Is that the new cause of the dump? I do not know why the whole market would take it as bad news. It should be taken as a positive because the cryprospace will now be rid of exchanges run by unqualified amateurs.
It could be the cause of the dump but unfortunately a lot of people don't even read to understand what is going on. The moment they see a downward pattern showing face, they just slide along which then escalate to a full blown crashing of prices. I saw it yesterday and was wondering how exactly did we get here again. It could either be bad news or good news though because there are surely behind the scenes events playing on that are not open to the press. Rather than seeing it as a complete good news, I would be more concerned on the reason why an exchange that has file in an application, decide to withdraw it then choose to close down as an option. It shows that, its a difficult decision that was eventually taken and for the rest to still keep their application means they are ready to compromise further. |
|
|
|
Attendance of crypto-exchanges dropped by 50%
Poor price indicators of crypto-currencies in January and February prompted many crypto traders to enter the stock exchanges less frequently. Estimates of the total number of visits to trading platforms, based on web traffic, indicate a sharp decline of 50%.
At the same time, web traffic reached its peak in December 2017 and in January 2018, when the crypto-currencies were breaking all the price records.
For example, according to MarketSearchweb analysis, the overall number of visits:
Coinbase: fell by 49% in February, from 123.5 million to 63.1 million visits, reaching 169.5 million visits in December 2017.
Kraken: fell by 56%, from 31.7 million in January to 13.8 million visits in February.
Binance: fell by 54%, from a peak value of 191.5 million to 87.3 million visits.
Bitfinex: fell by 48% in February, from 18.3 million visits, compared with 35.4 million in January and 59.3 million in December 2017.
In some of my earlier posts, I had made mention that we should brace up for hard times based on the ban of ads. In any business establishment, no one can underscore the importance of advertisement and hits on websites don't come by default but from several sources which these days is largely for social media and now that is gradually fading away. Those figures would drop further in the coming days. You only click what you see and get attracted to which might inform your decision as to whether to stay or not but now the opportunity for that is locked down and more coming. I would be surprised if this is not happening. |
|
|
|
i am a bit curious to know are all these big social platforms who have made billions from peoples participation suddenly banning crypto currency ads , is it a planned scheme for continual economic enslavement of the masses..
google ban crypto ads. twitter ban ads. facebook ban ads. even mailchimp has banned anything concerning cryptocurrency.. its very funny and ridiculous.. meanwhile ads of pornosites promoting child prostitution, ads promoting sexual irresponsibility is going on, ads of big companies selling cigarettes and harmfuls drinks is on...
Government claims to be protecting the people, meanwhile the big banks supported by the big governments are actually the biggest con-artists in the world
There is no way to separate some invincible hands in the scheme of things around the social platforms banning crypto currency these days while they live sites that are promoting moral promiscuity alone to flourish and also investment that would blow away within time continued to have their day. The issue is that, its a coordinated attack which is being done strategically first it was China which could not defeat bitcoin because the popularity continues to soars so the attack needs to go across the world at once that won't give a breathing space at all to be effective and that is what what we are seeing happening. On the revenue they generated from ads, it can quickly be recovered if the body or countries behind the campaign against bitcoin by all means can give some form of relief in terms of tax relief, favorable policies, good deals, room for lobbying positively, which would translate into more profit for companies that complies in the long run. That is why they are all falling in line but its not their fault though as people who have infested the market with scamming behaviour gave room for other attacks to follow. |
|
|
|
These are the scams I've witnessed myself in the last six months and how much the scammers got away with. I know there are a lot more but these are the ones I saw first hand.
EthDark: a scammy shitcoin - At least 2 million usd
Litecoin gold- scam erc20 token- Around 200k usd
Ethereum cash- scam erc20 token - anywhere from 100k-1m hard to tell
Ethereum lite- scam erc20 token - at least 70k usd made in one weekend
Denaro ICO- straight up scam, devs left with at least 10million
Stone- Fake private dag crypto coin- Scammer got at least 300k usd
Confido- another scam ico, scammers made away with 500k usd.
