represents just the opposite, centralization and communism.

The best thing that could happen is to China completely ban mining and set some reasonable deadline within which such activities must cease. All those involved in such operations would have enough time to relocate, and everything would happen gradually so there would be no drastic impacts on the network.

Unfortunately, this ban only applies to one region - which means that in the future we can expect China to play a major role in the crypto world.

If you get your information through such social networks, rest assured that 99% will be complete untruths or better to call them by their real name, fabrications and nonsense. Do you think someone who valued their privacy above all else (Satoshi Nakamoto) would let some kid living in the world of conspiracy theories expose him?

Spend your time in a better way, the advice is free - but it can be worth a lot if you listen to it.

---

What proof do you have for that? As far as I know, that agency does some other business and has nothing to do with Bitcoin - like probably any US agency that they are trying to put in that context. Read what Snowden discovered about Bitcoin, maybe then some things will become clearer to you.

Koliko je meni poznato Skrill ima mogucnost direktnoga povlacenja crypto (BTC&ETH) jos od kraja 2 mjeseca ove godine. U clanku koji sam pronasao navodi se da je usluga dostupna u European Economic Area sto znaci sve EU clanice + jos nekoliko zemalja.

This now turns out that banks are doing something good for society by preventing people from investing in risky investments - and everyone's right should be to be able to dispose of their money at any time, however they wish. Maybe it's some banks that have a high moral standard, instead of just trying to make as much profit as possible - but I still think that those banks are just trying to keep as much money in their accounts as possible instead of pouring that money into crypto.

Of course, banks will say they are being forced to do so by the authorities, but they are working with the same goal - to discourage and make it harder for people to trade cryptocurrencies - because if we get banks out of the crypto equation, very few people would find alternative methods to convert fiat to crypto.

If with this we found that you consider Bitcoin bad in every way, how about you finally move to Altcoins boards and continue your education there - altcoins, stablecoins and even gold do not fall under the Bitcoin discussion.


If you are already going for gold, it might be a good idea to change your name to goldboss or altcoinboss - it would suit you better since you complain all the time that Bitcoin is not good. After so much time and open threads you seem to have wasted your time and the time of others.

There may be 100 million millionaires at the moment or in the future, but that doesn't mean they will all want to own Bitcoin - because if only 10% of today's millionaires bought 1 BTC it would look like this:

- 5 000 000 x $40 000 = $200.000.000.000 = 5 million BTC removed from market = insane!

Even more absurd is the fact that 8 billion people should one day own a BTC, and 45% of them don't even have internet access at the moment. We can throw in as many numbers as we want, but for most Bitcoin is still atomic physics and if you stop 100 people on the street and ask them to explain what Bitcoin is and how it works, I don't think 95% will have an answer - while others will know at least something, but it all comes down to 1-2% of those who use it in some way today.

When you say “in the next years” you should actually say in the next few decades when it comes to mass adaptation.

This is far from any news that could affect the market, especially when we take into account that the SEC considers each application within the maximum allowed period of 240 days, which will probably be the case now. The SEC has already extended that period for a VanEck ETF that has met the condition (filled 19b-4) while some others mentioned in the linked article have not yet met that condition.

In other words, if the SEC continues to operate according to its usual practice, in the event of a positive decision, nothing should be expected before the end of the year when the VanEck ETF deadline expires.

For more information -> https://www.etftrends.com/crypto-channel/the-race-to-the-first-bitcoin-etf/

I once helped a friend with a crypto investment, so he asked me what the safest option was for keeping them - I recommended a hardware wallet and sent him links to an e-mail, to which he replied that he already had it at home. Of course, he only had a USB stick which I have to admit was quite similar to the Nano S.

I wonder how many people actually use such USB sticks for their crypto wallets (backups) and live in the belief that they have a hardware wallet?

If it's just a watch-only wallet I don't see why an outdated version would be less secure than the latest, if we know that such crypto wallet does not contain private keys? Is there anything that could affect broadcasting transactions from a cold wallet in terms of security?

Every post and title can be edited, so it would be good to edit the title - for the truth, but also for those who do not read anything but the OP and the title.

---

As for all these things that have been going on for the last week, I think we’re giving them too much attention and just adding fuel to the fire completely unnecessarily. Musk is one man, China is one country, and Iran doesn’t play a big role anyway given that it has been under sanctions for many years.

After all, all of this together has only slowed Bitcoin down a bit - and I think the price is quite realistic for those who understand the market - for those impatient who just want to profit quickly things of course look tragic.