That sounds like suicide for their service. I haven't extensively looked into the article, but if you need to create an account, plus additional KYC, what exactly are the upsides of their service compared to Binance?

It seems like it really just defeats the purpose of their "Instant exchange" model. I'm afraid that sooner rather than later another Instant exchange such as Changelly is going to completely dominate the market.

I've checked the article now -- Nowhere does it state if they're introducing this because it is required by law.. Seems like an extremely stupid move.

If you could be a bit more specific about your hardware, there are several tools out there which allow you to calculate your profits.

The radeon R9 200 series could make roughly .4$ day ( if it's an 280X+)

See https://www.nicehash.com/profitability-calculator#amd-r9-280x;USD;0;1;200;0;a14=14.6;a20=14.42;a21=1.07;a22=0.49;a23=0.07;a24=280;a25=0.6;a26=2.6;a30=0.49

I'm not entirely sure what CPU you have, but 8 cores are usually AMD?

A Ryzen 1700+ could potentially also make you another 0.5$.

https://www.nicehash.com/profitability-calculator#amd-cpu-ryzen-7-1700x-400ghz;USD;0.0;1;95;0;a22=0.61;a30=0.61

These nicehash calculations should be fairly accurate. It's obviously pennies but for the work involved it could be worth it.

Well, they obviously could be possible, but they won't be viable and probably extremely costly. The miners that didn't conspire will find themselves with a proportionally larger share of the network. = more profits. As stated above^ -- Which means that you'll need a 51% attack to cut them out to really have any efffect.

A 51% attack ( which would be needed to mine at a smaller cost with less energy consumption efficiently will probably also be significantly more difficult for the involved parties (As they removed 50% of their hashpower in this hypothesis. - Right?)) and doing so is basically burning your own fingers -- since the price of bitcoin will probably drop enormously if there were to be such an attack = reduction in profits. I doubt that the money which is spared in using less energy/electricity covers those losses.

I simply don't see how you could ever make a profit doing this when you have (bought) so much hashing power. (100.000's of Antminers). Unless you were somehow able to short bitcoin itself for billions.


Unless the miners have already achieved 51% of the hashpower, i don't see any reason not to deploy all resources that could potentially mine at a profit?
Not doing so would definitely be 'weird'


Doing so would effectively destroy the eco system and thus their mining equipment in which some of them probably invested billions. This would be driven by malice, not by trying to make a profit.

Is this one of those site templates that have fake users/bots depositing and betting?

Anyhow, this isn't the right section. I feel like Goods > Digital Goods might be more appropriate.

I'm quite curious, didn't OPskins shut down a long time ago? How exactly does this all work with Valve prohibiting all these gambling sites from operating?

Yep. Drafts unfortunately don't include a link to the thread where you wanted to post your reply, unless you quote someone in your reply, (which i usually do.)

That looks something like

When you click on it it'll redirect you to the topic that the draft was made for/in.

Wow. That infographic looks great! If only i knew what it was representing..  

As far as that wall of text you scribbled down goes, you should probably start by taking "measures" against yourself. Looking at your post history, you might be part of the problem you're describing.


Great and harmful? Do you even understand what you're writing down?

"I'd love to nominate theymos and the developers of Skrillage for all the development they've done on the forum so far!"
Which is more or less the reasoning behind your nominations... Not saying your nominations are wrong per se, but your thought behind them seems pretty skewed.

You mean using OP_RETURN to push certain data/words onto the blockchain? Other then that, i'm not sure how much is possible/what you're referring to here..
Coloured coins? Never heard of that before..

Anyway, here's the guide i found where you can apparently push certain words onto the blockchain ( although it being Hex), https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/25224/what-is-a-step-by-step-way-to-insert-data-in-op-return/

Which looks quite interesting, but i doubt that this is what you're referring to.

As far as i understand it, they're recovering the BTC amount, which basically means that users are still going to be down ~60%, even if they're fully reimbursed, due to the "low" bitcoin price as of now.

Imagine if only this was an inside job --If they sold the bitcoins back in December, they would be able to fully reimburse all their customers and still keep a massive share of the funds. Add that with the fact that no one has been arrested for the hack, or (as far as i am aware), no one within NiceHash has been held responsible yet.

Is there an update on this? Has anyone actually been held responsible yet? I can't find anything other than that there is an "investigation", as stated in the article..


I really have a hard time buying the current version of this story.. Not sure why.

Too bad that there is no real alternative for them.. *sigh*



Are these simply spambots or might they be sockpuppets of Nicehash?  

I thought that Apple especially used to be quite picky on which apps they allowed to be added in the App Store, I guess their system isn't 100% waterproof.

Also, how exactly does an App creator receive advertising money from someone that downloads their app? This all sounds quite confusing.


As others have stated, not only has it had huge security issues in the past ( One of the reasons it can't be found on Bitcoin.org), you're also missing out on a lot of features when using Blockchain.info in comparison to Electrum or Bitcoin core. 

