Because we have turned into a society where consumerism rules and where social status is shown precisely with a new smartphone, an expensive watch or an item of clothing. I personally know people who give up a lot in life to be able to buy such things, some even at the expense of their own family, which does not seem harmless at all.

In addition, that famous smartphone has been brought into context with Bitcoin so many times on this forum that I wonder what it has to do with each other and why these comparisons exist at all. I could still understand the fascination when someone found a Bitcoin white paper on Apple computers, and it was interesting to me, especially considering that it was removed from newer versions because someone estimated that something like that could harm them.

---

As for the doubt about whether someone should buy a new iPhone or invest in Bitcoin, I think that one should not necessarily exclude the other - because if you have $1000 for a phone, then it is certainly not a problem to allocate a few hundred $ if you already want to invest in Bitcoin.

I think that this is still too small an amount that could change someone's future, if we are talking about the fact that the cheapest version of the iPhone 15 costs from $800 to over $1000 depending on the country. If you invest $1000 in BTC today, you still won't have an iPhone, and it is questionable how much and when you will profit, not to mention the risks that arise from the fact that someone can hack you, physically steal BTC, or that you can lose access to your wallet or your backup.


Your friend would have to work maybe even two months to buy that smartphone, so I don't think that investment is that simple for him. Maybe if he takes it in installments and then pays 10% of the value for the next 2 years, that would already make some sense and that's how many people actually buy many things.

You actually answered yourself in which ways you could get merits for your posts, but the problem is that you admit that you are not good at any of those things, which is actually a problem considering that you are on a forum where, among other things, the most debate is about Bitcoin.

If you look at your statistics when it comes to posts in relation to boards where you post, it is clear that more than 50% of your posts are in Altcoins, Politics&Society or Off-topic, with the addition that you yourself admit that you have not been very active on the forum in recent years.

If you want some change, then you have to change yourself - and that means that you should start visiting the forum a lot more and reading the posts of other members, and with time you will certainly learn something, so you will be able to participate in discussions.

They definitely deserve some kind of punishment from the community that bought their devices, but I sincerely doubt that they will go bankrupt considering that (unfortunately) most of the people who have their hardware wallets or those who are about to buy them do not understand the risks they are exposed to considering that their seed can be shared with Ledger and at least two other companies. As if the hacking of the data of hundreds of thousands of their clients was not enough of a warning that someone in that company is behaving very irresponsibly.

---

We will only see in the coming years how much trust has actually been lost, but the fact is that Ledger is maintained on the surface only for the reason that no other company has adequately responded to the opportunity that appeared on the market. I am not saying that there are no alternatives when it comes to other hardware wallets, but it seems to me that they are still a step or two behind, whether it is marketing or competitiveness when it comes to the price of the product.

---

I think that the number of employees of the company will perhaps be the best indicator of how successful (unsuccessful) the company will be in the future. Bad business results always fall on the backs of ordinary workers.

I assume that the company (Ledger) sees your IP address only if you use Ledger Live, but I leave it possible that the hardware wallet itself has some hidden communication with the company even if we use another wallet like Electrum. However, we must not forget that when initializing the hardware wallet, we have to connect the device to Ledger Live, and we have to download coins apps or even upgrade the firmware, so I wonder how much sense it makes to hide later.

From everything that I have personally read on this topic, it seems to me that from the beginning the whole thing was actually in trust between the company and us (customers), and now it all came down to Ledger literally saying "yes, we can extract your seed from our devices, but trust us we won't share it around unless you pay us $9.99 every month".

The problem is, of course, that the company thinks that way at all, because most of these so-called "crypto messiahs" think that we are all just idiots who would lose everything we have if it weren't for their companies and their services/devices.

Almost no one, because ordinary people will start talking about Bitcoin only when mainstream media talk about it, and that will only be when for some reason the price starts to rise. We have to be honest with ourselves about some things, and that is that at least 95% of people who know anything about Bitcoin see it only as an opportunity to make money, and they don't want to invest in the long term, but are waiting for a sign that a big bull run has started.

I don't agree that the guys from Wall Street think that Bitcoin is dead, because they still know something about all this, and I'm sure that they follow very closely what is happening with the spot BTC ETF. In case of approval, I'm sure they know very well that it would be a very good opportunity for a quick profit.

The only way for someone to commit plagiarism that could be considered accidental is when they copy/paste an article and forget to place the source, and this is often done by beginners. I often report such posts as low value/zero effort posts rather than plagiarism, and if this continues, only then as plagiarism.

Everything else that can look like plagiarism actually falls more into the category of paraphrasing, but if you retell an article in your own words and give your opinion, it shouldn't be a problem. Just in case, it is always good to cite the source if we base our thoughts on someone else's work, not only because someone can accuse us of plagiarism, but also to give credit to the author.

I would not call it "adoption" in the literal sense of the word, but only a certain type of awareness that there is a certain form of investment that in a very short time (several months or one year) can result in significant profit. I think that the famous four-year cycle has spread so much among the masses that most people believe that it is a done deal and a sure profit.

It is obvious that some bet with the conviction of a sure profit and that the accumulation time is still going on, with the fact that the majority will still very likely join only when they are sure that the new big bull run has started, and if there is no super good news before halving, such a bull run should not be expected before Q3/Q4 2024.

I kind of hope that in that case the price will rise by 50% or more in the next ten months, which would mean that in the next big bull run, we could start from a position of at least $40 000 for 1 BTC.

