From this response, it's clear that you are not prepared to help out a beginner. Your comment has really put me off this topic completely. I feel like I've been talking to this guy this whole conversation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-zIbVEjVpQ

To other members: there are other newbies out there looking for help, advice, or guidance without wanting to be told that they're stupid, if you know what I mean.

How is it not relevant to the topic in question? I am not saying that one is more prone to be scammed by buying one of these. What I'm saying is that the hardwallet is like a giftcard that has been loaded with 'money' already and someone can decide that they don't want to use it anymore, and therefor sell it.


The online wallets that are used in Crypotcurrency are secure only because it is keyed to you and only you. No-one else can access it without your private key. Also, with cold wallets, like the Ledger Nano for example, there are various conditions that one has to meet before accessing anything on the wallet. That being said, if one decided to sell their Ledger Nano as second hand, my previous argument would then come into effect. What would stop the  person selling the Ledger Nano from accessing the wallet after selling it to you, as the private key on that cannot be changed after initiation? This would further emphasize my point of a lack of education, as anyone who is sufficiently educated in using hardwallets, would never buy a second-hand wallet anyway.

There are various website to facilitate the buying and selling of unwanted gift cards already, so what's stopping those websites from adding these "hardwallets" to their database and facilitating the buying and selling of these? All one has to do is register the card on the website and post the add. Most of the time, payment is needed before delivery, so, as I've said before, one can collect payment from multiple people interested in buying the 'hardwallet' and send copied versions to the buyers, which are then only verified (or, in this case, not verified) upon delivery. People are willing to buy just about anything online these days in order to save the time and the effort of having to leave their homes.

Which firm are you referring to? Banks are not firms, they are institutions where people hold their money. If you say , you are directly contradicting what you've said earlier about

Agreed. I'm also really interested in Bitcoin Origin. Is there going to be an Airdrop sometime?

Well, yes... You have, indeed, stated that, but as we see time and time again, this industry is rife with scams and, on the flip side of the coin, a massive education problem. So, essentially, you're saying that, should someone not understand the "system" as well as you, too bad, so sad it's their fault. Frankly, it's that attitude that hurts Crypto.

On that note, the flaw with these "Bank notes" is that they are still handled by human beings, so there will always be the human element to take into account and, as I'm sure you're aware, throw a stick in the wind these days, you're going to hit a scam or someone trying to take advantage of a lack of education. This is a problem; a very serious one. Until the community is properly educated(just as they are in Fiat currency; only after centuries of use and support from those who brought it to them in the first place and those who are experts with it), Crypto will probably remain to be seen as something to be avoided by the main stream because of all of these issues. If all you did was Google the sheer amount of scams over the centuries following the introduction of banknotes, you would see the reason I'm posing these questions to this forum; in the hope that there is someone who has more knowledge than me, to help educate me and quell my fears.

I'm not trying to play a game of who's more right, I'm simply putting forward an opinion that, as a large amount of this rest in the hands of humans, it is still open to dodgy dealings; that is all. You obviously have your opinion and it's one of: if you partake you better be ready to be scammed... Really? Surely education on Crypto is a better solution, rather than just a nihilistic view. Would you say this to one of your family members if they got scammed because they didn't know better and you, being an expert, didn't explain how it works to them?

So, in conclusion, I am looking for a constructive conversation, not a one sided view on the matter. I understand you have your view and opinions, but they aren't the gospel, and I hope you see that...

Does anyone else have the same feeling about this as me...?

This is great. I hope it comes to my country soon. Does this have any relation or connection to property-based ICO's?

I'm just playing Devil's advocate here, because there's surely a way for people to get scammed. It's been happening for as long has humans have been around. For example, if someone sells one of these wallets online and 3 people reply and say they want to buy it, the seller can say, "I need the payment before couriering it to you." The seller can then collect multiple payments for the same wallet, and send fake ones to the buyers. If that happens, the only way for the buyer to know if he/she was scammed would be to check the package when it arrives, but by that time it would be too late as he/she has already paid money to the scammer. I'm not saying that this WILL happen, I'm just asking, wouldn't the potential for it to happen open up in this case?

I'm not saying that the system and technology used is inherently flawed, and I understand the use of the NFC chips, however, taking into account human nature, wouldn't the hardware wallet open up potential avenues for fraud where the fraudulent 'card' or hardware wallet looks legitimate at face-value, and people only realize that they've been defrauded when they go and try to initialize the wallet and it does not work?

Ok. I understand now.

With that understanding though, I refer back to my point of fraud. What, then would stop someone from selling the wallet to 3 different people where only one will be able to use it?

After reading the whitepaper from the link that you've provided and reading the original article that the tread was based on, this is what I've come up with:

The purpose of Bitcoin was to eliminate the need for a third party which would entail a certain level of trust.

"What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party." - According to the link you've provided.

Also, with banknotes, there is the possibility of fraud, due to the transaction not going through the Blockchain, as Satoshi originally intended.

"...there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non-reversible services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads." - Also from the link you've provided.

From what the original article, from Coingape, states: https://coingape.com/bitcoin-banknotes-ready-to-replace-traditional-currency/
"The notes will be on sale at the Megafash Suntec City store. The aim is to mass produce the physical notes of bitcoin in millions by the end of 2018."
it will go directly against the original whitepaper, where the electronic method of transactions was essentially vetted by the Blockchain in order to eliminate fraud.

Perhaps we have both misunderstood, but this is what my understanding is after having read through both the article as well as the whitepaper.

Thank you for that information and the link. I will definitely go and have a look at this and see where I've misunderstood.

I agree with this explanation, especially with the comment about Bitcoin's value coming from a multitude of reasons, because there are many features of Bitcoin that attract people to invest in it.

I understand and support the Crypto-ATM's, however isn't the whole idea of Cryptocurrency to be paperless and completely electronic? Wouldn't Crypto banknotes defeat the purpose of that?

Ironically, those who invested in Bitconnect are probably going to invest in more scams again, without doing their research and confirming whether or not those are scams, apparently not learning their lesson. They are 'token holders' though, so what does that imply about their IQ?

Besides for Youtube and other social media influencers, how do influential people’s opinions, such as Richard Branson, Bill Gates, and on the flip side, Warren Buffet, on Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies affect the volatile nature of the exchange rates and the general public opinion of crypto? Is it a good or bad effect due to them being a more credible source of information as they are distinguished people in their own rights rather than Youtube sensations who can get these “paid followers” to make themselves look legit?

I believe that, as a global currency,Bitcoin would not be viable, for the simple reason that a lot of countries attach their 'democracy' and 'independence' to their currency and would see Bitcoin being made a global currency as an attack on their (sometimes fought after) freedom.

With China imposing tax regulations on crypto as well as Russian President, Vladmir Putin, giving July as the deadline for a framework of the restrictions on the crypto community, what is the general opinion and feelings on regulations of cryptocurrency worldwide? Personally, I feel like,
far outweighs the "pro" of regulations essentially cutting out scammers.