|
I think the best way is to evaluate the logic of their offers. Any kind of "guaranteed returns" is a red flag, as it is IMPOSSIBLE to guarantee a return. Really, obtaining bitcoin in any way other than paying full retail price at an exchange is very risky. Look carefully at the reports of those who were scammed and you usually see a glaringly bad decision to trust someone. Don't trust anyone!!!! Just use an exchange that gives you a way to trade without knowing the seller.
|
|
|
|
Because bitcoin IS the revolutionary idea. Not some weak ass copy that serves some particular segment of the crypto economy. Almost all alts are trying to fix some perceived problem that does not exist. For example, Ethierum fixed the problem of banks not having the real power.  |
|
|
|
|
Just replace the word bitcoin with the word money. You are asking how to get money. Work, sell stuff... Nothing different in bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Why do you put randomly between quotes? 1NYT1f6Mbty6iZiHPQtM5fDSmSKk6e2HKN doesn't show up on Google from before you "selected" it. After all the excitement, I am a bit disappointed with this showdown. You gave such a good show! This can't be how it ends. It's like a movie that just stops suddenly  Why did you send 0.0001 BTC to 17ffAqKkfMLGBMyiDeZLoDQ7A9JrqU6YAM ?  Welcome to Hollywood! lol |
|
|
|
I'm not sure I follow. So 1BTC would now be worth $0.65?
I doubt you mean that, right? Because I would lose a fortune in that scenario. And we would all lose 99.9% of our stored wealth. There is nothing wrong with what we have now and those who "don't get it" are out of luck. We no longer need to push for adoption because the war is over and we won. People can come into bitcoin now or later, but the price is what it is.
Or I may not be understanding you.
No, 1 BTC would be worth $0.589 but you would have 1000x the bitcoins you have now. Like what apple did last year or two years ago. A 7:1 split makes the price 1/7th what it was before and shareholders have 7x the shares so the account value doesn't change. I think it's a dumb idea. For those who think they are getting 100M satoshi's (one Bitcoin) for $0.59 will be let down because they are actually getting one mBTC. It's a trick on perception. Ok, that makes a lot more sense. But I still don't think it's needed and trying to get consensus on a decision like this would be super hard. |
|
|
|
|
Mining is the process by which new Bitcoins are produced. It can get complicated, but basically miners compete for a reward that they can receive when a block is discovered (about every 10 mins.) This system provides an incentive to keep the network running by paying people to run their computers and use electricity. It also is a fair way to distribute the coins worldwide.
|
|
|
|
This "article" is just a easily generated column placeholder.
There is no "unfair" way to distribute an asset that is equally available to anyone with interest in buying it. The whole premise is based on the distribution of coins among early adopters versus late-comers, which is an entirely different thing.
Those that risk their capital on an unproven idea deserve their rewards, you can't scream that its "unfair" that those who grasped what Bitcoin was about first got in ahead of the teeming masses. This dynamic plays out in many ways in other similar circumstances, whether its the first round of capital investment in a startup, or the savvy investor that sees the diamond-in-the-rough of a OTC "Pink Sheet" offering. You can't go back and tell these people risking their money isn't "fair".
The whole argument reduces to this: If you don't have foresight and experience, then you pay the price for being late and stupid.
And I wouldn't want it any other way....
Totally agree. There has never been anything keeping people from using BTC. (Excluding Russian law.) The people who bought early paid less, but also took on way more risk. It is very typical of any market to see a ratio of risk and reward. If you wait to buy some asset that has done well then it is not going to see as much growth, but may be more stable and less likely to fall apart. Or one could take on a risky asset with a small possibility of huge growth. Either bet could be part of a sensible strategy. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I follow. So 1BTC would now be worth $0.65?
I doubt you mean that, right? Because I would lose a fortune in that scenario. And we would all lose 99.9% of our stored wealth. There is nothing wrong with what we have now and those who "don't get it" are out of luck. We no longer need to push for adoption because the war is over and we won. People can come into bitcoin now or later, but the price is what it is.
Or I may not be understanding you.
|
|
|
|
|
I think whatsapp has become increasingly compromised. You may want SureSpot instead. But any messenger could be safe if it is:
1. OPEN SOURCE
2. USES END-TO-END ENCRYPTION
3. HAS A UNIVERSAL DELETE THAT DELETES ALL OCCURRENCES OF THE POST
Without those features the answer is NO!
|
|
|
|
I think it is far more... no, FAR more likely that he just collected a lot of information about his next victims than information about giving away 1000 BTC. You do all realize that he's not going to give out 1000BTC? At least I think not. You need only ask why. Why would someone give away over half a million USD on a whim? Spoiler alert, people with that kind of money do not give it away on a whim.  |
|
|
|
Absolutely nothing wrong with bitcoin. It was a website that had a theft. Obviously storing money at some site in another country, run by people you don't know... And then you give up total control of your private keys? What did you think would happen? |
|
|
|
Then bitcoin is that weak to react to a single hack in some exchange site? I never thought bitcoin could be this much easy to manipulate.
