The shirts are nice but the cost implication is the other. For someone in Canada or the US, he won't have any problem but for someone whose currency is say 200:1, a sweatshirt of 50CAD would amount to 10,000 which is not cheap without taking into consideration the cost of shipping. Your post is not explanatory enough as I expect that there should be a follow-up on how to go about it. You provided a vague information.


What would likely happen will be that he will collect bitcoin and ship to you rather than paying on the website because there is no option to pay with bitcoin on the website.

Its a simple mathematics. When you have it and sell, you no longer have it again until you buy. Its that simple. Everyone should be allowed to pursue their objective in the market.

In the fiat world, despite all the amount of dollars we see in movies that drug lords keep that didn't go back into circulation, it does not makes the dollar scarce or increase its value. The assumption that holding is making the manipulation of market easy to me is not mathematically possible because by withdrawing supply with increasing demand, the price increases not the other way round like what we are having now that have led to the drop in price. The sharp drop in the price of bitcoin by almost $300 within hours is huge but there are answers to that surely not those who hold.

Also, if everyone is trading, it means bitcoin has failed to be a 'store of value'.

Wouldn't it have been better if you had included the source of this news so everyone can verify and read more to know the very details which you have left out of your summary and also makes you not guilty of plagiarism.

One of the practical application of blockchain is during voting process which is something I have been looking forward to. All over the world, even the most advanced country, the issue of voting has been marred with several allegations of malpractices and hacking which has always cast some element of doubt in the entire process. This has made this problem a universal problem that needs to be solved using new technology and that is what blockchain will solve.

All this week, I have been reading abut trailblazing steps taken by Japan towards development of blockchain and if this continues, I see Japan taking the lead in the league of nations in the next decade as they will likely become the model everyone is looking up to.

I think the defining point here is the "technically" which is a long process between non-anonymous and the pseudoanonymous as  you claimed. Being able to  know someone is behind an address does not mean knowing the person who owns it. Several times I have passed beside big buildings and wonder who owned it but do you know that without too much stress, I could get it just by visiting the lands office, the public authority in charge of approvals for buildings, and I have my answers.

But for bitcoin, that simple "technically" is not what a normal person can do and today your bitcoin address can be linked to usernames, mail addresses that can be discarded, IP that can be faked using VPNs etc. So, the pseudoanonymous is still a huge step forward from where we used to be.

Now going beyond what Op is facing that needs to stopped immediately, its important for everyone to be careful in fronting for another person which is the case Op is going through and I hope he can sort it out.

I have seen people entered into trouble because they chose to help someone innocently. Imagine you are on the ATM queue and someone came hurriedly begging you to help him withdraw which gladly did as someone with a good heart. But the card was stolen from someone else who has been coerced in letting go of their pin. For their own security, they know that there is a camera that capture every transactions on the machine and that is the beginning of problem the moment the original owner lay complain with law enforcement agents.

The moment something is coming 'free', its saying its time to flee if you value your freedom in this world of technology where virtually everything can be traced from origin to conclusion.

Aside that you bought your account, you must have been aware to a large extent on how business is run especially in this section that you have posted. In the crypto market, there will always be demand for products like this but there is a caveat which is, it must be legit.

You have practically covered every basic requirement that is needed to facilitate a trade here but two things in my opinion that you need to implement

1. The optional Escrow should be changed to mandatory as that to me is sending a wrong signal as its basically making it that the cost of the escrow is going to be borne solely by the buyer since he will surely be asking for it.

2. The price. The brand you have selected are very much in demand and you should consider the location of where your prospective clients will be ordering from because by adding the other incidental costs that would be incurred eg, the escrow and import fees by the time all this add taken into consideration, might go beyond the amount it could be gotten else whee

This is the funniest thing I will be reading in recent time. Not that I am happy that its happening to him but when the news filtered the community about how boastful he was on the "unhackable" nature of his wallet, I had maintained that nothing is unhackable just that the hackers have not had its time or they are focusing on something else. I am sure he might not have been the target if only he didn't such boastful comments because for him to have come out with such claim means his security layers must have been better than the already existing ones which have even stand the test of time.

