|
1. Bitcoin nie jest pieniądzem elektronicznym w myśl dyrektywy E-money od EU i polskiego prawa.
2. Bardzo ogólne stwierdzenie.
|
|
|
|
Curious to know as to how I can purchase large volumes of BTC. Will be paying cash. I want to get a 3% discount on buying 500 BTC. honestly, why doesn't he buy in small amounts on exchanges? He must have something he's hiding. this is that simple He wants to find someone who wants to sell in one go without slippage or mysterious exchange account freezes which can take weeks or months to resolve. |
|
|
|
Nie rozumiem dlaczego KNF nie może sformalizować swojego stanowiska wobec kryptowalut i przejąć kontrolę oraz nadzór?
Wziąć przykład z Japonii czy Malty i powoli uregulować tą szarą strefę. Im szybciej się to stanie, tym lepiej dla wszystkich, a na pewno dla przyszłości kryptowalut w Polsce, bo na dzień dzisiejszy opinia publczna jest przeciwna i Bitcoina traktuje jak hazard lub inwestycje największego ryzyka, a nie bezpieczną przystań czy też cyfrowe złoto.
1. Chcą zbadać temat, nie chcą dziur w prawie. 2. Patrzą na inne kraje, FATF, etc. 3. Patrzą na obecny rynek kryptowalut, zbyt ostre podejście uderzy w firmy i użytkowników, już parę firm musiało się przenieść do UK/Malty/etc. 4. Jest to w ogóle w ich mandacie? |
|
|
|
I agree that fiat currency is not involved and therefore the threat level is low. But in case of BTC-e, almost 45% of their crypto funds were also seized by the feds. They have the capability to seize wallets and steal the coins within them. My guess is that if the authorities can prove that Chipmixer is regularly used by criminals to launder their money, then they will be able to create issues for the team, even if they may not be able to close down it completely.
Not the same BS again. No one seized BTC-e's wallets, only fiat currencies were either frozen or seized, and it was less than 45% (no one outside BTC-e themselves knows the exact figure). And BTC-e was easier to locate given that they hosted their website in the US and needed more infrastructure than a mixer. |
|
|
|
Nie twierdzę, że to coś złego, że w 4 bujamy całym lokalem dodając nowe treści, by każda nowa duszyczka jaka tu zajrzy poczuła, że lokal żyje. Nie twierdzę też, że ktokolwiek z nas miał złe zamiary. Jednak dokładnie tak będzie to postrzegane przez każdego, kto poświęci 10 min i przygotuje odpowiednią tabelkę, bo nasze statystyki wychodzą o rząd wartości ponad przeciętne. Uważam też, że niezdrowe jest by użytkownicy o największych zasługach (meritach) na 2.5 mln forum były osobami, których 60% zasług pochodzi z wymiany opinii w 4 osobowym gronie. Po prostu przez skromność uważam, że nie zasługuję na top 150 poza tym obawiam się, że niedługo powstanie o nas specjalny wątek w sekcji meta. A po ubarwieniu nas na czerwono już na pewno nie będzie komu pisać. Mimo stanowczego tonu moim celem nie jest atak/oskarżanie nikogo a raczej troska o przyszłość lokala.
Jakoś mocno bym się tym nie przejmował, po wprowadzeniu flag sam negatywny rating znaczy mniej, a flagi za merity nie powinno się wyłapać (nie pasują), zostały wprowadzone, żeby nie było wątpliwości kiedy trzeba zachować ostrożność robiąc z kimś biznes. Nikt nie jest stratny żadnych pieniędzy jak jakieś obce osoby się wymieniają meritami. Choć już zarządzający kampanią sygnaturkową może inaczej na to patrzeć.  |
|
|
|
|
Jest jakiś termin przywrócenia wymiany online? Na stronie jest napisane "za chwilę", ale to już tak od ponad dwóch tygodni jest.
|
|
|
|
This is why I also hope that Bitcoin won't see any native privacy enhancement features implemented. This is the start of a new move that Japan has started, and now we see the UK adapt to it too, and more countries will follow soon.
