I made this account for the sole purpose of giving this review.
I am a longtime user of this service and have never had a issue of any sort. My transactions range from 500$-20k$ at a time. My coins have always moved very quickly and without issue.
I recently made a transaction (10,000$+) and find that my btc has made it to bitmixer but from bitmixer to my forwarding address the transaction isn't confirming.
This is the first time I have had a need to use there support. After submitting a ticket, I received what appears to be a automated email back giving me a number and that they will look into it.
I will post here and inform everyone of my experience as it happens.
Here, try ViaBTC's acceleration service: https://www.viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator/When anyone (you or anyone else) sends BTC with a fee of BTC0.0001 or greater, ViaBTC's service will help move things along. After using several times, only once has a trx taken more than 2 hours (after) to confirm for me. I have used it with bitmixer payments to me. Hint: use the ViaBTC service right after the top of the hour (say: 9:01 or so). YMMV Also, if bitmixer got back to you, you will probably get your problem resolved. Keep patiently working with them. That's what I did when I had my issue (years ago). |
|
|
|
|
...
I would go with Pab, Yakamoto, MingLee and Lancusters.
I believe Russia's power is overblown by the MSM (they are not as powerful as the media portrays).
They have many problems, and making it harder for the rest of the world (beyond the BRICS, who are not all that great trading partners for Russia). Let me put it this way: Would any of you who wanted to import/export anything from Russia want to deal with a payment system outside of SWIFT? (Ahh, me either)
That just seems like they want hurt themselves as they hurt (but not as much) the USA and Europe.
And the BRICS have little to complement each other -- their main reason for a weak unity is resentment of The West.
|
|
|
|
This morning's action is making my coffee really enjoyable.
BTW, we just broke $1300USD at Bitcoinaverage. Fun indeed.
Each of the sites I look at have prices at over $1300 as well. Bitcoin price just passed gold -- that is only the second time that has ever happened, the first was a few weeks ago. Imagine what might happen if they RESOLVE the SegWit v. BU Civil War... |
|
|
|
Smile. Just before signing in today I saw that Bitcoinist and Coin Telegraph have both written that SegWit is becoming the winner. If they settle this, the price of Bitcoin could go way up. But when will they (developers and miners) actually settle this? |
|
|
|
|
...
STT
I think that you have the correct read on China.
I remember reading that "Japan got rich before it got old, but China is worried that it will get old before it gets rich."
Demographics are against China. And, IMO, Communism (even their hybrid system) will work against China. Also China has horrible environmental problems.
|
|
|
|
|
...
m-t
Truly there ARE huge sums of wealth being extracted by various sleazy means, your examples above are "straight out of the textbook".
I read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" and I found Perkins to be totally believable. Bribing the elites to gain resources of poor countries.
I had not read of the Reynolds sleaze, but all the cigarette companies knew for ages that their products were very toxic, and nothing they did to make a buck would surprise me.
All three of the mafias (Colombian, Italian and Russian) were all bad. Last I heard the Colombians are becoming less relevant every year as the Mexicans (and even the Peruvians) displace some of their business.
|
|
|
|
Banks are not social institutions helping people. The purpose of the national bank of Cambodia because is not a modern one article claims is that she wants to use the blockchain technology only because its goal is to decrease their cost using a cheap and already trustful process. Read the article here. You are pretty much on point here. End users of banking services won't receive any benefits from blockchain tech, they still would pay the same fees and they still will pay for the premium features (faster money transfers, better support or banking advisers etc.) Banks fueled by hyperledgers will be better, but users will be treated the same way they are now. Nothing will change. Agreed. In general it takes a long time (if ever) when a company is able to lower its prices to consumers if they are able to lower their own company's costs. "Nothing will change." Sad but true. Still there is an argument for efficiency. Perhaps we can all observe to see if Cambodia's proposed experiment will actually BE more efficient. |
|
|
|
I'll ask everyone.
Take the situation of more than 70% of the unique users of this forum, how much of them do you think have more than BTC1 in their wallets? Among those who have less than BTC1 of users in this thread alone which theres a lot, they keep saying that diversifying is good. Thats ridiculous its like managing 1 dollar and hope that it will become a million.
The question. Do you think they should diversify or go invest in 1 altcoin?
