Connectivity issues either come from a faulty device (which is quite rare), a bad cable (most common) or missing drivers/rules (common mostly for some Linux users). If you've ever changed the cable with a high-quality one and still have issues, it may be the Trezor device at fault. Remember that after many uses, cables may get faulty especially if you don't take proper care of the cable's endings.

I used to have problems with my Android <-> PC connection a long time ago. Ended up buying some very cheap Samsung cables only to later find out those don't even connect to the PC at all and charging was extremely slow. Brand name =/= high quality.

If it's the device's fault, you should (I think) have a warranty for it). Contact the support as other members suggested above.

They always make tests beforehand, but it's almost impossible to launch a perfect product. There are a lot of cars out there who've been found to have some serious issues in bulk. If you really don't like Trezor, then go for another HW brand such as Ledger. But don't expect perfection there either.

Except the debit card is as centralized as it can be while cryptocurrencies let the control be in the people's hands. The already-existing virtual fiat (the one we also see on cards) can be deposited, withdrawn, received and spent but you don't get most of the features Bitcoin or other cryptos currently offer. They're two completely different things, although they do seem/feel similar at a very first glance.

CBDCs will not be the cryptocurrencies we currently have. That'd be a huge loss in the face of cryptos I'm quite sure they won't take and would also be a very unusual choice. PayPal's choice has nothing to do with the Central Banks' either. CBDCs will create their own coin that they can properly and actively monitor & control.

Oh well, that sucks. But does it surprise any of you? China's been against most things they can't control, so the possibility of miners actually having issues with the Chinese government has always been high imo. They knew it's a Communist Party who leads them, and I doubt the party will ever do anything in the miners' favor. The story might've been different if they could've somehow used mining and hashrate % as a tool of control and surveillance in advantage against other countries. I mean, it's a hassle to handle Bitcoin txs through banks even in democratic countries where freedom is supposed to be a priority.

Disclaimer: By this post, I do not condone illegal activity in any way.

It is a possible if you wanted me to answer shortly, but it's quite risky. As the ledger is fully public and transparent, little leaks make for big mistakes.

Let's not forget that Bitcoin is a digital thing. With that being said, knowing how many softwares, operating systems, devices etc have backdoors in them ready for intel agencies to join your company and find out what's going on with your stuff, laundering money via BTC is a pretty bad choice imo.

Just imagine being able to launder money 5 years straight and, all of a sudden, you somehow connect to your wallet without Tor - or someone's carefully watching your exit nodes. A little leak makes for your identification. Yes - you could user mixers, whirlpools, coinjoins etc as a way to partially break your coins' history, but that requires maximum attention and perfect handling of your coins, devices and fingerprints.

Using Bitcoin the "anonymous" way is quite hard. Mixers and other similar methods are fine imo, as long as you aren't committing any crimes you may be held accountable for. But when it comes to crimes, if an agency suspects you, they will spend any amount of resources if they think you're worth the costs & time. For when someone wants to hide their identity easier and without that much of a hassle, a better option is Monero.

Now for the higher sums of ML, I've never studied how easy it is for an agency to penetrate your digital/electronical stuff as long as you're suspected, but the first thought I'm having is about closed-source hardware. Even if we swap Windows for a FOSS system, closed-source software for open-sourced and so on, we get to the final and main point which is quite hard to combat: the device you're using. Even Respects-Your-Freedom certified devices aren't 100% open-source, because some of the most important components for a PC to work (such as CPUs and GPUs) aren't open-source, at least not comercially.

Privacy and anonymity is more of a dream than a reality these days, unfortunately. We can and should do a lot of things to improve them both in our daily lives, but at the end of the day we have little "bombs" sitting everywhere around us waiting for the trigger to be pushed.

Bitcoin trading exchanges Bitcoin with other assets, while taking/making payments with it means exchanging it for services/goods.

Ideally, you should only be purchasing the real Bitcoin and store it in your own non-custodial wallet such as Electrum. Purchasing "stocks" (or purchasing from third parties such as Revolut or PayPal) does not guarantee your ownership of the said coins. With PayPal's new Bitcoin addition, you're not even sure if you're purchasing Bitcoin at all. As their ToS said, you do not own any identifiable crypto asset.

Bitcoin is a currency, not a stock. Think of it as exchanging EUR for USD. You're exchanging USD for BTC instead.