Eg; you won't be able to use Replace-By-fee if your funds get "stuck" due to low fees, or CPFP. Exporting keys out of their wallet is also quite difficult.

How can you dislike a feature that literally has 0 downsides..? AFAIK, the only minor annoyance is that it might require a softfork.

What/where did you read that? Schnorr signatures have absolutely nothing to do with wire tapping, or i must have missed something.

A lot of faucets & exchanges pay their userbase from multiple "sources"/inputs.
If fees start to rise again, Schnorr signatures might prove to be extremely useful, and decrease fees for such companies significantly. I remember that at one point that withdraw fees on poloniex were really absurd, (0.005BTC?). If only we had schnorr signatures back then, it could've possibly been a lot less/ never spiraled up to that point.

It might even keep the entire faucet industry to live yet another day, as i know that fees like the ones we had in December really crippled them, to the point where multiple faucet networks simply shut down and ran with customer funds, as it was simply unprofitable and thus impossible for them to keep operating... (Epay.info et al)

The site just makes me think of TrafficMonsoon. It seems to me that they have the exact same concept. (Clicking ads, improve your account level to generate more ads/income.)

Which is more or less what trafficmonsoon did. (Selling ad packages that you had to click daily to earn $$.) I'd love to be proven wrong, but this site looks extremely phishy.

They have over a 1000 campaigns running on their site but they can't figure out how to correctly configure their captcha keys? That just stinks.

I believe Switzerland is currently experimenting with the Ethereum blockchain to use if for voting & possibly using it to make the use of taxpayer funds more transparent/( reduce corruption?). Let's see if i can find the article.

This might be it, https://cointelegraph.com/news/blockchain-evolutions-in-switzerland-voting-and-banking

I have yet to see something like this in any other country. Correct me if i'm wrong.

And ofcourse, Switzerland being Switzerland with extremely lucrative regulations for ICO's and investors of said.  
https://cointelegraph.com/news/why-switzerland-is-becoming-a-crypto-nation-with-a-flourishing-ico-market-expert-take

If the list you compiled is truly for newbies, then you should maybe consider taking out the Ledger & Nano, as they're both ~100$. Although they're good wallets, i doubt complete newbies would rush to buy/have access to those.


I personally would rather see some more software wallets.

You list Blockchain.com but not the original Bitcoin Core / Electrum? Are those too user-unfriendly or what exactly is wrong with them? Unlike Blockchain.com, those give you full control over your private key + a lot of other additional features (RBF, CPFP, and custom fee settings).

Also, is coinpayments really a wallet? I thought it was more or less a payment gateway for merchants.. I could be wrong though.

I just took a look at their site, and it seems like they're simply an intermediary to other instant exchanges. (Shapeshift, ChangeNow, Changelly)

I don't really understand their business model, or why anyone would ever use them. As your basically using a thirdparty ontop your exchange, while that is completely unnecessary, and potentially dangerous. ( I have no clue who operates Coinswitch & how trustworthy they are..)

You can simply see what site offers the best exchange rate, and then go to that site yourself.. cutting CoinSwitch.co out completely.

Newbie account ✔
Selling popular service subscriptions for an extremely cheap price and for lifetime.. ✔
Is using autobuy links ✔
Assures people everything works fine, w/out giving any proof. ✔

It seems like you either hit the jackpot finding that "site", or you're just a lying scammer. Which one is more likely?

Not only that, they straight up lied to their customers and forced KYC down their throat to be even able to withdraw their funds, (When earlier they stated the contrary, funds would never be locked, even after the implementation of KYC.)

https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/8mizvf/dear_poloniex_you_specifically_said_you_wont_hold/

I've said this before and will say it again, I would not trust Poloniex with a single penny after they pulled that stuff on their userbase.

I almost feel empathy with people who are still using Poloniex/Bittrex over Binance.



I mean they did add Dogecoin USDT pairs..  https://twitter.com/Poloniex/status/1035564251103023105, what else could you possibly want?

I doubt anyone is going to spend time and resources just so you can "fuck up" what i presume is a twelve year old. (Fortnite skins..? seriously?)

Remind me what this has to do with Bitcointalk? Does he have an account here? If so, i guess you can move this thread to scam accusations & maybe get it tagged, although it isn't really clear to me what he has done exactly -- Selling you a membership to a shitty TA group?.

If not, i don't know how much you paid for that TA signal membership crap, but i would see it as a lesson learned, and move on.

It might surprise you that that isn't the case. Bing's market share is roughly 30% in the US compared to google & other search engines.


It's funny though when you bing "Bitcointalk Technical Support", one of the first results is


Apparently that (phishing?) site indexes just fine on bing, while bitcointalk.org doesn't. Weird.

Theymos should definitely look into this..

You mean announcing a program about refferals/(refferal program) that's hosted on your own exchange? You should be able to do that in your ANN thread just fine. I don't think there are any rules specifically against that.

But  individually spreading/promoting refferal links is strictly forbidden, unless it is in your signature. See;