From my point of view for the loans I have made they are all unsecured personal loans for smaller amounts. So, I look at it as no different then them going to a friend or coworker or whoever and borrowing a couple of hundred dollars till payday. What they do with it is more or less their own business. For the amounts I have given out you really could not do a HYIP kind of thing.
If they came to me and asked for a couple of thousand to setup a Ponzi the answer would be no, because more or less you are supporting one at that point.
If they did not tell me and I did not ask, well that's on me. But, would we ever know the truth anyway? If you @Timelord2067 came to me here and asked for a few thousand because the engine in your car just detonated and you need to get something to go to work till you can buy a new one. I would probably give it to you since I really doubt you would blow a decade old legendary account and it's alts for a few grand. BUT if was to start the TimeWarp2067 HYIP how would I ever know if it never got traced back to you?
We are all kind of anonymous here.....
-Dave
|
|
|
So, if I've understood correctly: you received coins from Bisonapp (a custodial exchange), and they did show up to your Umbrel balance. Then, you received money from Bisonapp again, and they did show up, but disappeared a little later.
If that's the case, then did the transaction confirm the second time? If it was unconfirmed, then it might have been double-spent after you looked at it last time. You need to contact Bisonapp.
Since umbrel gives a new address for every transaction I am guessing (100% guess) that the address the OP gave was the next one in his wallet, which would be the one that is showing now. Even if the TX is double spent or dropped it does not display the old addresses. Umbrel also keeps the default size for the mempool. So it's entirely possible that since transactions with under a 4 sat / vb are being purged at the moment, that it *was* sent, and *is* out there BUT his node does not see it. And unless the OP has it someplace there is no easy way to see what the old address was unless he gets it from Bisonapp. You can get it by sshing into umbrel and using bitcoin-cli and get it from there but I have no idea how to get it from the GUI. -Dave
|
|
|
Do you have Ride The Lightning installed? If not can you install it though the app store. From there if you go to onchain and then transactions it should show you everything that came and went from your onchain wallet.
Bisonapp should (I don't know for sure) have some way of showing you a txid for all funds that have been sent.
-Dave
|
|
|
Well I sent 2 payments to that adress from my personal Bisonapp account. The first one is still visable and the second one was first visable and then disappeared. It is strange that the adress does not show anything. It should at least show the first deposit....right?
Yes block explorers show all transactions so if you sent to that address it should show. Remember the deposit address that you get from umbrel changes every time you use it so is the bc1qxdgkknc53cl9wvc95klzyu65fvfeerwtu98c92 address the one it's showing now or the one that you used before? What does the Bisonapp account show for outgoing transactions to you? Does it show that they were confirmed? Any other info? -Dave
|
|
|
Probably not the best place to discuss it, but I figure it's worth a mention here in the hardware section since over the years we have had a lot of discussions about Moore's Law and how much speed we can get out of how small a die on a chip and if it would keep going or would we hit a size / speed wall. He was one of the co-founders of intel and in general a really intelligent person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_MooreProbably did more to advance ICs more then any other person. RIP -Dave
|
|
|
As WillyAp said a lot is going to depend on where you live.
I'll say this while wearing a sig for a mixer (sorry Royce)
There are other ways of separating ownership of coins (coinjoin / join market). Some exchanges that have email verification only P2P markets And so on.
Mixers / privacy coins just kind of make it easier. So even if they could stop mixers / privacy coins, witch governments probably can't since they would just reappear elsewhere. There would be other options, and getting all of those would be just about impossible.
-Dave
|
|
|
The flip side of the argument is that if BTC goes up they could have wound up paying $30k for the domain. Since I am running my own payment node when putting sales though I just pass the price to it take a 1% discount and call it a day.
It's a bit of an opinion thing, once you give people massive discounts they start to ask why an that could cost sales. Never give a customer a chance to ask why something is so discounted.
Just my view.
-Dave
|
|
|
Would need a bit more information before even attempting to figure it out.
Is the entire deposit missing or is the amount just smaller? What was the address? Did it actually confirm of was it out there pending?
Did someone open up a LN channel to you?
Do you enable autopilot?
-Dave
|
|
|
Well the standards ones for people who announce new wallets.