Bitcoinred- another erc20 scam token.- AT least 1 million +
Mooncoin- 62 billion coins that were stolen from cryptsy were not locked, and dumped over 1 mill usd.
Wifi global- another scam ICO- at least 500k usd.
Sometimes I wonder the level of how people are so dumb in parting away with their money and because situations like this that scammers can get away with it, gives other the motivation to pull the same stunt because there is a chance they will make more money. With all of the noise about ICOs and now joining the league Forks, a whole lot still fall for the nice graphics design, the polished team with fake LinkedIn profile already set up, flashing website and some exchange sites whose primary concern is the fee they will get. If all of this can happen in six months, I give up hope on whether the crypto world would ever gets better and investments would be more secure but its actually not their fault, its the people whose greediness and quest for riches have been blinded their level of reasoning that they forgo the basic intelligence gathering they would have done. |
|
|
|
I have the groundwork planned for a coin but want to do A captcha faucet but that takes alot of time and how would I get the funds to be listed on an exchange
Ico would fix the problem and make it faster but I feel really scummy taking money from people
You feel scummy for taking money from people, let me also tell you that people are even much more careful in giving out their money. Gone are the days where people just invest in anything based on their greed and blinded by the motive for it to multiply their investment. Now, you have to serous prove yourself before you would be taken serious and based on this your words, I doubt if this your coin would stand the test of time on a long term basis. To launch a successful ICO, one of the germane thing is the team which is obviously lacking here. Again, if your mind is telling you something else, the best thing is to listen to it and follow another path. My opinion. |
|
|
|
I'm sure all of you would be aware of Captain Smith and his shameful teammates, who have brought shame to their country and all the respect for Aussies cricket seems to go down the drain.
This has brought me to a important question for all, is winning so important that you let your ethics down and chaeat?
This was cricket have you ever tried to cheat in gambling if yes why and were you able to stop doing it or no.
I have never cheated, won't deny I had the urge to do it but I resisted it nevertheless.
There is no code for us gamblers like the weak ICC has but I feel even we as gamblers are ethical and won't do such shady stuff to win.
Reading the news about the cricketers sends a message and that is if you must win, win according to the rules. They have just successfully ended their careers because of their greed. In societies where there are rules and high ethical values, you are allowed to break the rule, but when caught, the hammer will hit very hard which has happened to those individuals. For us the gamblers, I think ethics should be about those making the platforms available. For someone like me who is only interested in soccer form of gambling, I don't know any ethics I have to comply with than to place my bet and wait. But for the gambling site that are quick to devise several means to rip me off should be the one sticking to ethical codes. |
|
|
|
The term bubble is being used when there is need to discredit something. Before the 2008 stock market crash when the price was just going all the way up it was being interpreted as increase in activities, confidence boosting in the market, awareness is getting to a high level and all of the technical jargon that is being used to justify the financial charade that happened until everything came crashing. On the tech stock, despite the increase, it still would not be categorised as bubble because they don't want to discredit the new funnel that people is interested in and just like you said, it wont last forever as every model has its own expiry date I only pity those who believe they can invest in this for a long term purpose. On crypto currency that cannot be controlled, that's where phrases such as ponzi, bubble, scam, multi percentage growth is paramount in other to kill it. |
|
|
|
As an economist, I worry about a lot of issues related to economies in this world.
Bitcoin is surely a revolution, but I worry that it is highly unfair for the older generations and the people who join Bitcoin in later periods.
Most people in the world do not hold Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency. If they started buying it, prices would soar and there would be a huge purchasing power transfer from those who got later in to those who got in earlier. For these people, staying in Fiat currency will be the best option.
Also, there is the issue of scalability and of the timeframe of existance of Bitcoin.
Isn't it better to jump try an ICO? And following this reasoning why invest in an ICO now when something better may come later?
I think many of the discussions about cryptocurrencies leave out those of our society who have less access to information and new technologies.
What do you think?
Thank you.