I have never taken McAfee words seriously though as I don't see him as adding any real value to the crypto world aside the pump and dump market he specializes in where he predict the next alt coin for his followers to rip off the market while he also make the same thing. I see it as causing more harm than good to the entire crypto market.

If you feel that is the only way, the you won't see yourself going the extra mile in earning it the right way. Don't also forget that begging for merit is frown at by the forum because it amounts to insult on those who are trying assiduously to churn out quality content to the benefit of the forum participants.

For you to have zero merits showed that you are surely not doing something right. A simple look at your previous posts showed that even you won't give yourself merit for those posts you have made if you want to be fair and you don't expect anyone to do that for you. Start turning out quality and someone will start noticing.

The issue is complainers would blame everyone, every events and every other happenings aside themselves to be responsible for their loss. You see people blame the whale for selling that is why price has fallen. They will blame one event that is happening in a village in China as the reason for the fall in price. Sometimes, you read people blame the holiday happening in India, they blame increase in dollar value, gold, silver and other ridiculous things but not themselves.

The moment people start understanding that they are solely responsible for their outcome in crypto, then much more informed decisions would be made and the blame game will reduce to the barest minimum.

This is serious issue I must admit and I just cannot assume that you were ignorant of certain things because of your knowledge of mining is enough to implement basic security of your wallet and I am not more skeptical on which wallet is the best one to use if desktop wallet is now vulnerable to this kind of attack. The only explanation to this is the issue of virus which must have created a gateway for the attack to be launched. But I still need to apportion some blame to you that you had to wait for over a month to know something is wrong. It speak more of how much value to place in your assets. Even if you cannot be checking everyday, once in a week won't be too much as you would have been able to take action and the little funds you lost after the main event would have been saved.

Reading the provisions of the additional requirements, its obvious that Japan is engaging in serious business and their decision to recognize bitcoin as a legal tender in 2017 is followed by series of action to shame other countries who are waiting for them to fail then use their failure to defend their position for initially refusing to allow crypto and be commended for seeing the "future".

I would't blame them one bit or apportion a bit of excess to their approach as I have always been an advocate that exchange platforms providers should start being held responsible for the assets kept in their custody and in ensuring that, every information they provided must add up which is why the physical verification and series of security questions in the new process is a welcome development.

The only part they have not touched which I believe its going to happen in the near future is the deposit and the insurance that they must be forced to undertake. All of the procedures can only prevent but not stopped it which means people needs to be sure that when the inevitable eventually happen, their funds can be returned.

It seems Yahoo is just waking up from their slumber after Google have relegated them to the background. Their Bing search handle has been nothing to write home about compared to Google search handle. I don't know what you are suprised about because the phrase crypto has been in the news for several years and if Yahoo is just reporting it, it means they are late to the party because several organisations have gone beyond the point of reporting and moving towards researching followed by implementation and deployment.

Yahoo could have influence only if they decide to sell their business and all of the cash proceed is invested in crypto because I know Yahoo would quite worth a lot and such huge injection of capital will go a long way in putting a smile on the face of crypto enthusiasts. Other than that, there is no significance influence I am seeing them making. Maybe marginal effect would be felt as they could still open up new business, deploy their resources for publicity thats very much how far they can go.

The war on privacy and control is a forever war that would continue to resurface every time and I don't see government backing down any time soon because they will always have reasons to gain access to data in other to protect the larger citizens and forestall any damage that might happen whether they will then use it right or not, is another discussion.

Personally, I don't see government having access to information but should be done the right way. Rather than profiling citizens who can be manipulated in behaving the way they wanted, they should do more than that. Gather your facts, do investigation, then get a court order to have the access to whatever information you need. Its that simple. But suggesting that there should be a backdoor to data gathering organisations is willing shooting ourselves in the back as that would mean giving allowance of unauthorized individuals to have access to such information.



If they are targeting crypto, its not what they would announced it via a memo that would leaked and which organization would they have referred it to? I don't see any influence on crypto at the moment.

2016 is not a long period from now and there is need for discussion like this to be done in other to put in perspective the consequences of decisions made by the people we elect to represent us and make decisions on our behalf.