That is correct, but again, store your coins in a non-custodial wallet and remember to ALWAYS save your seed (preferably on paper). Just make sure you're the owner of your coins.

Exchanges are public companies, and having more privacy means more of a burden for governments whenever they want to analyze someone's transactions. Imagine all txs from Binance came through mixers. Would be hell of a work for govs to analyze the chain - and Binance would be suspected of helping crimes.

Most of the time, it's when the very recent history (1-2txs) of your address comes from a mixer. If you don't bounce your BTC from address to address after mixing the coins, the mixed transaction is so recent they'll suspect you were the person who used the mixer.

It does not need a $2T market cap to get to $318k. Price and market cap go in tandem. I'd rather think the $1T (or $500B) market cap is just a psychological level that, once we get past it, will become easier to imagine as a reality. $1T or two is not that much imo for an asset that provides a lot of things we've never had before, in a fair way. To me, $318k is as easy to touch as $10k was before 2016.

Nu stiu daca proiectul de lege pentru evaziunea fiscala mai mica de 50.000 RON inca mai este la stadiul de proiect sau s-a avansat cu el, insa in orice caz, cunosc cazuri reale in care statul le-a facut probleme imense unor persoane care au avut evaziuni fiscale pe care le-ai considera nesemnificative.

Avand in vedere felul in care statul nostru lucreaza, asteapta-te sa ai probleme pe cap si pentru o amarata de tranzactie de cateva sute de RON. E suficient sa gasesti un prost care sa aiba suficient timp si chef sa se tina de capul tau pentru asa ceva. De fapt, sincer sa fiu, cei cu cifre mari de evaziune fiscala in principiu sunt mai feriti decat noi pentru ca acolo unde e valiza de bani, de cele mai multe ori apar si relatiile si spaga.

Ideea e ca am vorbit cu cateva persoane care lucreaza la banca/stat si persoanele care se ocupa in orice fel cu criptomonedele sunt tinute sub supraveghere si analizate in detaliu, indiferent de sumele cu care lucreaza. Dupa cum era probabil de asteptat, atat statul cat si (mai ales) institutiile tip bancile ne considera drept criminali/diavoli din start. In situatia noastra se merge mai mult pe ideea de prezumtia de vinovatie decat pe cea de nevinovatie.

Then you're free to leave the forum. This forum isn't a job offering, it's a community where you have to stay if you feel like you have common interests (Bitcoin).

Rather than spending your time here seeking methods to make insane money in no time, just shut down your PC and go back to real estate brokerage. I don't understand why you're still wasting your time here if $10k is as easy as one deal for you. Make 12 easy deals and you're done for an entire year. Easy peasy!

We certainly feel bad for you. There are just 2 options: you start actually putting a bit of effort into making this community a better place or you just leave. There's a third option, which is continuing to waste your time here looking to get rich, but trust me.. nobody will pay you $10k/mo for nothing.

Nu se aplica retroactiv pentru veniturile incasate inainte sa fie data legea, insa cred ca se aplica pentru monedele pe care inca le detin de multi ani de zile. Daca sa spunem ca as detine 1 BTC din 2012 si as vrea astazi sa il vand, cred ca se impoziteaza. Ideea pe care incercam sa o scot in evidenta este faptul ca, daca as vrea sa il vand, nu am nici cea mai mica idee care ar fi profitul din suma incasata.

Tocmai de aceea spuneam ca exista 2 variante: sa tii "ciocu' mic" sau sa declari, asteptand ca in orice moment sa sara statul pe tine... in oricare dintre cazuri.

Nu stiu ce sa zic, sincer sa fiu. Nu spun ca nu ai dreptate, insa e destul de simplu ca statul sa afle de unde provin banii de indata ce PCGarage iti inregistreaza comanda ca fiind platita cu Bitcoin. Nu e ca si cum as fi ales sa platesc cu cardul si plateste, de fapt, in numele meu o parte terta careia ii vand BTC.

Daca am ales plata cu Bitcoin si statul analizeaza compania PCGarage, am dubii referitoare la ideea ca statul nu va sti ca am platit cu BTC. Eu nu mi-as face sperante prea mari ca astfel de comenzi nu sunt analizate. E vorba de MobilPay si PCGarage, ambele inregistrate in Romania. Si daca nu furnizeaza PCGarage informatii legate de modalitatea de plata a comenzii tale, tot exista MobilPay care (presupun, sau cel putin asa pare logic) leaga o plata BTC de numarul comenzii.

