Do DCG own foundry too or am I confusing them with someone else? If they go insolvant I could imagine there could be a lot more problems with firms we don't already know are in the crypto space but I'm not sure how likely a thing like that would be.

It seems a lot of companies are taking out far too high a leverage on this sector though and it's probably a good time to commend a lot of retail investors for not doing as badly (sure there's been a few that sell houses to buy the top, but not too many and they're certainly not facing as many problems as these companies - like how the ftx ceo got arrested).

Sounds quite a lot like a desperate long shot though too... Why does Russia need to team up with someone to do this, are they doing THAT badly on their own? I thought they'd have a decent enough development firm for something like this at least, or is this more of a strengthening ties exercise (to which, maybe they don't need the currency anyway).

I thought there was already an Indian company that made digital gold in the past, is that not still a thing (but maybe India seem too neutral and a potential risk for now)?

They probably can't use something too decentralised (like PoW) because it'd either be expensive to run or it would get attacked (it might just get attacked anyway, like Russian TV did regardless of how it's made).

What did the address begin with? If it was a bc1 address then the error was with the website, if it was with anything else the error might be yours.

If I have it right, a sidechain can host layer 3 (things like applications that run on layer 2 tokens) while layer 2 tokens can't without one.

A sidechain often normally refers to tokens and ignores other things (like contracts on the lightning network) which are also layer 2.

I payed axie for a while and would've made a profit on my $240 buy in if I sold the tokens I earnt when I'd earned them after playing it for about a week or two for about half an hour a day (I was familiarising myself with NFTs so don't think it was time wasted).

---

If you're buying into something that's new, it'd make sense just to buy the token once you've researched it (when released, games can be bad for graphics too until there are enough initial tests done).

If you plan to install anything, I'd recommend getting familiar with creating a virtual machine and then you'll keep your wallets as safe as possible. If you're playing nft games.a lot require you to share a code between the machine the game is on and the website (with your wallet connected). Anything more than that is probably a bit sketchy. Your wallet will also try to make sense of what you're signing so if you're more used to understanding these messages then you'll also be a bit safer (ie spotting the difference between sending funds and signing a message in the wallet software you need to use to connect).

It's now become a lot easier to use dexes to transfer funds and cash them out; it might just be me that thinks this but dexes seem cheaper now than centralised exchanges? I paid 80 cents yesterday to convert 1000 usdc to btc and immediately gained custody of those btc.

I'm not sure if there's statistics but I wonder how many dexes have been attacked (ignoring liquidity pools and focusing on only atomic swaps and manual transfers) it feels a lot safer and a lot more secure so I'd imagine it actually is.


There seems to be a lot of companies that do this sort of things but not too many interacting with them imo and publicising it which is likely the reason there are less merits awarded for these activities.

They use different derivation paths to find their keys by default. Most software allows you to edit the paths but it's not really advisable unless you note down what you've done as you might lose your funds.

Trust wallet also uses different derivation paths to load different coins while metamask just uses the eth one to load everything (as TW has a lot more support for alternate blockchains).

Why do you want to educate them? There's probably no need or reason to...

I made a post on here a while ago about how someone could teach a child about crypto and I think the same strategy applies: find something they're interested in and go at it from that angle or wait for them to learn about it themselves. With the second one, for older people, you might be able to change the media they focus on to do this as a lot of mainstream media include news segments on cryptocurrency (right wing media doesn't afaik) and economics or business related media don't. If your grandparents don't have any interest in investing, business or technology, it might be a lost cause unless you can find a way to make them interested in it...

Why is number 3 not number 1? Investing more than you can afford to lose before you understand the technology can just be throwing money away. Once you know what you're doing and have a few months or years of practical experience then investing what you can afford makes more sense (but not investing what you're going to need soon).

People new to bitcoin might also do well by discovering hodl. It can make you miss selling at the ath but it's ultimately quite a bit safer (but don't hodl for too long without checking back and keep an understanding of how to send transactions).

"we want to stop.money laundering", "we want to ensure our international sanctions are effective", "we want to keep our currency and markets secure".

Sure, if you do it in 7 days, inflation will rocket, stock prices might sour (and then reverse), your currency might tank compared to others in value (if there's too many restrictions). The US can't do a thing like that and neither could Europe, but China and countries similar with high inflation or bad relationships with their local currency might find reason to try it at some point as it'll offer them a huge amount of data and tracking potential.