That's a bit ironic, coming from someone with a signature of a Bitcoin mixer. Without more privacy features/functionalities bitcoins will entirely cease to be fungible, turning Bitcoin into Paypal 2.0. Great step forward for those who value privacy. These coins shouldn't be listed on centralized bucketshop exchanges that don't value your privacy. Technically speaking, the value of these coins doesn't really matter when it comes to their utility. Those who need their privacy go in and out pretty quickly. Not many (ignoring speculators) end up holding these coins for prolonged periods of time. I would say more global delistings of these coins, please.  I'm no fan of Coinbase, but if few users are using a privacy coin, those who seek privacy are more likely to be identifiable. Delisting on a major site like Coinbase will lower the coin's popularity. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I mixed up the sites even though I have invested in the bankrolls of both lol, I think I tend to do it because they're named too similarly. I meant to say the other way around, withdrawals on average take less time on bustabit than on bustadice. Edited that post for clarity.
Right now, bustabit has 447 online users and bustadice has 36 online users.
|
|
|
|
Just check in Tier E. Member slot.
Maybe you are looking on "G" column? This is only Bonus posts number. Take a look on "F". Only line 106 and 112 made less than 15 posts, and didn't get payed. To be specific, someone got a starting post of 778 for the week and have an ending post count of 768, still manage to receive the payment of 0.000179 BTC. Take a look on his post history from 5-11 August. 30 posts, so everything is cool with him  Like peter0425 say - he manually or mods deleted his old posts. The forum doesn't always count posts properly so theymos did a recount recently as he does from time to time - this could be the reason for the discrepancy. |
|
|
|
|
If bustadice does non-immediate withdrawals in the same way as bustabit does that makes sense. On bustabit they generally don't take long, but on bustadice which has lower levels of activity they usually take around ~12h.
|
|
|
|
Usually immediate, and I had immediate withdrawals (the one without the extra fee) in the next block, too. But never nothing which could drain the hot wallet which I think is >100 BTC.
The thing is I didn't use immediate withdrawal, and it's been quite a few hours already. The amount does not exceed 100 BTC, however it is around 1 BTC. A non-immediate withdrawal shouldn't take more than 24 hours. Quickest one I had without paying the extra fee was in the next block, longest one took ~20 hours. |
|
|
|
Pod okiem KNF to z jednej strony tak, ale z drugiej nie. Giełdy kryptowalutowe nie są uregulowane prawnie, więc nie jest to nawet ich odpowiedzialność mówić jak mają działać. Jedynie wtedy gdy łamią prawo/nie spełniają wymogów prawnych obowiązujących to mogą reagować i składać zawiadomienia o popelnieniu przestępstwa i wystawiać ostrzeżenia jak np.: https://www.knf.gov.pl/dla_konsumenta/ostrzezenia_publiczne?warningName=bitmarket&warningTypeId=allO konto w banku wtedy trudniej, ale nie powstrzyma to założycieli przez ucieczką z kasą, czy innymi działaniami kończącymi się stratą klientów. Mnie ciekawi jak będzie tym razem, ludzie stracili nie tylko kryptowaluty, ale też środki w postaci walut fiducjarnych. Niby jest większa regulacja takich pieniędzy i powinno być łatwiej prześledzić, gdzie są pieniądze, ale chyba nie do końca. W przypadku Bitcurexa też z całą kasą zniknęli, minęło już parę lat, a żadnych nowych wieści, mimo że za giełdą nie stały kompletne no-name'y tylko osoby udzielające się w środowisku BTC. |
|
|
|
|
Usually immediate, and I had immediate withdrawals (the one without the extra fee) in the next block, too. But never nothing which could drain the hot wallet which I think is >100 BTC.
|
|
|
|
The question is if crypto exchange should answer to HMRC?
If they have legal presence in the UK, they don't really have much of a choice, do they? Maybe they could delay things at best. For other countries there are international treaties in place. |
|
|
|
That's not how bitcoin works.
There are no 'clean' and 'dirty' coins.
There can be UTXO with an illegal source, but after the next transaction they are not traceable anymore.
Image, you have 1 'dirty' bitcoin (input A) and 1 'clean' bitcoin (input B).
Now you create a transaction consuming both inputs and creating 4 outputs (0.5 BTC each; output W, X, Y, Z).
Which 2 outputs are 'clean' and which are 'dirty' ?