Contrastul dintre ceea ce spui tu si ceea ce spune avocatnet este destul de interesant. Nu e prima oara cand avocatnet spune ca "Taxarea criptomonedelor intervine doar dacă acele instrumente sunt transformate în bani sau sunt folosite pentru cumpărarea de alte produse sau servicii.". De aici am si auzit, de altfel, ideea cu bunurile si impozitarea.

Probabil ca este o lege interpretabila cu care te poti inca "juca". Problema e cand statul incepe sa se joace cu aceeasi lege, pentru ca atunci cuvintele omului de rand nu prea mai au putere.

Totusi, sincer sa fiu, poate ca la sume mici e mai fie-treaca, insa la sume mari tot cred ca iti sare statul pe cap. E un mare du-te-vino cu toata treaba asta, si sincer imi da mari batai de cap.

In primul rand, n-am nici cea mai mica idee cat anume din portofoliul meu de azi este profit si cat e investitie. De cand sunt cu criptomonedele, am vrut sa las cat mai putine urme dupa mine. Am aruncat orice bonuri, am folosit e-mailuri si numere de telefon "de unica folosinta" etc. Astfel, trecutul meu e cam imposibil de analizat. Mi-ar fi extrem de greu mie sa iau din urma toate tranzactiile si sa le justific, d'apai statului.

Analiza trecutului meu crypto arata horror pentru oricine s-ar chinuii sa il analizeze. Nu vreau sa stiu de cate ori am trecut din BTC in sute de alte monede alternative si inapoi, prin zeci de exchange-uri, pe urma de cate ori am folosit mixere si exchange-uri decentralizate. Toate astea in decursul a aproape 10 ani de zile. E efectiv imposibil sa tin cont de tot, mai ales cand stiu ca acum cativa ani de zile raspunsul ANAF era ca monedele crypto nu sunt impozitabile deci nu aveam griji. Daca as face tranzactii cu bunuri, as avea 2 variante de temeri:
 1. Nu am declarat nimic deoarece nu stiu ce sa declar cu exactitate si ma tem ca statul afla de tranzactii
 2. Am depus declaratia, insa acum ma tem ca m-am aruncat ca prostul in gura lupului deoarece orice intrebare si suspiciune nu va putea primi raspuns si justificare din partea mea

Din acest motiv, am un mic sentiment ca statul nici macar nu se strofoaca prea mult sa afle cum sta treaba cu adresele noastre de BTC. E prea complicat sa se justifice costurile din partea lor, dar traim in Romania deci asteptati-va la orice. Gasesti un prost care sa se tina de capul tau si aia ti-a fost. Mai ales cand e vorba de "moneda preferata a criminalilor".

Pe de alta parte, ideea de a achizitiona anumite bunuri din profit poate sa pice destul de nasol. Daca ar fi sa dai comanda pe un site si sa platesti echivalentul a $100 in BTC, BTC pe care i-ai achizitionat in urma cu 5 ani cu $1, cred ca se considera tot o actiune impozitabila. Cum justifici toata treaba e partea a II-a. Acum daca luam acelasi exemplu pentru o masina, devine si mai naspa treaba. E totul cam cu curu'-n sus, fapt pentru care am stat departe de orice fel de metoda centralizata/online de a tranzactiona.

Here's a "long story short" for you: it's not as easy as it seems to earn money, no matter what job you have. Even if you wanted to get into the best campaign on this forum, which is currently ChipMixer, you would have to work extremely hard on the forum to earn a position in it.

Joining CM means having a great dedication to the forum, and it seems like your only dedication is pointed towards earning money the easy way. And according to your trust, seems like the easy path you've chosen is the scammy one. Best of luck earning $10k a month - in the end, without working for it, you're likely going to find yourself stuck into a vicious time-wasting cycle earning nothing.

You don't hold anything. As long as you only have the ability to purchase and/or sell it, it's exactly like me selling you a paper with "Bitcoin" written on it for $16k, telling you that's your coin. It doesn't work that way. I highly suspect their Bitcoin is not the Bitcoin we know.

I have one question I think is quite important: why be in such a hurry and push this so-called "Bitcoin adoption" without the most essential features such as withdrawing or sending when you have had an issue as a corporation with Bitcoin for many years straight? Why not just delay it for one more month or two and make all these other features available as well?