Open source?
Is it custodial or non custodial?
Any security audits done?
If it's custodial is there any KYC?
Requirements other then KaiOS? I know it's for lower end lower power phones but outside of that.
-Dave
|
|
|
You can get in trouble with the SEC as a forum member with celebrity status for promoting cryptocurrency on your social media, but not in trouble with them for promoting just bitcoins. There is a scary SEC rule- that it is unlawful for any person to publish or give publicity to crypto assets without disclosing the amount they were paid for the promotion. That is it in a nutshell. If you push a stock or a lot of things you have to tell people if and if so, how much you are getting paid to do it. If nobody is paying you it's a different thing, but if you are then there are rules you have to follow. I don't know why people think it's such a big deal, it's been that way for a very long time. -Dave
|
|
|
So according to you wolf.bet is a scam, and primedice is a scam. And then you show a very small snip of your logs to prove a point. Put up or shut up as they say. There are legit scam casinos, but coming in with no real proof and accusing 2 that have only minor complaints vs others over the years is not going to get a lot of traction here. BUT we are supposed to believe the pump and trade bot that you sell is 100% legit: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5326454 / https://archive.is/6gsoV -Dave
|
|
|
I keep getting the feeling Binance is being operated with more in their marketing and management budget then in their infrastructure and hardware budget.
Too many instances of things going wrong on a regular bases. Not show stopping implosion things, but now we patch this to make it work and then we patch the next thing and so on. Not actaully stopping to do it properly.
I don't use them on any kind of regular basis, but it seems that they have more things happen to them then other places. Could also be that more people talk about it since they are the largest.
-Dave
|
|
|
In general, it makes sense for businesses to run multiple full nodes for redundancy, and to prevent various attacks.
If a business wants to run 5 full nodes, under the status quo, they will have to download the blockchain 5 times. From my understanding of the proposal in the OP, a business could potentially download the blockchain once, and transfer the current UTXO set to the other 4 nodes using a trivial amount of resources.
As acho101 pointed out, assumeutxo requires trust in the entity that provides the current UTXO set as of x block. In theory, some of this required trust could be reduced via means that are done to provide trust to light wallet users, such as electrum users.
You can do that now, you can copy & paste the blockchain data between machines. If it's all part of the same company you have to assume that you are going to trust the other data. And these days any business that would want 5 copies of core running is going to have sufficient backbone bandwidth that moving 500GB or even 1TB across the netowrk should be no issue. And if that is not possible external drives. I frequently do this when spinning up things that I want to test on main net instead of testnet. -Dave
|
|
|
Too many things here make it look like it's not true / not the entire story.
Is is possible? Yes, but as others have said it would have to have been someone who had no idea of how crypto worked or how a hardware wallet works. AND also not know any basic IT / PC security tech knowledge.
Is it an attempt to get hits / views? Most likely.
Is there a possibility of it being something else. Yes.
Also, people do make mistakes, some people own up to it and try to make it right, others just blame.
-Dave
|
|
|
The other option is doing a CPFP (child pays for parent) transaction.
You can send the incoming BTC from your wallet to another address with a fee high enough to cover the 2nd transaction AND enough for the 1st one also and a miner will probably pick it up. So you are probably looking at about 25 Sat / VB as of this moment at a minimum.
ACINQ might be able to bump the fee on their end but I don't know if they do that for people.
-Dave
|
|
|
Sent. TXID: aae01ccb4d4a9e5a20d976cfb44f74b9f371a14ff85e308b930cdb1c675b8c09 Payback address: ltc1qnk2hnlstvw6uhklaa07pwxe369v3ru9npnuqtw
Thanks, Dave
|
|
|
This hack and the older one are already being discussed here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5410704...Let's see if General Bytes will come back and reopen their service or it is shut down forever, but other BATM operators need to seriously improve security to avoid this remote attacks....
They more or less said that they will not reopen their service that you as the ATM operator have to operate your own back end. Which is both good and bad, as I pointed out elsewhere there will probably be a bunch of operators dropping out since they do not want to / do not have the ability to operate their own back end. OTOH, someone may be able to come in and provide that service for people for a fee while also running their own back end so they can recover some of the costs. -Dave
|
|
|
|