Why pay a fee at all if there is a way to send transactions without any fees? There is one coin that used to be quite popular and the distribution was in such a way that it was literally distributed for every solved captcha - then it was called RaiBlocks, today it is Nano

I'm sure that one day Tim Draper will be right, but as things stand so far he has not justified the status of a "prophet", considering that in 2014 he uttered the famous saying "1 BTC will be worth at least $10,000 in the next three years".


https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/tim-draper-predicts-bitcoin-will-soar-250000-four-years

Does that mean you won't be doing "odd jobs" anymore? I know you deal with some other things that do not belong to the domain of "odd jobs", but I wonder how you will gain financial independence in 2 years by offering something like I'll Pray for You ...


I was not driven by the desire to stop working from 9-5, nor the desire to get rich overnight - I was primarily interested in the idea around which Bitcoin was built. Unfortunately, little or almost nothing is left of that idea...

I'm not saying that your method isn't good, but maybe you're paying the fee three times instead of once completely unnecessary. The point is to confirm that the address you copied into the "send to" field is identical to the one you received, i.e. you are viewing it in another window. If there is no change at the time of copying, then you can consider that your system is safe - and you can do the final check in the transaction preview option, regardless of whether it is a desktop wallet or a hardware wallet.

However, since mistakes are costly when it comes to cryptocurrency transactions, any method that adds extra security should not be considered expensive or unnecessary. I've had some very valuable transactions in the past, and I've always checked everything at least five times, no matter how time consuming it was.

I mentioned just one such, and you still claim that such a thing does not exist at all? There is always some kind of solution, the only question is how reliable it is and how much you have to pay for it.

---

Any such service without KYC simply cannot be cheap because anonymity has its price, especially when it comes to paying with "anonymous" cards. Someone on the forum has been selling "anonymous" bank cards for a long time and no one has complained so far - but the question is who can afford to pay around $1000 a year for such a service.

I have not used PP for some time, but verification with documents was not required until a certain limit was reached, and I think it was an amount greater than $2000.

---

Right at the beginning, let me say that I have not personally tried it, but recently I saw this topic in which virtual cards (Visa&Master) are offered without KYC - and according to what is written in the description, they should work with PP and services such as Google Pay and Apple Pay.

No offense to Montenegrins (if there are any on the forum), but in that country, as in most Balkan countries, you can buy not only a judge, but also the entire court. It is not at all clear to me why the whole thing is based on an allegedly fake passport for which he was arrested, when there are far more serious charges worth tens of billions of dollars for which this man is wanted by South Korea and the US?

It can always be something else, because sometimes it's about an OS file being corrupted and that's why the computer is behaving strangely - but at least that's easy to fix if it's a Windows OS. The most important thing is for each user to understand the entry points for each virus/malware, and if we know that, we can protect ourselves from it.

I can say that I have been a computer user for a long time and that in the beginning I had problems with viruses/malware, but that I learned my lesson and left all those things that can lead to computer infections. In short, don't download pirated software (cracks), don't click on suspicious links and use a reliable antivirus + firewall and you won't have to worry about clipboard malware.

Of course, and with all that, always check your coin addresses in detail, especially when dealing with large value transactions.

Some will say that it's never too late to do the right thing, but I'm not one of those people who can be bought with cheap tricks - if you've been consciously working against Bitcoin for years, then regardless of today's moves, you're still a villain. It's been several years since @fillippone opened a topic about that CEX, so even though the reasons were different, we can still agree that Coinbase the most anti-Bitcoin organisation. Make #DeleteCoinbase great again

Why would they brag about something that could jeopardize the investigation, which probably hasn't ended yet? It is obvious that CM did not do what they said they were doing, and for some reason they kept not only the vouchers but also the private keys - and if you ask me how I know this, I already wrote that my funds were swept away from private key which was old more than a year. Therefore, there is no reason not to justifiably suspect that the logs are part of what they got their hands on.

Anyone who considers themselves innocent would try to defend themselves in every way, and ignoring everything presented in this topic only confirms that it is true.


I'm glad that someone still shows the sense to separate the good from the bad, but I'm also disappointed when I see that the majority still tolerates such behavior as if it's something completely normal and not more than obvious abuse of merits.