Bitcoin can not be manipulated. However bitcoin speculators can be pushed around by even sophomoric attempts. I guess it's just human nature to assume that someone is "doing this" as opposed to basic market forces. It should be no surprise though, the Mt.Gox hack led to an even bigger drop. |
|
|
|
I think the you re the one who hacked mtgox and bitfinex.Well I have no complaints.Keep it up bro.May be include me in the next hack.Im looking forward to u.
I suspect his next hack does include you.  |
|
|
|
|
Well you bring a gun, duh. Who would meet a stranger with $28000 cash and no firearm? A bank, for example, would not.
|
|
|
|
I don't look at days. I look at years and decades. The future of bitcoin has never looked so bright. How many decades before bitcoin hits $1000 again? lol, I wish I knew? But I am a bitcoin USER. I don't care much about the price because I spend them. However the user base is growing and the production is shrinking, I'm optimistic. |
|
|
|
I don't look at days. I look at years and decades. The future of bitcoin has never looked so bright. |
|
|
|
Short answer: YES
Bitcoin has no authority to demand taxes, its a math program.
Governments have the authority however. In the U.S., ALL MONEY YOU MAKE IS SUBJECT TO TAX LAW. Sometimes your tax rate may be zero, but the laws still apply. In the case of bitcoin you owe capitol gains on the appreciation in value. The rate varies depending on your tax bracket and other factors, but 10% is a normal amount.
Don't kid yourself into thinking that you don't have to pay taxes. All your transactions have been recorded on the blockchain forever and one day the IRS may hand you a bill that also includes penalties and interest. You might even have to do a little jail time......
......if you live in the USA. It's impossible to give tax advise on an international forum. True. In some places perhaps there is no tax on BTC at all.  Also, can we stop confusing taxation and fees. Bitcoin HAS NO TAX. A lot of posters are calling the Tx fee a tax. The VOLUNTARY fee is payment for service. Routing your transactions costs money and bitcoin is not a free service. If you want something delivered you have to pay for it. It could be a postcard or a package from Amazon, or a bitcoin. You are simply paying for the work and expense involved in moving your BTC, and it is no more a tax than a UPS shipping charge. |
|
|
|
Definition of stealing: Taking something ...
That is not how Bitcoin works. When you ... I think there is a lot more to it than that? By the same logic you could steel my car and claim that I gave up any rights to it when I bought it. Bitcoin IS my property and the government (at least in the US) has an obligation to assist me if I was robbed. They took their taxes when they claimed it was mine, now they must act. Which is why they can tax me in the first place. So while the police may not know what a bitcoin is, I have protection for my assets. No, you don't understand what I am saying. Your example does not work since a car (and other types of major property) has title ownership papers. Bitcoin has no such proofs and that is intentional in this system. Your only proof is control of keys. The US Government has no obligation in law in help get your btc back UNLESS it was secured, such as with exchanges or businesses. As long as you deal with bitcoin within the Bitcoin Network, there is no remedy. When you move your btc to something else, like Coinbase, then that is the only time the US government would have ability by law and proceed with their investigation/processes. Here are some questions: 1. If someone swept my btc from my address outside a regulated system, what is the mechanism and protocols to legally and realistically help me get my btc back? 2. What are the proofs that are used to prove that I didn't transfer the btc myself and made a false claim? I checked with my insurer (I insure my coins) and he tells me that id stolen my BTC are absolutely something the police are legally obligated to investigate and that the thief is open to both civil and criminal prosecution. However you are asking the right questions about how practical it is to recover lost bitcoin. I have no idea how they would determine who the thief is in the absence of other clues, or how you could logically prove that you were robbed. Then again, this is true for a lawnmower also. I suppose the police would try their best in an investigation. My hunch is that they would be unsuccessful. That's why I prefer insurance. |
|
|
|
Definition of stealing: Taking something that does not belong to you.
So if you worked for your money, then it's yours whether you decide to store it as bitcoins or as raw cash kept in a round pot and buried out in your yard. Fact still remains the money belongs to you.
If you did not work for the money and you "suddenly" find yourself in possession of money WITHOUT the consent of the owner, you should RETURN it. If you don't, then that's stealing.
That is not how Bitcoin works. When you convert your money into bitcoin, you no longer own that money or claim rights to that money. You now are participating within the Bitcoin system and that system does not provide rights of ownership. So, you willingly decided to wave your ownership rights, to gain control rights within a non regulated financial system. Whether you worked for the btc or not, is irrelevant in this type of legal theory. In Bitcoin, if someone "stole" your btc out from your address, who do you go to for remedy? The Bitcoin Devs? The Bitcoin miners? There is no one who is legally responsible. Because there is no legal responsibility, there is no ownership, then there is no theft. You can not appeal to the Bitcoin network itself to help return your stolen btc. I think there is a lot more to it than that? By the same logic you could steel my car and claim that I gave up any rights to it when I bought it. Bitcoin IS my property and the government (at least in the US) has an obligation to assist me if I was robbed. They took their taxes when they claimed it was mine, now they must act. Which is why they can tax me in the first place. So while the police may not know what a bitcoin is, I have protection for my assets. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