Even as an economist there is room for theory and another for practical. Economics will teach about the risk but would leave the decision to the decision taker who be the one to bear the brunt if anything goes wrong. Even in the most centralized economy with various controls and regulations, information does not circulate in a uniform way some people will surely have access earlier than the others. When it comes to bitcoin, I don't think there is any need for castigating or talk about unfairness for those who came early because they took the risk when it was unpopular which eventually paid off and come to think of it, a lot of others who might be castigating today, had the opportunity to come across bitcoin at some point but chose to ignore because a whole lot of people here today, 5 years ago had access to the internet but focused on something else. There is a consolation though and that is we are still early adopters. |
|
|
|
Are they simply risking their asses or am i misunderstanding something? To date, they don't have any single money transmitter license and still they operate in all states.
Any idea how come?
And what exactly is it about you with them? Bitstamp is one exchange that have proven to be legit and I believe they have explanation for this with the experts that would be advising them. If they are not on the right side of law, while they can get away with it in other third world countries, they surely can do that in the United States and they won't even need you to remind them the amount trouble they are in. If you don't trust them enough to handle your funds just decide and move it out immediately pending when the 'authority' will be ready for them and seize all of their funds. |
|
|
|
|
Likening an holder to an horse would sound very insulting to me because it would mean someone is in charge of the horse directing it to where his going because an horse does not even have an objective of its own but rather the objective of the rider who he is bent in accomplishing despite the challenges along the way and at the end of the day, what does the horse get, a fraction of what he is to accomplish or nothing at all. A case is horse used for battle or bet on to make a race, what do they get, they are fed then locked in the stable to be released when their services is required.
On the other hand, I would agree to what @stompix described an holder as because that portrays what I have in mind as whatever happen during his bed time(which could be the FUD, the crash, the cartel or money bags doing their thing) does not move him. He wakes up then make a decision.
|
|
|
|
In plain terms, this thing beats me. I read it every now and then that bitcoin as well as other cryptocurrencies contribute to capital flight. The logic behind such claims is that someone can buy bitcoins for dollars in one country and sell them for the same amount of dollars in the other. This is the point which I never truly understood. To me, there is no real or virtual transfer of dollars across the border so there is no capital lost at all. No dollar gets lost or transfered.
Am I the only one who has doubts about this claim?
The way its being explained goes beyond basic understanding and that is why you think it does not contribute to capital flight and looking at it from the 1000$ or $2000 dollars we are dealing with, it makes the claim of capital flight sound bogus or unfounded but I will try to paint a scenario if it will aid understanding of what is being said here. In a country, a business cannot move fund abroad without obtaining clearance from the relevant authority and there is always a certificate and maximum amount allowed to each company. The reason is because as we all know businesses can come to the home country and trade making over 500% profit margin and then move to their own country taking that money from the local economy will distort the supply of money thereby leading to scarcity and these are the reasons people complain that there is no money in the economy also it means there would be less liquidity in banks to create more money. With bitcoin, you don't need to obtain the certificate of have to face any form of maximum amount to be transferred all that is needed is to purchase as much as possible bitcoin for example I need to move $1 million abroad, I just need to buy 100bitcioins on the average then send without even having to pay necessary fees. I see no logic in this. When you buy 100 bitcoins with dollars or whatever, you don't transfer dollars anywhere. So the situation after selling bitcoins is not any different with before buying them. In other words, for the cash outflow to happen the amount of dollars in one country should diminish while in the other increase. This is not the case with crypto. And even if you buy bitcoins with renminbi in China and sell them for dollars in the US, the amount of renminbi and dollars doesn't change in the respective countries. I can say there is nothing more to add because several replies have been given on this matter which should equally makes it more easier to understand. Several things happen in the economy which is not necessary have to be logical but that does not denies that existence. Let me add one today the whole countries in the world have debts amounting to trillions of dollars but looking at it, you won't see any logic in it because you then ask yourself who are we owing? People in Mars or Jupiter? But it exists. Another case is a country going abroad to borrow and you ask what is the basis, why can't we just print more money? Or will the country send a cargo of their currency to the debtor country? Obviously no. Its not logical but it's practical. While I won't try to further buttress this, I can say categorically, that capital fight is possible with bitcoin and people are making use of this opportunity whether its sounds logical or not. |
|
|
|
Reading the article shows some words for thought sincerely because the author actually put some amount of efforts to come out with such expository article backed with verifiable evidence across historical lines but the issue here is not about whether what he is saying is true or not, its about what are we going to do about it? Absolutely nothing. The issue as at today is that rather than pondering about all of those conspiracies or truthfulness, and you can't do anything about it, its better to make the best use of it. To break this influence they purportedly have means a whole lot of money in which only few people can have access to and those people are being crippled with KYCs regulations which means we are back to where we started and the only way out is to make the best out of the current scenario. |
|
|
|
Snowden Leak Suggests NSA Is Extensively Tracking Bitcoin Users :The U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) has been reportedly monitoring the bitcoin blockchain with an eye on identifying users on the distributed network.
