sockpuppet1
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
 |
May 15, 2016, 07:21:57 PM
Last edit: May 15, 2016, 07:53:07 PM by sockpuppet1 |
|
"Anonymity well I tried"
Maybe anonmity is not that important for your average user. But, the ability to keep what is yours from being taken by thebanksters, TPTB, your local hacker, is an absolute. The unconditional control of any CC must remain with the individual.
Mass privacy is very important. That is why Monero and Zcash matter. We'll never have mass anonymity. Fuhgeddaboudit. Privacy doesn't mean privacy from the authorities. Sorry. Politics and technology will never allow it. I tried to search for the absolute technology for anonymity and I can promise you it does not exist to be found. I promise you. The control over an individual's CC will remain with the individual, but the control over the CC protocol will remain with the global elite. This will always be the case. Accept it. This is the reality of the world we exist in. You say the protocol will remain with the global elite ... will that include your version of a CC, should it ever come to fruition? If I bring my design to fruition, the intent is that it can't be centralized, because the power remains in the hands of the each spender to choose where they sent their unprofitable PoW share. But the bottom line is that Iron Law of Political Economics guarantees that in effect the global elite control the minds of the people, e.g. which wallet software the spenders choose, etc.. You'll never create a protocol that is immune to political economics. Not even the base protocols of the Internet are immune. But yeah, I'd attempt to give us the best that can be achieved in terms of decentralization. I am just being honest. I don't want to fool people with ideological bullshit.
I was thinking earlier about the legal system vs crypto. Does anyone think user defined mixing will be a weakpoint of Monero in the legal department? As in, a fixed mixed count would have been preferable if attempting to design around the law when user defined is pretty similar to active mixing. It seems kind of obvious that governments would be far more likely to consider active mixing as an act of laundering (darkcoin), while if anonymity is part of the protocol itself, it's just a shortcoming of government auditing. Both Monero and Zcash are safer legal-wise (than Darkcoin), although you would likely have to enforce a fixed mix count instead of variable if you really wanted to be safe in Monero.
I believe perhaps the global elite will kill off any system which doesn't mandate a viewkey on each mixed transaction, wherein some elected foundation or body is given responsibility for whom has the private key(s) to the viewkey. Better perhaps a multisig viewkey would be best where these would be given to multiple authorities (e.g. each of the major powers or regions national security agencies), and then a quorum of them would have to agree in order to view a transaction. Thus I think the level of mixing (above 0) is irrelevant. I just don't believe you snub the global elite and expect to not get your ass wiped in the mud. I had hoped for an absolute technological immunity, but I studied all the technology deeply and I am very, very confident to tell you that it is impossible. The global elite will remain in control of the Iron Law of Political Economics. Mass privacy is very important and Monero should stop being delusional and realize how they have to structure their system in order to be accepted. I guess they might just attack the users and catch them at the on/off ramps and destroy interest in coins that obscure the blockchain from the authorities.
How can a user living in a country where use of cryptocurrencies are unregulated be controlled?
There will exist no such place. Name one. Just one. Moreover, the protocol is controlled by the Chinese mining cartel, so all the regulation can be done from China. Your coins can be confiscated China regulates their ASIC mining farms. If Monero scales up, it will also be captured by the Chinese cartel. With the rise of decentralized exchanges, controlling all on and off ramps seems impossible. Some countries may choose to be welcoming instead of hostile.
