probably will be fixed by the end of tomorrow and those merit lost are reinstated, but still, happy april fools day!

i don't think that the criminals are idiotic enough to only use mixers when it comes to laundering their funding. even if you have banned all of the mixing services, there are so many other methods on processing their illegal funding, including going through a possible pari-mutuel casino betting (could be risky, but as long as you find a safe-enough method for it). so let alone KYC mixing - they can often fake their identities in order to get their "legal" access.

financial freedom is a bitcoin's spirit, mixing is one of the most important method on exercising it. understandable that this website isn't a grey zone, but if mixers are to be banned for this reason, expect a new and more complex method replacing it.

agreed, because they are no longer on service.

in 2019, there are 108.6 million card transactions per day.

so the block size increase should have done far sooner and radical if bitcoin is to be for mass adoption, 4MB per block under today's load is still treating bitcoin as if it is still a community currency. when we look at the mempool right now, there are more than 200k unconfirmed transactions, which you already can imagine how slow it is.

let's say a 2MiB block has 5k transactions on average, and the each block happens every 10 minutes, it means 720k transactions per day. if we have to match the 2019's rate, it is about 300MiB per block that equivalates 108m transactions per day.

but the problem is the entire blockchain which stands at about 526GB right now. we need to change the system of the blockchain synchronisation requirement to increase efficiency and decrease burden for those who do so. for example, fragmented blockchain which maintains blockchain size per user at a level they can afford to (about 15~100GB per user depending their ability and the network stability).

i still remember the earlier days using bitcoin wallet would take me at least a week just to do that at the time it was 75GB.

the bigger problem is that how the western governments, which Chinese Communist Party is a part of it, are purely of puppets, and are looting and gaining bigger control from the war. all these troubles reflect directly on every single price we get to pay daily. in other words, they don't want either side actually win, they want a sustainable war to secure all of the controls, so let alone ceasefire treaty which Trump did.

that is a part of the new world order, and it is no longer conspiracy theory anymore.

happy april fools day! however, missed the days when we had the crypto badge joke.

yes. normally, dead coins would be delisted somehow, or sometimes being cellar boxed. it is more likely someone closed his short positions that affected the others into domino effect. these coins, even if you could trade it, better not engaging it at all or you could be end up yourself in trouble (saw some coins dropped to near-zero in a matter of day).

sometimes, i don't think that it is NFT itself, but how it is actually being used, and its ownership. most people mainly into gaming i knew hates this because of the concern of materialisation or the issue that you will need to do another process just to access the game. the other one is that how people is going to prove they own the NFT at all, but no one puts the importance of what it runs on top of into scrutiny.

if you wish to memorise the password yourself instead, you should go with passphrases in 4~6 random words.


changing passwords do not help for the ones not exposed to any security breaches or risks at all, so change it per necessity.

the reality is even worse. they are actually attempting to devolve to the communism era where they nationalise everything and you own nothing but nothing good is actually distributed again. if you dig a little bit onto the way China tries to stop COVID, it's not even within its intention, instead, all about absolute control for the regime. what's even more frightening, is that some countries are trying this way under the narrative of environment.

World Economic Forum is making a lot of plans to "build back better" like you said. one of the aspect is that they want to make a net-zero world that no more carbon emissions out more than the planet can afford. in reality, if you look at the other side of this, they are wanting to make people own nothing too. some random banks in Sweden is already pushing out credit cards based on your carbon footprints, which was a literal conspiracy about ten years ago.

this is real. an appropriate amount of carbon emissions rather keeps the soil on the good standing. greenhouse gases cause global warming, but doesn't mean not even an entity would need it. even the forest needs some carbon emissions to keep its life going. to make it a net-zero, we are supposed to make use of those pollutions and not reducing it.

it's best to change all to USDC.

USDT hasn't been back to the exact $1 probably since the Terra (LUNA) was depegged and has been dropping in its market capitalisation (from 2022.5.9's 82B to today's 67.5B). on the other hand, it's not fully backed in cash, thus it doesn't guarantee 100% solvency.

edit 2023.3.11 - fuck my life i got this wrong.

USDT, as of 2022.3.31, claims that they have $4.1B in actual cash reserve. however, according to CMC data, its capitalisation has been down by $11B from 2022.5.11 to when this reply is submitted, which is far beyond its cash solvency.

people walking into those trading things without doing any due diligence towards what they are trading in the first place is their fault. even though we have verifications like KYCs, scammers can use this to steal personal information.

for some reason, even having the maximum security settings, there is a chance these scammers can find you out. however, there is a tiny chance (which remains worth mentioning) that you are hit with genuine ones. as a result, i'd have some advice below:

TLDR: most of these "investors" won't even prepare anything for any questions asked by users who are introduced to . even so, doing any due diligence on their claims can easily figure out if they are even legit.

• if you receive a message which is already an introduction to their investments, lacking any disclaimers alone is already exposing themselves.
• however, if you receive the initial off-the-wall message from anyone you aren't even familiar with, check their profile and see who they are and how they even know you.
• if they tempt you to any investment and you have spare time to handle it, question their investment plans upfront with everything you want to know about. for example, where will your money go, the payouts, risks and benefits for participating, contact information, and more. even though it costs a much longer time than blocking, scammers expose themselves by not properly answering any of your questions.
• if they have any evidence of their successful "payouts", given that is a common red flag, beg them.

to my knowledge, they did have a record to block trades they deem to be "risky" and even sold clients' shares without prior warning, for example, GameStop. that precedent alone proves they can control what clients can do, let alone if you can transfer out your shares (or cryptos) at all.

happy april fools day! time i know i will have an IQ of lower than 120 anyway, lol.

if this becomes more common, instead of blaming the unvaccinated, we should ask ourselves "what makes them buy those passes rather than getting vaccinated and get those?".

furthermore, until COVID19, have you ever heard of any vaccines that are widely promoted by people who have no scientific knowledge of those or even mandated by any governments and anything against that vaccine is censored?

the biggest problem isn't about fact-checking, but there are authorities censoring any counter-fact-checking practices, which is already happening, such as YouTube banning vaccine misinformation. in fact, this kind of practice isn't telling those information wrong but what information they fear people talking about.

to be fair, we shouldn't trust only one source just because it's fact-checked. for the best practice, gather the same news reports from multiple sources, regardless of fact-checking or the reliability of its source. if the fact-check only contains primary sources (or sources coming from allies but nothing from opposites just because they aren't reliable, especially regarding conspiracies), they too could be a conspiracy.

assuming there are two fact-checkers who have a contrasting conclusion, both get reliable sources, who are we going to trust?

for example, this article about covid vax deaths i have linked before also contains numerous sources on their claims. no matter how misrepresented to you, under your logic, this too should be considered a fact-check.

but in fact, you won't usually have access to the redemption section, as the fee of it is extremely high. until you can redeem your funds, you can't verify if that Tether amount is legit. also, half of the whole Tether capitalisation is backed by commercial papers we don't have access to know about.