Link for details news:https://www.coindesk.com/nsa-reportedly-eyes-to-scrap-bitcoins-anonymity/
It actually depends on the categories of people involved to decide whether its good news or bad news. I would add a third option which is the neutral position which I belong to and I am sure a lot of people would also fall in this category. I use bitcoin in which I have not break any known law that forbids it. For the exchange sites that I am interested in using that implements KYCs, I didn't forge any response neither have I engaged in any scam activities. Its on that basis I say the news is neither good or bad for me. However, I cannot say the same for someone who sees bitcoin as a means to carry out their nefarious activities as they cannot be traced then this is surely bad news for them. Either any category we all belong to, it still does not change the position of NSA whether to go forward with it or not. |
|
|
|
I think a lot of people around us has told us that Bitcoin is a FAD or a SCAM or a Ponzi scheme. Some of our closest relatives have told us to SELL before the BUBBLE will burst. {guess we hear that enough?} The media is telling everyone that Bitcoin is the tool of criminals and terrorists and child pornographers and paedophiles. Most of these people are not invested in Bitcoin, but it looks like they are looking for reasons to attack it. How many of you want to prove them wrong? I sometimes look at these people and I think... WTF are you on about? I seldom bring up the subject anymore, because everything coming out of their mouths are negative. The only time when they are interested, is when the price hits a all time high. Then they want advice to invest in Bitcoin and when they buy at the ATH, and the price drop with 10%, then they panic sell....lose money....blame Bitcoin. I am sooooo sick of this. I hope we can finally prove them wrong in the near future, because this is definitely getting under my skin now.  If there is anything I want more, its this as I have come to start exercising some serious constraint in telling people about bitcoin because everything you painted here is what I have experienced at one point or the other and I think I have been witnessing some amount of calmness which is something good because of the downward trend in price. While I don't want to shame others for not believing, I just want to have the feeling 'I told you so'. They are actually not at fault and I don't blame anyone as it takes the strong hearted individual to survive in this world and because people by their default nature look for the easy way out and when that is not happening, they look for someone to blame that's why even when I manage to get someone who is slightly interested, I only point the way rather than convincing or mentoring in that direction. Its going to get better, that is my wish. |
|
|
|
If anyone is really interested in the growth of bitcoin, then you would care and be bothered about the bans here and there because its sending only one message which is heard loud and clear all over the world and that is crypto currency cannot be trusted. To someone already aware of crypto currency, you can separate the trustworthy ICOs from the others, you can separate bitcoin and other reputable coins from the rest but to a new individual its one and the same. Again, its not about whether someone is using Snapchat or Instagram but what mattered is getting the message out and this platforms have been a useful means that spread beyond geographical locations, since its likely impossible to advertise on TVs. Aside that a lot of people have come in contact with crypto currency because of advert of an ICO which he didn't eventually participate. But now, all of those means are being shut, then we are likely to get stuck at a point of even go down further. |
|
|
|
|
I have account on both platforms but would still take Paxful ahead of LBC just because of the amount of scam actions that have been reported on LBC severally without any room for people to have a refund of their resources. I have read several news even on the forum about how funds were lost and the admin on LBC were not even cooperating on resolving the issue with all of their promises. On Paxful, on the otherside, I have used the platform several times without stress confirmation is instant, responsive customer care, and I am yet to read one bad news from the use of that platform.