Whether the death toll is 33, 91, 108 or 5. Such decisions are not meant to take any life and even if one life is lost, its too expensive which shows the deficiency in such decision which include among other reasons the timing that is given to carry out the exercise and at the end of the day its the poor people that would be affected as they are the ones who are not connected with bankers or know people in high places in other to facilitate the exchange process seamlessly.

I have read about a country that changed its currency over night because they were having civil war and needed to render the other side useless with the currency they have amassed to pursue the war. Others have been about corruption after huge stash of money have been kept by corrupt individuals at the expense of the populace but in situations like this, there is always a proper and process put in place to avoid such calamity as a result of their good intentions.

No matter what ICO is being called, it will still be seen with suspicion until there is an acceptable regulatory body verifying the claim of those coming to the market to raise fund. The problem is about the people as we have seen several ICOs that in an unregulated environment have flourished and given people who trusted them a decent return on their investment.

With regulations, then there vouching of the team would have been settled, there would be an obligation to ensure that reports are given regularly on the application of funds generated from the market are applied for the purpose they are meant and there is an institution of a corporate governance board to ensure that the right thing is being done in the operations of the enterprise. It is when all of this are done that we can then start thinking of the right name to give it whether security of secure investment.

I am happy for you that you took the initiative to ask questions by first discerning that for those things to be asked, something should not be right unlike those that would have been blinded by greed and see this as an "opportunity". I am sure you must have been promised some form of compensation to ask for such details. I won't be wrong to assume its something that would surely be related to airdrop and when you release those details, you will be able to access whatever they are promising you.

But I want to blow your mind that the moment you release those details, you have just mortgaged your identity for nothing (as no matter what you are being promised worth losing the very person you have come to identify with all your life that is even if you get paid). Its scam that won't end well.

I have managed to do one thing which is to keep as much as possible to myself. You are still in an advantageous position that your friends could even sit down and listen to what you have to say before deciding which path they want to follow. For me, the reverse is the case as virtually everyone that surrounds me believes that any income that have linkage to online activities is going to be illegal without any element of doubt or giving reason for individual argument.

This issue which is fundamental have been largely responsible that my crypto friends are not people I know personally to have a sit-down talk with. For others that have been involved in crypto through me, its based on the recognition of the hunger for breaking barriers and ability to go against all odds to seek the right amount of knowledge that made me tutor and brought them into the fold.

Its really hard to ignore and this is discussion a whole lot of countries are avoiding to have which I believe they will eventually. The reason is simple, virtually every economy in the world is facing one challenge or the other and even the ones that looks like they are on top of the situation and able to manage their economic deficiencies to the envy of other countries are swimming in series of debt with domestic pressure coming from all angle which is why it seems what the economic administrators are only applying "Trial and Error" approach.

To transition to crypto would not be an easy task which I don't see it happening anytime soon not in the next decades at that but the countries that would benefit from it are the ones that have started early like Japan, South Korea and the likes while others are having their discussion under the radar, some other have decided the best route to go is to ban. They will blame themselves for not starting early.

Reading several reasons everybody has given, I have just decide to conclude that "whatever you personally believe is the reason to you, is the reason why there is an increase in price. Nothing else matter". We need to understand that the crypto market is has grown so big to have been determined by single events happening. When we do that, we are only indirectly admitting to the fact that the market is easy to manipulate and given those who engage in it (if it exists) to continue to engage in it.

Argument about 500 million USDT is only less than 2% of the market capitalization, news about good tidings in crypto, this is not the first time its happening, end of the year is coming, its just any other month. Why can we just accept the dynamics of the market that price would increase and sometimes it will fall.

Before waving off any survey, one key thing to consider is the source of the survey and for me, coming from Coinbase is legit enough to be given its due consideration.

18% is a cool and decent figure if ask me because replicating that percentage across board would mean that a huge percentage of student in the US are already in the fold and these students would grow to become law makers, policy makers, entrepreneurs, head of agencies, committee members etc which is why I am seeing some positives here that in the next decade some amount favorable policies is coming from States.

While this offers hope as I have rightly noted in the above paragraph, I do not see it making some significant difference at this time because the popualtion is really not enough to make a move in the US and bitcoin price determination goes beyond that. We still have several students in China, India, UK, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Japan etc. Until when the penetration begins to cover a huge percentage of the target population, we might not see any impact.