The Internet will be regulated. China is the model. They will assume the throne of the financial capital of the world in 2033. You can waste your time disbelieving (and end up in jail and/or all you wealth confiscated). Meanwhile I will get my ducks aligned so I am congruent with the reality. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Once a transaction has 6 confirmations, it is extremely unlikely that an attacker without at least 50% of the network's computation power would be able to reverse it.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 18, 2016, 09:55:13 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pruden
|
|
May 18, 2016, 10:42:09 AM |
|
He was not careful w.r.t. running arguably afoul of laws preventing the use the word "dollar" in ways that might offend the US Treasury. This is one of the reasons I created the following linked thread to make sure I understood well the laws that might govern the creation of an altcoin: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0Have you read the article? Are you sure you are not talking about "Liberty Dollar"? I agree with what you say, in that von NotHaus was risking a lot by making the currency similar, but the Liberty Reserve is a completely different case (von NotHaus was sentenced, but not to 20 years, ffs). |
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 19, 2016, 12:47:50 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
minor-transgression
|
|
May 28, 2016, 09:03:58 PM |
|
If Only ... http://anonhq.com/media-will-not-report-anonymous-shuts-new-york-stock-exchange-fed-reserve-world-bank-vatican/also this ... https://www.wired.com/2016/05/map-tracks-governments-hack-activists-reporters/"An informal group of security researchers calling themselves the Digital Freedom Alliance this week launched a collaborative software project to <a href=" https://digitalfreedom.io/map/" target="_blank">aggregate and map out/a> government hackers' attacks against journalists, activists, lawyers and NGOs around the world. The project, whose <a href=" https://github.com/digitalfreedom/data-targetedthreats/blob/master/targetedthreats.csv" target="_blank">code is hosted on Github</a>, collects data about state-sponsored malware infections from public sources like the University of Toronto's <a href=" https://citizenlab.org/">Citizen Lab</a>, <a href=" https://targetedthreats.net/">TargetedThreats.net</a>, and security firms' research. It then organizes that data into a map that breaks down the attacks by date, target type, the family of malware used, as well as the location of the command and control server used to coordinate each malware campaign. "I was tired of the Hacking Team-types claiming that there are no solid evidences of abuses, when there are plenty," says Guarnieri. "You get most of them plotted in that map."" |
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 29, 2016, 07:00:37 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1841
|
|
May 29, 2016, 04:05:38 PM |
|
That's rather scary for the Yopeens (that's genuine Ebonics for Europeans in Philadelphia dialect), that will make it harder for anyone to free themselves from a BIG European Superstate. Perhaps a whole lot of people will take careful note if there is a Brexit. Were I British (nor do I know all the facts), I would vote "AMF" (Adios Mothaf***ers). If the UK leaves, others will take note and likely become more interested in not having BRUSSELS always telling them what to do, what taxes to pay, etc. In the USA, we all have a number (Social Security number, which originally meant NOT to be an ID number..., sure, sure), but I would *guess* that Brussels will keep growing their tendency to becoming a powerful & scary centralized Superstate. That does seem to be a pattern seen in places sympathetic to Socialism. sockpuppet1 ought to toss in some comments now...  * * * Yet Yurp keeps letting in Muslim rapefugees. WHAT is going on inside their little old brains...? |
|
|
|
|
|
minor-transgression
|
|
May 29, 2016, 09:38:07 PM |
|
I got into a conversation during the week with one on the brightest minds in the UK: 1st Class Honours; highly placed in a national business exam; the sort of person you expect to rise to the top. Here's the strange thing - why wouldn't this person seek promotion up the management structure? Holding back because of tax or student loans? So I had a look at their Student Loans ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36388011) and take-home-pay. Very rough summary: just below £42000 marginal nett income is (100-20-12-9)% and above £42000 it is (100-40-2-9)% that is (Pay -tax -NI -Student Loan.) The figures vary, depending, but you get the picture. I can't be certain, but if things fell badly the marginal rate of deductions might rise as high as 61% for a narrow range of annual pay, not including deductions for pension etc. It looks like the addition of student debt is just enough to move most graduate jobs onto the wrong part of the Laffer curve. The trade off in stress, social life, vs financial rewards isn't worth it. Which is why, I'd guess, that employers are complaining about skill shortages. So, they either relax, enjoy life in an undemanding job, or leave for the USA, and work 100 hours a week for a salary well into six figures. Some choose one life, some another. In the bigger picture, human resources, skills, and knowledge are what gives nations compeditive advantages in the knowledge economy, so this is not going to end well for the UK. How to fix it? I have no idea. BTW, ask MA this question: Why blame Socialism when Incompetence explains so much? |