|
|
|
|
There will be a new restricted financial products policy by Google. In June 2018, Google will update the Financial services policy to restrict the advertisement of Contracts for Difference, rolling spot forex, and financial spread betting. In addition, ads for the following will no longer be allowed to serve: Binary options and synonymous products Cryptocurrencies and related content (including but not limited to initial coin offerings, cryptocurrency exchanges, cryptocurrency wallets, and cryptocurrency trading advice)Ads for aggregators and affiliates for the following will no longer be allowed to serve: Contracts for Difference Rolling spot forex Financial spread betting Binary options and synonymous products Cryptocurrencies and related content. Sources: https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/7648803?hl=en&ref_topic=29265https://www.fxstreet.com/news/google-to-ban-ads-on-cryptocurrencies-related-products-rtrs-201803140550When the news broke, I even thought it was all about ICO but including the bolded just showed that the effect will be massive. Agreed that people won't lose money because of ICOs, it then means they can't even see ads of exchange sites where they can, they can get ads of wallets to install which might propel action to know about what bitcoin is all about. The only way people would know about bitcoin is through direct advertisement through billboards, fliers and personal conviction which put a lot of responsibilities on those of us already involved. The only thing we can do is to brace up because hard times are coming. |
|
|
|
His comments might be encouraging, but I won't bank on it as a reason to rejoice that a fresh air its about to breath into the direction of crypto currency during his tenure. The reason is simple, institutions such as the PBOC, goes beyond individuals and every decision taken has to be in compliance with the law establishing such institutions until he is able to change such laws to accommodate his ideals for crypto currency, it will only be comments without any major change in the current situation. Another thing why I won't want to rely on such comments is because Chinese stance against bitcoin is deeply rooted in its economic policy, the form in which they fundamentally believes in as against bitcoin promotion of capitalism that alone is a difficult hurdle to pass by the new governor of PBOC. |
|
|
|
All of us noticed the pump and dump scenario in Bitcoin and all other coins, is it going to be forever like this? Isn't there going to be a stage wherein the price will be stable? Cause it seems like riding and leaving a virtual money vehicle. Any thoughts will be highly appreciated.
When things go long enough, it seems its going to be forever but that is not always the case just like what bitcoin is facing that makes it look like pump and dump was designed with it just like transaction confirmations. But a deep look at it would show that bitcoin has not been with us long enough to form a conclusion that this situation will continue its just 10 years and no one could imagine the response it has garnered thus far. Its not that the volatility would be eradicated even as time passes but it will be reduced to the point where major decision will be taken on reliance on it's price, budgets prepared accompanied by cashflow projections. |
|
|
|
Former Manchester United and Real Madrid striker Michael Owen is launching a cryptocurrency in his own name, joining other famous sportsmen including Manny Pacquiao in a new venture to connect with fans. The retired England star announced Wednesday his investment in the Singapore-based Global Crypto Offering Exchange (GCOX) as he unveiled the “Owen Coin”. http://punchng.com/ex-england-star-michael-owen-to-launch-own-cryptocurrency/amp/Could this be a booster to cryptocurrency because these celebrities have big influence world wide and could invariably canvass more support for cryptocurrency. I am not seeing anything different from what is currently happening. I will only be concerned if because of Owen Coin, China allows its ICO to be raised, Facebook makes an exception, Google reverse its decision to ban ads and finally the forum decides to give it some special consideration. Other than that, its going to face the same faith that the entire ICO market is facing but could be mild because of the name involved. The question, is for those that have endorsed in the past, what is the status of such coins today? I hardly find them in the top 10 coins. Celebrities needs to change their strategies and endorse bitcoin itself and not some coins created and they are allotted maybe 1millon pre-mined that makes them super rich just by promoting it with their name. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
I don't even use snapchat like for real.