I'm surprised that you wrote something like this, considering that we established a long time ago that CM kept absolutely everything, from logs to private keys and vouchers, and that everyone who kept their funds on those PKs and vouchers lost their BTC. If my memory serves me well, the official information is that 7 GB of data was seized.

They (Ledger) or perhaps it is better to say lord of the rings Pascal still claim that they are the most secure HW because their Recovery is one big step forward, and they described the hacking of the user data base as some kind of trivial thing that had no effect on user security.


It was a good lesson for all of us not to trust anyone, no matter what the company's name is or what kind of product it has. We should always be on our guard and not advise others about something we may regret one day. The best hardware wallet that exists is the one that we can just make from an old computer or mobile phone.

You are contradicting yourself, because first you present yourself as a person who does not have the technical knowledge to carry out such a project - and then you claim that 5-6 years ago you created even 2 altcoins, which by all accounts were successful in the sense that you managed to collect almost 1000 BTC.


I have no doubt that money can be made, because the world is full of naive people who will buy false promises and completely meaningless cryptocurrencies, hoping that $1 investment will turn into $1000. I would call it a simple deception, and also a violation of the law, considering that the trading and mining of cryptocurrencies is prohibited in China. Not only are you putting yourself in danger, but also all others who would participate in such a project in any way.

Everyone can interpret it in their own way, so even though I agree that the first priority for all of them is profit, all those who listed that coin gave CW Faketoshi direct support. Let's imagine what would happen if none of the top 10 CEX listed that coin?

I remember when @hodlonaut asked for the support of various CEXs in his fight against Faketoshi, but no one cared, except for one CEO who wanted to give him some tokens instead of BTC and thus promote his CEX.

ETFs are something that attracts large investors who want to trade in the simplest possible way, and the big advantage for each such investor is that he does not have to buy and store BTC himself, but the fund does it all for him. Of course, such investors are always at risk of losing their money, considering that others manage their assets, but here we are talking exclusively about trading, none of them care what BTC represents, nor do they want to know about the golden rule "not your keys, not your coins".


I think that investors are always attracted by big names that have credibility and a good reputation, so it seems to me that companies like BlackRock, Fidelity or Grayscale will grab the biggest share of the pie.

It actually makes sense because if you mix BTC, you do it with the assumption that you will get coins that are not related to you, that is, you want to break the link between your main address and the address from which you will make transactions. Maybe people would use privacy coins more if they could get to them more easily, but also if those same coins would be accepted by merchants in the same way as is the case with Bitcoin.

In other words, private coins are something that makes sense in transactions between private individuals, but with them you cannot pay for a hotel, buy a plane ticket, or many other things that you can pay with Bitcoin today.

---

@bitcoin talk, posting multiple posts in a row is against the rules of the forum, and you can reply to multiple users in one post by adding multiple post quotes, just scroll down and select the "Insert Quote" option.

After years of supporting that scammer, do you think we should applaud them for that move? They don't do it for some noble reason, but because obviously no one trades with that shitcoin anymore. All those CEX who listed that fork coin just showed that they are no better than whoever is behind it, and that's the whole truth.

Maybe because he is a pathological liar who is also encouraged by the fact that he has found rich sponsors who generously finance his "endeavors", and they obviously have no idea that he has no chance of proving that he is Satoshi Nakamoto.


Logging into the forum by itself would not prove anything even if Satoshi's account had not been banned for security reasons, and not even signing one of the first addresses used by Satoshi. The thing is that anyone can claim to be someone else if they come into possession of private keys or forum login data.

For me the matter is very clear if we just consider the way Satoshi has communicated on this forum publicly and privately with his associates - compared to how CW Faketoshi communicates and behaves. In any case, they are two different people and I have no doubts about that.

I'm supposed to do a report every time I get paid - which means every week, which is completely insane. Therefore, if someone makes such an insane request, I think we can agree that paying taxes on the earnings from signature campaigns is by no means an option for people in my situation.

Given that I live in an extremely corrupt country where in the last 8 years about 30 ministers have been fired or resigned due to corrupt actions, believe me I sleep peacefully when I know that my money did not go into their pockets.