|
|
|
|
trollercoaster
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 29, 2016, 10:01:44 PM |
|
Incompetence, ignorance and socialism all go hand in hand  |
|
|
|
|
AndySt
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1012
|
|
May 29, 2016, 11:33:31 PM |
|
Incompetence, ignorance and socialism all go hand in hand This and capitalism is full given its prevalence on the globe  Though of course too large a state presence in the economy and politics is not good. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 01, 2016, 02:55:47 AM
Last edit: June 01, 2016, 09:35:57 AM by iamnotback |
|
sockpuppet1 ought to toss in some comments now... The government is dancing between the raindrops. The 5th Amendment states that you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself. You have the right to remain silent. So how do they get around this? Even worse is what courts have done with this regarding telephones. If you use a fingerprint scanner as a security feature on your computer or cell phone, they can trace it and throw you in prison until you do as the court demands because they regard any biological evidence as an exception. In other words, you are not being forced to testify against yourself. They are taking bodily evidence to find you guilty. Courts can and do order people to unlock their phones with their fingerprint. Providing a password is different from providing a fingerprint. So you might want to forget biotechnology for security. The legal implications are far different from a password.Google’s plan to eliminate passwords in favor of systems that take into account a combination of signals – like your typing patterns, your walking patterns, your current location, and more – will be available to Android developers by year-end, assuming all goes well in testing this year. In an under-the-radar announcement Friday afternoon at the Google I/O developer conference
...
With Project Abacus, users would instead unlock devices or sign into applications based on a cumulative “Trust Score.” This score would be calculated using a variety of factors, including your typing patterns, current location, speed and voice patterns, facial recognition, and other things.
Google has already implemented similar technology on Android devices (running Android 5.0 and higher) called “Smart Lock,” which lets you automatically unlock your device when you’re in a trusted location, have a trusted Bluetooth device connected, when you’re carrying your device, or when the device recognizes your face.
Project Abacus is a bit different. It runs in the background on your device to continually collect data about you to form its Trust Score.
This score is basically about how confident it is that you are who you say you are. If your score isn’t high enough, apps could revert back to asking for passwords.
And the facial recognition is becoming much more accurate:http://www.nestmann.com/orwell-could-never-have-predicted-thisEdit: I will propose a better technical solution in which we don't need to rely on Google to snoop on all our activity in order to build a trust profile.
We should use a 4 - 5 digit passcode to unlock our screen. The mobile phone can store this passcode one-way encrypted. So this means the authorities or even a hacker will be able to unlock our phone with sufficient computer power to break the one way encryption (perhaps at most a few weeks of computing time, but probably much less). But the average person who grabs your phone, won't be able to unlock it:Hacker potential: Complex generation of a 4-digit PIN for Trezor described above is enhanced in the event of unsolicited attempts to discover it. With each incorrect attempt, the waiting time to try again increases by a factor of 2. With 6561 possible combinations, discovery of the PIN is unlikely. Trezor’s website contains a large amount of information on a range of possible attack situations. The full list is available here.
So then all you need to remember are two 4 or 5 digit passcodes. And you back up your 24 word private key using a metal wallet that you store in a safe, so even if you lose your smartcard, then you can recover everything by buying a new smartcard:https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/cryptosteel-the-ultimate-cold-storage-walletIf you are concerned about your metal wallet being stolen, then use multi-signatures and store metal wallet backups of the private key at more than one secure location.