---

If a CBDC interacted with banks, would anyone have a bank account? If it offered a fixed 2% return then I guess bank accounts would either have to out compete it or linger with old investors that don't know any better than storing their funds there (or ones apposed to change).

Most AI becomes problematic because of the data it's trained on. If someone claims they have an AI that is without bias, it has theirs.

It's been the problem of a lot of bots from ones that can learn and post on social media to ones that make decisions about people.

Imo there'll be a problem when jobs start being replaced by robots because people can strike in view they're going to be next to have their jobs cut and some could quit if their company pays people not to work while others are still being paid and working for that company (especially if there was a catch all government system) - if this happens, we'll see a lot of jobs opening up as workers that businesses want to keep start asking for better pay.

Grin seemed to bring in some sort of "shuffling" method to reduce traceability by allowing accounts/addresses to move funds and make them less traceable - I don't think mimble wimble fully had a complete level of privacy before that but I could be wrong.

You seem to have resuggested public key cryptography but in a different way. Bitcoin might also transition to using mimble wimble at some point (and I'm under the impression it will, or at least become more private) but I don't think they're going to be doing that yet (it might be similar to how sharding isn't done on eth yet and is planned to be activated in 4 years or however long they expect it to take now even though it's been coded on harmony for a while).

In summary, it'd just become a different or extra version of the currently disliked/suboptimal system.

Most courts can become victims of manipulation already and a decentralised one would do the same unless it's based off specific logic (such as decentralised exchanges).

There's a way to president could outsource a lot of jobs and employ many teams externally (and it has clearly been done with the token infrastructure) but hopefully it isn't done with the physical things needed so locals can benefit from it (such as building the datacentres and electric generators even if not now then hopefully at a later iteration).

If the president is doing everything on his own, it won't boost the economy of the country at all. You'll just get citizens selling off or spending any shared profits as quickly as possible without realising the chance they could be scarce.

Sometimes they get you to click links. Sometimes they'll take funds in a scammy way as mentioned above. Sometimes they'll hope you save the wallet somewhere and forget to tell the difference between that and your original one. Sometimes they'll just want to check your account is reading messages and is still active (such as to sell your username on as an account that's active/reads messages).

There's probably more reasons but it's worth just checking your notification bar and swiping off messages.

You've come up with 3 ideas already of what you cod do but what everyone's doing might not be the most profitible imo. If lots of people are trading something one way how are you going to do things differently yourself to do well? If you follow the crowd you might just end up in a crowd.

Don't rush with learning though. Influencers might tell you there's a specific time that's good for investing but no one can know and time in the market is only better than timing the market if you're not going to pull your coins out when you're down 70% (which isn't too unlikely).

Take your time and get used to things it can only make you improve your outset or decide it's not for you.

Have you tried here yet? https://recovery.btc.com/

That and their support are the best two choices considering how much effort this looks like it could take if you try doing it in a wallet.

You also sound like you haven't done the start properly either as I assume it means you have 2 nmemonics (perhaps they're both 12 words - you still need the third though).

How did you come across this wallet and is it actually yours? You make it sound a lot like isn't...

There are governments known for printing each other's money on agreement and some known for printing currency of other nations without their control or say (it's been a fairly common war tactic in the past).

Most central banks try to control inflation, if you get a country whose inflation goes negative or below target (like the UK/EU do a lot of the time) then there's a chance bitcoin's price could pump if they step in and do something like offering low interest loans, to buy back their own bonds or to buy shares in companies in that county (thus allowing those places to have a greater amount of free cash they can use to invest in assets).


If it did happen with a lot of people I wonder who would actually be in control of that situation. A troll anywhere could probably cause the price to crumble and force a lot of people to sell really low (there's obviously almost no chance of this happening but it's probably another reason why it wouldn't - a situation where everyone tries to manipulate the market might light to a situation where all the exchangers are just manipulated into selling lower).

I checked and it does let me update it in Trezor suite web on android. They used to have an app called Trezor Manager and I'm not sure what happened to it - maybe they replaced it with an online version and consider it as secure.

The downside I can find is it only seems to work with Chrome (which might not be a drawback for anyone else but it feels like a privacy compromise to me).