I would advise everyone to stay from altcoins altogether Unless you certainly know what you are doing since "risk comes from not knowing what you are doing". Regarding 1 bitcoin specifically, you may stay with just bitcoins and dollars (if we talk about trading, obviously), but that doesn't mean that diversification ends with moving your funds into different assets. In fact, it only starts here. You should "diversify" your bitcoin to a few reliable exchanges (2-3) since any exchange can be hacked (or scam like what Cryptsy did), and this is the systemic risk which you simply can't get rid of if you intend to trade more or less regularly Yeah, I would go along with that, unless you really know what you're doing, stay away from alts. deisik, I would mildly disagree with one of your points in an above post. Even if you are at a fairly high-level at a company that you might work for, they can still perpetrate fraud with very few knowing. Example: Enron. Diversification can be done, actually advisable because of this "single company risk", which still exists even if you think you "know" the company well. |
|
|
|
|
...
I am always happy to see increased Bitcoin adoption from new places. While I do not think that the Middle East will be a region of very high BTC use, I think that we should look at the long game: slow and steady growth in Bitcoin will mean greater gains for those of us in Bitcoin now.
Idle wealth in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia) might also mean that more people of means will experiment with BTC as they will have time and money to invest.
So, every little bit (new users) helps.
|
|
|
|
|
...
I am always happy to see new services for tumbling Bitcoin. I would be interested to see further proof that Helix Light is a related party to Helix on the Dark Net.
A 3% fee seems high, as bitmixer.io offers a somewhat random fee between about 0.8% - 1.25% (and that can be adjusted by the customer).
Also I would very much welcome any user feedback on your service. Good luck!
|
|
|
|
He correctly did what users of the pool want. So fuck Roger Ver and his BS ideas. SegWit is what market wants, so give the market what it wants instead of spreading insecurity and trying to sell alternative solutions for months.
Once this scaling issue s behind us, BTC goes over $2k.
I hope this is true. With Wang Chun you never what you will get. He likes to troll and play the market as well. But I agree that the majority wants SegWit and miners should finally accept that instead of stalling technological progress just for short term profits! Especially Jihan Wu is a very big problem in that regard. And if SegWit should get activated we will easily move over $2000. However the way to go is still very long! Agreed with you two. It looks like the argument is slowly shifting to SegWit. I agree as well that once the BTC Civil War is settled (and yes it may take a while), then the path is clear for a nice price run-up. If this whole mess gets settled promptly, it will bring more confidence to the Bitcoin Ecosystem. Which will bring in more new users (and we hope more merchants). |
|
|
|
If given the option between gold, Bitcoin, and a business, I'm going to choose the business every time. Businesses (assuming that they perform a market function) actually create value. Gold and Bitcoin only reflect it. Gold and Bitcoin go up on value based on trading whims. Businesses have intrinsic value based on the ability to create new value in the world.
Well, I appreciate your sentiment about businesses actually adding value, that is a very important point. BTC and gold just retain value to a degree or another, and can also be used to transact, to a degree or another. But, there are BAD BUSINESSES!! Ones that lose money, are crooked, etc. Running a business id usually very hard work for an uncertain return. I have been involved a few businesses as a founder or other principal. Getting involved with a couple of them turned out to be bad decisions for me. Businesses can be very hard to sell, often quite illiquid. Look very, very hard at buying or starting a business! Yes, if they truly perform a needed market function, then it may work out great. |
|
|
|
...
I would not know. But franky1 has answered varios questions from me when I was a NOOB, showed some decency (as have many others here).
Many shills would not do that, it's typically not part of their M.O.
So, even in ignorance, I voted "No".
That's cool. Can I ask why you are ignorant of the issues? You're a legendary member. I am not judging you, but I want to understand generally why there's a lack of information or clarity. My skills in programming (etc.) are essentially non-existent, my comments re SW vs. BU are not really informed ones as an example (other than saying that these assholes ought to put their EGOS away and solve the various scaling issues plaguing Bitcoin). Oh, and while they're at it, they should think ahead as to when BTC traffic rises substantially again, so we don't go through all the drama yet again... Most of my commenting here at bitcointalk is about finance and a fair amount on privacy and the whole encryption (etc.) set of issues. It's hard for an outsider like me to know everything... |
|
|
|
Maybe it's too strong to say that bitcointalk added value to the world but it certainly added value to the Bitcoin world. No matter the some low quality posts and topics it's still the best forum for cryptocurrencies and to gather people from Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies world to communicate together and share their experiences.