Some more useful links:http://cointelegraph.com/news/who-will-keep-you-safe-a-comparison-of-bitcoin-wallets-that-arent-digitalhttps://choosecase.com/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 02, 2016, 06:46:04 PM
Last edit: June 02, 2016, 07:57:49 PM by iamnotback |
|
People using Bitcoin to move funds around thinking that if they've used a mixer then they are anonymous. They will be sad to later find out that all those mixers were compromised by meta data and/or infiltration. Bitcoin is a trap laid to entrap those who are easily duped on the technological capabilities. The only known technology that might be anonymous is Monero, but there are several problems to avoid: a) Monero allows overlapping rings, so via combinatorial analysis, your anonymity might be unmasked, especially if the rings were Sybil attacked, and b) your IP address was traceable across mixes. The mitigating actions are to mix Monero numerous times (other mixers can be infiltrated so don't use them!), and to not rely on I2P nor Tor, instead use an entirely virgin device that you never use for non-anonymous Internet activity and connect over an unregistered WiFi connection and far from your normal place of residence or work. And don't bring your smart phone nor GPS tracked vehicle with you while accessing the remote unregistered WiFi hotspot. https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/g20-blames-your-psychological-problems-for-their-failure/ “The G20 reiterates the high priority it attaches to financial transparency and effective implementation of the standards on transparency by all, in particular with regard to the beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements. Improving the transparency of the beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements is vital to protect the integrity of the international financial system, and to prevent misuse of these entities and arrangements for corruption, tax evasion, terrorist financing and money laundering. The G20 reiterates that it is essential that all countries and jurisdictions fully implement the FATF standards on transparency and beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements and we express our determination to lead by example in this regard. We particularly stress the importance of countries and jurisdictions improving the availability of beneficial ownership information to, and its international exchange between, competent authorities for the purposes of tackling tax evasion, terrorist financing and money laundering. We ask the FATF and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals by our October meeting on ways to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange.” |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 08, 2016, 04:16:12 AM |
|
The statement bitcoin is destroyed is not at all true and not gonna come true in the future. Most could have known in this seven years time how many interruptions were faced to reach this growth. So if its a failed one already it could have happened.
That is what they all thought at the peak in 1929. It is not dumb that n00bs don't know the technology and game theory economics. What is dumb is when n00bs (such as the Bitcoin maximalist comments in this thread) think they know something about an issue that is far too complex for them to be comprehend without deep research that they are unwilling or incapable of doing. This is known as the Dunning-Kruger effect. So many dumb comments in this thread by Bitcoin maximalists who will invent any excuse possible to remain in denial of the fact that highly centralized systems fall into the abyss of turf battles morass and BitCON is becoming the TrojanHorse coin with centralized mining control enabling the coming capital controls and expropriation of wealth by the G20: LN ... doesn't scale well decentralized (but we may eventually get there with Bitcoin highly centralized, although being that this is fighting for who will control it, it will not come without battles as we've seen with Bitcoin Classic and XT versus Blockstream and the Chinese mining cartel): Now all we have to do is wait countless months for segwit which no doubt'll be batted around by the various parties too. Whoopee.
... The mass use case of Bitcoin is very weak because the technology doesn't scale decentralized and decentralization and permissionless qualities were the original reason to want CC instead of digital fiat, and Bitcoin is a very tiny, miniscule market right now. The less decentralized Bitcoin is, the slower its network effects will grow. Because turf battles turn it into a morass. YouI don't understand how Lightning protocol works to claim it's decentralized.
ftfy Thanks for your feedback. Hope you don't get offended if I correct your misunderstanding. LN requires orders-of-magnitude more block chain transaction bandwidth for peak garbage collection phases, than it consumes normally. Thus you need Bitcoin to scale massively before LN can scale massively. Bitcoin can't scale without being centralized for validation and mining. That is fact well known to experts such as myself. Many people may deny it and I have no desire to argue with them. LN also requires a few numbers of centralized servers cooperating for it to function reasonably well: It uses a decentralised method of routing by everyone knowing the topology. In the future we will implement RP routing, which dramatically decreases the requirement to know the full topology of the network down to only the 24/7 online nodes.
...
Yes correct. In my simulations routing with ten thousands of nodes was carried out in <1s.
That works fine with RP-Routing, because then you exclude all active participants from the routing problem and only concentrate on the passive nodes. I agree that if you take into account millions of wallets, it does get much more difficult.