That question can not be answered.
Same applies to cash:
1 'dirty' 10$ bill and 1 'clean' 10$ bill. Now you exchange them to 4 5$ bills. You can't say which of them are 'clean' and which are 'dirty'.
If you follow where the outputs are being spent, and if the hackers aren't smart enough about how they sell or spend the bitcoins, or if too many of Chipmixers' users spend the mixed coins through services with KYC (or by buying physical products or services in their name), then eventually it might be possible to state with increasing likelihood which outputs are clean and which have a higher probability of being dirty. |
|
|
|
|
Mają 100% albo blisko tego, ale ich to 1 czy 4% wszystkich rozdanych meritów na ich lokalnym dziale. Jakie u nas trzy osoby mają liczby masz wyżej.
Poza tym to nie ma co marudzić, że mało u nas się rozdaje, w przeliczeniu na napisany post to rozdaje się u nas bardzo dużo meritów w porównaniu do innych działów lokalnych.
|
|
|
|
Szkoda, że nie mamy wątku o systemie trust, bo jest to często dyskutowany temat i przydałoby się miejsce, gdzie możemy dyskutować na tentemat. Jeżeli już jest taki wątek, to proszę o link i witedy przeniosę mojego posta.
Tu jest temat na przykład: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123185.0 Ale nie ma odgórnych zasad (ani na forum ogólnym, ani tutaj), że druga osoba nie może podobnego wątku zakładać, tak btw. |
|
|
|
I don't think actmyname would be able to extrapolate his one hour performance into a longer time period. I raised this point earlier in a different thread but there's still a difference between 60 posts/hr (not really sustainable) and 60/day. Not enough slots in BTC paying campaigns or potentially being blacklisted is still something he'd be likely to face. The framework for this is already in place. The copper membership paid rank permissions can be copied into a new paid rank, and the permissions of existing ranks can be modified. The date and starting post counts of when the new paid rank is purchased can be tracked, and their posts can be put into a tool similar to "patrol" until their current post count AND the current date are high enough above the values when the new rank was purchased.
The patrol page has only Newbies' posts to check for the worst of spam posts. Monitoring everyone who decides to pay for a signature is going to take a lot of moderators' time, you have to visit the thread and read the OP to see if the reply is at least vaguely on-topic or not, and other users' replies to check if the investigated user isn't simply regurgitating other users' content to pad his post count. Only Global mods have the required permissions to ban regular users (those who have >150 posts, or those who have >30 activity with 1 merit or more), or temp ban, and I think only admins can issue sig bans, and I don't think it's likely to change. |
|
|
|
I don't think that they have any real choice here. If the feds are involved, then they need to cooperate with them. Else, they will just get destroyed, like BTC-e and numerous other cryptocurrency ventures. If they could limit the damage, by giving only a part of the information (like past 3 months data), then they may be able to retain a fraction of the user-base. But at the same time, there is no guarantee that the feds will allow Chipmixer to continue its operations, as now it is proven that criminals are making use of its services.
Also, it is quite possible that the feds will push for mandatory KYC verification for the Chipmixer users, which defeats the very purpose of using their services. I am feeling quite skeptical about them, and I have a feeling that they probably won't survive for long (irrespective of whether they are ready to cooperate with the FBI or not).
First they would have to find who they are/where they're from, unlike btc-e/wex they don't deal with fiat currencies, so they have no legal entities to search for. And they'd have to prove Chipmixer knowingly accepted stolen bitcoins. I am amazed why those hackers decided to use the Chipmixer coin-mixing service when they are aware that the transactions can still be traced. I am hoping that there can be an official investigation to this and something can be done especially in tracking these people who are the real scumbags of this industry. As to Chipmixer, the last among the many, let's hope this can never lead to its own downfall.
The stolen bitcoins were traced to Chipmixer, but tracing where they went is another matter. Yes, they mixed more coins than usual after the theft, but it can only be said mixed coins from Chipmixer are more likely to come from the theft for a while, telling which ones came from the theft will not be easy. Blockchain analysis companies probably work with exchanges, payment processors like Bitpay, etc. so depending on how many of Chipmixer's users spend coins where their identities can be deduced it will make the job of identifying the stolen coins easier or harder. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