I can answer this very easily: because when there's no demand for it, you don't need to make it available so it's in your advantage. So why put everything out there for your users straight from the start when you could start from the bottom and only make available the most-requested features instead?

Unless PayPal's customers revolt against the way they're functioning, it's never going to change. All they need is enough volume to keep it all going. If that ever changes (and I doubt it will), they would probably just back out of the crypto business or find yet another way to do their tricks.

The way they've begun working with cryptos tells, for me, everything about their intentions.

I'm quite surprised to see so much PayPal support coming from older members over here. One particular thing I do not like is that I have only heard stuff like "you don't own the keys" and "you can't withdraw". The keys part seems kinda fine to me - the service has to hold your keys under custody because otherwise if you're suspect and the gov wants your money to be seized, PayPal should force your funds under seizure for suspicion, if that makes sense. On the other hand though, they could've simply made it possible to hold and use your BTC as a non-custodial wallet and, if you wanted to, to allow you to also sell it to them for fiat.

But is the "Bitcoin" being sold on PayPal the real thing or is it just a coin linked to its price? Because if the latter is what they're selling, then they're literally selling you fake Bitcoin under the real thing's name. I wouldn't mind if the pegged coin was being sold if the name would've warned you about it.

Moreover, and the worst part of everything, is that selling the fake thing under the real name (so basically misleading) means they can generate as many BTC as they like, artificially inflating or deflating the market to their liking.

There's something that I've been wondering though, and I think it's quite interesting to think about it: Bitcoin solves a lot of the issues we are currently having with fiat and there are a ton of other forks and shitcoins that attempt to bring something new to the game, but they're all based on the approximately same technology behind them.

But I think it's interesting to think about the possibility of something different, that does not sit on a blockchain but a completely different concept, which has the advantages Bitcoin has plus others Bitcoin doesn't. Just imagine creating an entirely new concept that is truly decentralized and fair, while also being easy to use/understand and has way fewer requirements than Bitcoin currently does.

I personally think that a new concept that'd bring even more advantages than Bitcoin does has the capacity not to "kill" it as in destroying it, but to create a huge disinterest in Bitcoin vs the new thing. I often think about this as a pretty impossible thing, but it's as impossible as it was back in '07 to imagine Bitcoin could ever come to existence.

It'd probably turn into a very bearish market dip first, and then, once Bitcoin gets even stronger, it'd strengthen its existence even more. The majority of the hash can be conquered, but let's not forget that Bitcoin's an amazing tech that can always be changed and forked. And as long as the majority of everyone else does not want something to happen, it simply won't.

Although they may own >51%, that doesn't necessarily mean they have full control over the network. There are lots of ways we could fix a communist party from taking control, even if that means we'll have to make changes we've never had before.

To be honest, while there surely are a lot of risks involved in holding Bitcoin, time has only proven me wrong every time I thought it's not worth the risks. I really believe the huge stock dip has caused too much panic for BTC investors to know how to react. Let's not forget that the last crisis was right when Bitcoin was born. Since then, we've never had such times. Hence, the Bitcoin market had to go a bit wild before choosing its path.

What makes me excited is that the market has rebounded, which basically does show me that investors have way more trust in Bitcoin. Meanwhile though, it still keeps a course that sometimes tends to follow more stocks than precious metals and sometimes it tends to do the opposite.

Time is what we need. Either that, or we have to simply accept that Bitcoin is not something to include in the gold/stocks category. Maybe it just is a completely new kind of asset that follows a completely different course.

Just a little correction here: hardware wallets aren't protected from mistakes such as entering your wallet's seed on a website. This mistake costs you no matter where you generated your seed or how you store it.

The thing is, we aren't supposed to use our Bitcoin through websites. We're supposed to use it the default way, which is either through light wallets such as Electrum or through full nodes such as the Bitcoin Core. That's how you ensure that your coins stay in your wallet, under your possession & care without third-party malicious parties such as data-stealing scripts getting involved. HWs don't fix human mistakes.

Now that makes sense. Thanks a lot for the help. I'll maintain 2 separate devices solely for Bitcoin purposes then.

This is something that I've been contemplating, honestly.. mostly due to the CoinJoin implementation. If Wasabi can download and run a full node, I'll look more into it. Coin mixing is something I'd definitely want to have as a handy feature.

Why would Bech32-only support be a con though? I'm using SegWit only anyway, so that's not an issue for me at all.