LN can't send a payment from Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address. It requires users establish accounts in the LN before they can be eligible, i.e. it is an opt-in system and it is not persistent. LN is an incredibly complex Rube Goldberg kludge patched on top of an inadequate block chain design and there IS a better solution coming. You have to discard the Bitcoin block chain and Satoshi's design and start over. In general, Bitcoin is moving towards centralization over the control of which nodes validate and thus which can do capital controls and KYC enforcement on transactions: https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2016/01/08/spv-mining-is-the-solution-not-the-problem/http://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/1txn/ |
|
|
|
|
OROBTC (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1841
|
|
June 08, 2016, 04:38:24 AM |
|
...
I'll just chip in an observation I have come to based on my own life experiences:
Trying to predict the future is hard enough, trying to predict what changes there will be in technology (almost any technology) beyond, say, two years is nigh impossible.
While Bitcoin seems very strong to most, a lot can happen that cannot be anticipated ("Black Swans"). That is why I do not recommend BTC holdings over 1% unless you are very committed to it and don't mind the (high) risks. It is an interesting technology though, and I obviously wish it well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 08, 2016, 08:58:00 AM |
|
I have a hard time choking back the assertion Bitcoin was designed to fail at a certain point.
I just can't wrap my head around that concept..
Define "fail"? If you define fail as the coin stops functioning or double-spending is so pervasive via 51% attack that no one will accept it, then I agree it is a ludicrous proposition that isn't very likely to happen. Rather the designed failure of Bitcoin is to become centralized so that the elite are able to control who can transact (which is another symptom of a 51% attack) so they can implement capital controls, expropriation, and taxation, while also tracking every transaction we make so we are 666 slaves. Bitcoin is not failing but it is failing to scale to mass adoption, and BitCON (the Trojan Horse) is failing in that it will be more oppressive+totalitarian than cash and fiat were. Why do you people have such a difficult time to understand this distinction, even I have repeated it so many times. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 08, 2016, 11:56:53 AM |
|
Re: Will Bitcoin be replaced by another cryptocurrency?
Does it make sense to believe that Bitcoin could one day be replaced by another cryptocurrency, that is, a cryptocurrency that really does make Bitcoin obsolete?
If we don't stop this BitCON Trojan Horse, the freedom of mankind will decline in a 666 system of digital tracking and centralized, top-down control much worse then we had with fiat cash. We damn well better accomplish it. This comment: It is not dumb that n00bs don't know the technology and game theory economics. What is dumb is when n00bs (such as the Bitcoin maximalist comments in this thread) think they know something about an issue that is far too complex for them to be comprehend without deep research that they are unwilling or incapable of doing. This is known as the Dunning-Kruger effect.
So many dumb comments in this thread by Bitcoin maximalists who will invent any excuse possible to remain in denial of the fact that
...
Applies to the following incorrect post: Bitcoin is flawed, but these flaws can be fixed. Bitcoin is already a big step ahead of fiat currencies.
The flaws can't be fixed both for technical reasons and also because of vested inertial resistance. And BitCON will become 666 more oppressive+totalitarian than the fiat cash we had before it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1465136.msg15124687#msg15124687https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1502163.msg15126064#msg15126064You are supporting the destruction of the freedom of mankind. Thank you for your unwavering, radicalised dedication to your geek-cool enslavement system ideals. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 10, 2016, 12:29:37 AM |
|
As AnonyMint predicted back in 2013... The centralized Bitcoin won't be 51% attacked bcz those controlling it will have the 666 control system they designed Bitcoin to accomplish. In the transitionary phase now, the Chinese miners will be handed lots of wealth as the process of centralizing mining proceeds. We can't say every Chinese miner today knows he is part of the ultimate plan. We can't even say the Blockstream devs know they are part of some diabolical plan. They are just trying to fix a design that can't be fixed without restarting from scratch. Compartmentalization is the modus operandi of the DEEP STATE. This is a process. The DEEP STATE that designed Bitcoin has a plan over years.