Yes, I was looking for a post that more-or-less followed my thinking. Were it not for bitcointalk, I would not have bought more that a small fraction of BTC nor learned so much. I have no friends or family involved with the Bitcoin universe. I am pleased with my experience here, especially in that I got a fair amount of help when I was a NOOB from various members. So, yeah, bitcointalk adds value to bitcoin users and the world. It did to my world. The Signature Campaigns have encouraged more posts, if there are some of lower quality, they are easy for me to ignore. And I really like the high-quality answers I have gotten from knowledgeable members. |
|
|
|
|
...
I would not know. But franky1 has answered varios questions from me when I was a NOOB, showed some decency (as have many others here).
Many shills would not do that, it's typically not part of their M.O.
So, even in ignorance, I voted "No".
|
|
|
|
... iamnotback If the price increases of gold (to $5000) and BTC (to $500,000) are in non-hyperinflated dollars, it escapes me to see how holding both BTC and Au are a path to impoverishment... So let us know whether your predictions are for constant dollars, "somewhat inflated" or hyperinflated. Thanks! It is important to know that, or at least have an idea. Behold, a 5,000,000 Inti bank note from Peru:  [Above is not mine, I just found a picture on the 'Net] Just today I found one buried away in my closet (we are moving across town before too long). At the time I was in Peru, that note was worth maybe $8. |
|
|
|
...
sidhujag
We are now arguing over the semantics of counterparty and government.
A solution re which to hold (gold or Bitcoin) is easy. As I have long argued, and have the battle scars to prove it, HODLing both Bitcoin and gold neatly addresses some of your concerns. Since no one can predict the future, having some holdings of each reduces risk of Black Swan events taking your wealth.
Gold IS wealth. Wealth is something you own, that costs currency to get. With gold you are already paid. Bitcoin needs a transaction...
I am very curious to see if iamnotback's latest speculative calls (SELL cryptos, a tad over-simplifying) is going to come true.
Its about what is the most ideal money.. you can spread risk by buying both but we are talking about which has a better chance at increasing speculative value which imo is bitcoin and not gold but many people dont see crypto yet so may get some pumps in gold which will get faded over long term Everyone has their opinion. "Ideal Money" is a slippery and ill-defined term. Money's best definition, IMO, is that it is three things: -- Unit of Account -- Method of Exchange -- Store of Value Gold, in general, is the best Store of Value, having served that role for 6000 years. ALL paper currencies to date (the US$, the Euro, etc. are next) have failed. The US$ is down some 97% since 1913 (founding of the Federal Reserve). Bitcoin may very well have the better long term speculative prospects for going WAY UP in price. Hey, could be! But you don't know that, nor I. NO ONE does. Bitcoin may die a horrible death someday (maybe soon with the SW-BU civil war).Hold both! The argument over "ideal money" is no good. There is NO form of ideal money that adequately addresses the three properties above. |
|
|
|
You didnt read my post.. even if you own that gold it can essily be blacklisted
No, the gold can't be blacklisted because it's actually fungible, unlike bitcoin. You see, if you live in America or most 1st world countries, the govt themselves already issues coinage without serial numbers on it. There is no plausible scenario where they outlaw small coinage but allow only large serialed bars. That idea makes no sense whatsoever. Canadian coins, however, are not actually fungible because they have their little micro-engraving feature (but you could always just melt them down anyway and it's fungible again). I may trade some for gold (Provident Metals accepts BTC as payment)
http://www.jmbullion.com and http://silvergoldbull.com both accept bitcoin now and don't seem to have the shipping delays Provident does. Hmm......... Provident's parent company is called Elemetal. Two of their subsidiaries have lately gotten into trouble. One for being involved with the Peruvian gold smuggling ring. The other for holding gold in unallocated accounts (while charging for storage), and just the other day ELEMETAL sent out a letter apologizing to their clients for stealing their money. "If you don't hold it, you don't own it." Thanks for reminding me that JM Bullion takes BTC too. I have not bought from them, but they are serious in the business, good reputation. EDIT: adding links: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article144472714.html <== (NTR Metals buying smuggled gold) http://thedailycoin.org/2017/04/12/elemetal-scandal-fallout-letter-video/(Chris Duane, second link, has been called whacko, but it was the first decent link I got via Google discussing the Elemetal letter, the news is real) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