I am pleasantly surprised by the quality of the articles and topics covered on this website. I appreciate when simplicity and a very modern design are combined, which results in very simple navigation and excellent visibility. I will definitely save this site to my favorites and come back to read a few more articles

---

@blockdyor, posting multiple posts in a row is against the rules of the forum, so it would be good if you use the option to reply to multiple posts in one post if possible

When a company goes bad (for one reason or another), the first to pay the price are the employees. I do not think that these dismissals of employees are solely the result of their business decisions, but also due to the global economic situation, which definitely affects the EU as well.

---

My opinion is that they know exactly how many coins are on their devices, because their devices communicate with their servers and use the blockchain data located on those same servers. Considering this fact, it is easy to conclude that such data can be collected very easily and also connected to the IP addresses with which they are accessed.

If some big brother were to knock on their door (if he hasn't already) and ask for all this information on any basis (taxes, money laundering, terrorism...) I'm sure they would have to hand over this information. Considering everything that has been happening around that company for several years now, everyone should ask themselves if there is any logic in trusting them with something as sensitive as our private keys?

We must know that there are at least three types of people who invest in risky investments.

The first category is ordinary people who work ordinary jobs and have an average income from which they manage to save a little and are looking for a way to make at least a little more out of a little money. They can be divided into those who want a quick profit and those who invest for the long term.

The second category is some kind of middle class who have enough to live on and have a little more money left over to invest, and besides, they know how to invest that money much better and smarter by combining medium-long and long-term investments.

The third category is people who are above average rich and have enough money that is not necessary for their daily life and they can invest it in the long term without too much fear for the final outcome, because they can afford the luxury of multiple investments, of which it is enough that only one be successful.

I would therefore conclude that a long-term perspective, along with the fact that they have enough money to somehow gamble with it, is key to success.

Do you remember Tim Draper and his statement from 2014 that after 3 years the price of BTC will be at least $10 000, which of course happened, although everyone laughed at him then? Of course, we can say that the man is just lucky, especially his next speculation has not (yet) come true if we consider that the price is nowhere near $250 000 as he stated in 2018, although he later added that this price could be reach during 2023.

Taking into account the possible halving effects and the potential possibility that the first spot BTC ETF will be approved in the US at the beginning of next year, the next ATH could very easily reach between $150k and even more.

I thought that this forum couldn't have two jerry's, but you are the obvious proof that this is not the case. You've already asked the same thing several times, so I wonder how hard it is to look at your own post history and read all the answers you've already received?

Cashing out fiat in UK?

If the OP will buy BTC through CEX, then the miners' fees have nothing to do with what he will pay when withdrawing his coins to a non-custodilal wallet, considering that he will have to pay what is actually called a service fee. Of course, in order to save on that fee, it does not make sense for him to make individual withdrawals for such small amounts, so he will have to take a certain risk and keep what he buys on the exchange.

The alternative would be to try to buy BTC on one of the decentralized exchanges, which might be the next move when he understands a little better how things work.

When I first read that news, I also thought that someone was just kidding, but apparently in that company they don't choose ways to earn more, even though their business moves are completely opposite to what they built their entire business around. If you still haven't, I suggest you read the next topic Ledger Recovery - Send your (encrypted) recovery phrase to 3rd parties entities in which you can also find one of the videos in which their CEO Pascal talks about the fact that everyone who criticizes their new service is just spreading FUD, as well as that he talks about the hacking of their customers' database as a trivial event that is something for them as a company normal and harmless.

I would find the reason in the fact that they are simply not able to do it faster and more efficiently considering how much time it took them to get to the moment when the payments will start. I don't believe that money is a problem, because the total amount that the bankruptcy trustee has will simply be divided between all those who have submitted a request for compensation.

I don't know exactly what formula was used to calculate how much each victim will receive, but in any case it is only a partial compensation, given that most of the hacked BTC disappeared without a trace anyway.

If you use CEX (and most people trade with cryptocurrencies that way), then every bank can see where the money goes and where it comes from, because if it wasn't like that, would banks implement such measures at all? It's a completely different matter if someone uses DEX and if they send and receive smaller amounts of money, but when you have large transactions to and from people who, moreover, are not in the same country and did not have any history of bank transactions before that, then every bank can request from the client to explain the reason for such transactions or even report it to the competent agencies that supervise such things.

Ordinary people have no chance of outsmarting the banks unless they completely bypass them, which is why we have Bitcoin. You can receive and send it anytime and anywhere to anyone who has a digital wallet and a unique address.

It is more obvious that you made a wrong step somewhere, because if this were not the case, someone else would not have gained access to your account. Regardless of where you store your login information, the moment you enter it in your browser, it becomes vulnerable if you have a keylogger or RAT on your computer or smartphone.

Did you check your IP logs as advised by @tranthidung, do you see the IP address the hacker used?

That would be a very nice jump to about $35k+ from the current price, so even though nothing is impossible when it comes to BTC, somehow it seems to me that without some super good news, something like that is not really realistic to expect. I remember 2015 and the price of BTC, which was just a little over $200 that year (at least for a good part of the year), and that 30% then and today is not even close to the same.

Given that we have been between $25k and $30k for a long time, every jump in price results in increased sales, considering that everyone is looking for any profit, and we saw that a few days ago when we crossed $28k and quickly went back.

This "golden rule" does not make much sense with most banks, because banks can check to whom the client is sending money, and they can also see very clearly who is sending money in incoming transactions. You have countless cases where the bank has frozen or even closed the client's account because it has established that these are transactions that the bank does not approve.


Put yourself in the position of a business entity that provides a financial service, and whose clients through that same service lose money and then want you to return the money that disappeared in a scam related to cryptocurrencies. Banks definitely deal with suspicious business and are not an example of transparent and honest business, but why should banks put themselves in the role of someone who will pay for other people's mistakes?