Our other hope is the system blows up technically. But that is why Blockstream is receiving so much funding, because they probably have the expertise to centralize Bitcoin sufficiently whil still being able to give some illusion of decentralization for sufficient time that Bitcoin maximalists fall into the trap, of which SegWit is a major step in that direction.
https://bitconnect.co/bitcoin-news/126/what-is-gavin-andresen-telling-china-chinese-ama-details-revealedThe one-time anointed king of Bitcoin by Satoshi Nakamoto himself ... When asked about his association with Blockstream, who some see as a force looking to centralize Bitcoin, he did not seem to be in alignment with their agenda... In regards to the centralization of Bitcoin, he now works for the Media Lab at MIT, who has just come out with a controversial concept known as ChainAnchor... ChainAnchor would coerce miners to not allow transactions that do not have the identities of the users of Bitcoins tied to their transactions and wallets, defeating the peer-to-peer, identity-protecting foundation of Bitcoin itself. Andresen also is a paid technical advisor to leading Bitcoin companies like Coinbase, BitPay, and Xapo. His commentary on the upcoming Lightning Network concept was less than glowing... |
|
|
|
|
|
n3o111
|
|
June 10, 2016, 04:36:47 PM |
|
Where did you get that picture of my family? Calling them nutcases, you have the nerve...
My family is much better prepared than I am, as you can see. Alas, in my case, my guns (ammo too) were lost in a boating accident, why a year ago IIRC. Rather than get the police all riled up about guns out there at the bottom of the sea, I thought I would just let them corrode away. Most unfortunate.
Oh, I lost all my precious metals on the same boat-ride. And everyone told me that it was so much better to take all that stuff with me rather than leave it all behind in some dark place at home. How naive. Now I have to start over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
June 11, 2016, 06:05:21 AM
Last edit: June 11, 2016, 06:26:59 AM by iamnotback |
|
kiklo,
Although I plan on adding a form of anonymity (a new design I discovered a few weeks ago) which I think is more realistic (scalable and doesn't need Tor/I2P) than Zcash, Monero, and Dash, I don't view that as the main feature necessary to overcome the 666 problem in front of us. Nor is anonymity for the mass adoption. Anonymity is going to be there for when you need privacy. If the NSA wants to track what you are doing, it will be almost impossible for you to obscure all the metadata with any anonymity design. The most determined can probably be anonymous to the NSA, but not the masses. For the masses, they just need privacy from hackers.
Per the 2014 quote of AnonyMint in my prior post, I believe the way to overcome is to enable zillions of instant microtransactions and to make the block chain not trend towards centralization (all the block chain designs so far do trend to centralization). In this way, the people will do so many minute transactions and it will be done in a decentralized context, so there is no way to really control it.
The scaling required can't be done with any design that has been promulgated so far that I have seen.
Make it uber popular, decentralized, and make the transaction size so small that it would cost the government orders-of-magnitude more to document every transaction than they could steal with taxes. Given decentralized nodes for consensus, the government can't really regulate the nodes, they must regulate the users.
Take away the honeypot of profit, then the crocodiles go some where else. Let them have their expropriation with Bitcoin and fiat. We go bifurcate the economy.
This has been AnonyMint's plan since 2014 when he first discussed with CoinCube bifurcation of the economy as the debt laden old world Industrial Age collapses, and we usher in a new Knowledge Age.
Finally now all the technology necessary has come into clear view. And AnonyMint is healthy enough to code.
Yeah Litecoin+Coinbase may have a role to play in that old world fiat collapse clusterfuck.
P.S. For those who believe in the Biblical, I think it says the 666 is a mark and implant into our bodies. I believe this may support the notion that the overlords won't succeed by regulating only the nodes, and they will have to regulate each and every human. So maybe it is not yet time for the overlords to win. Maybe we the people do win this time.
It won't be long before they can take your phone from you during a traffic stop and see if you have a Bitcoin wallet on your phone. If you do they will then confiscate your phone and you will have to prove your Bitcoins are innocent (and your phone is innocent) before they will consider giving your phone and Bitcoin wallet back to you.
This is why we will keep only an operating balance in a phone wallet. The main balance will be a colder storage at home in a vault, or in safety deposit box. You will periodically move funds between your hot mobile wallet and your cold storage. Btw, it really sucks what happened to you. Charge it to experience! |
|
|
|
|
|
