I buy freshly mined BTC for 8% premium

[virginorange]

Hello

I offer premium over market price for BTC with good history.

I'm especially interested in freshly mined virgin BTC. (market price +8%)

However I would also buy Bitcion somebody else bought on a regulated exchange (market price +2-3%).

[1714257096]

1714257096

[1714257096]

1714257096

[virginorange]

Hello

Since trust building will take some time, I'm looking for a long term relationship.
I would like to shift some of my stock portfolio into BTC.
Since I think regulation will become stricter, I want to buy BTC with a "clean" history.

Why I don't just buy BTC on a centralized exchange?
Sometimes centralized databases gets hacked. I don't want my name address leaked to the public.

Why I don't use other peer to peer platforms?
I used Localcryptos once and Bisq very often. Bisq has a safety deposit for buyer rand seller. This weeds out scammers and saves you time weeding out scammers.
However on Bisq you can't see which kind of BTC you will buy. You can just buy from everybody once, check the history and then buy repeatedly coins form sellers offering good history.
Even if you go through all this effort the mulit-signature-wallets for trading in Bisq leave distinct traces on the blockchain tainting your Bitcoin (search for: chainalysis-kyt).
I even got freshly mined Bitcoin on Bisq (for 2% premium). However buying those BTC alters their history (Blockreward + P2P Trading).

I'm not here to discuss frangibility of Bitcoin. If you are a miner and think Bitcion is fungible, just be happy to sell them to me for a premium.

I would also swap freshly mined BTC for more regular BTC: You pay me 1 virgin BTC, I pay you 1.03 regular BTC. (obviously in smaller steps to build up trust first).

[alterra57]

Payment method?

[DynastyCrypto]

Hi, I could likely accommodate both selling bitcoin to you (this is what my business is registered to do) and/or also swapping BTC for freshly minted coins. I don't mine through the business but I have contacts that could fulfil this need.

Please give me a call or WhatsApp - +447494 032839. Ryan

[LoyceV]

I'm not here to discuss frangibility of Bitcoin. If you are a miner and think Bitcion is fungible, just be happy to sell them to me for a premium.

Bitcoin is fungible, just like fiat money. But if you give a bank robber $90k for his stolen $100k, you become an accessory.

(obviously in smaller steps to build up trust first).

This sounds like an exit scam waiting to happen.

[virginorange]

Payment method?

Currently I can do EUR SEPA and Revolut, which are the most frequent payment methods for Peer to peer trading on Bisq.

Since Revolut is real time and has no fees, I think Revolut would be best.

Any better idea?

[virginorange]

Bitcoin is fungible, just like fiat money.

I found some hold the opinion that Bitcion is not fungible (source: https://sethforprivacy.com/posts/fungibility-graveyard/)
Centralized services discriminate by source of Bitcion (source: https://blockfi.com/prohibited-uses)
They base their discrimination on Chainanalyiss (source: https://www.chainalysis.com/chainalysis-kyt/)
Government also discriminates (source: https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm556, https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/02/16/canada-sanctions-34-crypto-wallets-tied-to-trucker-freedom-convoy/)
And punishes you (source: https://complyadvantage.com/insights/what-are-sanctions/consequences-ofac-sanctions-violations/)

Bitcioners say Bitcion is fungible, but government can punish you for using the wrong kind of BTC.

Lets say my mum bakes 2 cakes (same size & same taste). They are fungible.
1 cake = 1 cake
Now person with gun says: "If you eat the left cake, I will shoot you. If you eat the right cake, you can live".
Now both cakes stopped being fungible, since you value your life.
(1 cake + dying) is less valuable than (1 cake + living).

Other example: Equal land also has different value created by zoning laws.

But if you give a bank robber $90k for his stolen $100k, you become an accessory.

In my previous peer to peer trading on Bisq I paid between 100% and 105% in fiat for every 100% in Bitcion, so a bad source is not obvious from the price.
In my Peer to peer trading I can't see the origin of the coins before I buy. Even after buying the origin is not fully clear to me, but in 70% of trades I can now make pretty educated guesses about the source.
Bad source tends to be cheaper 100%-103%, while good source tends to be around 102%-105%.

This sounds like an exit scam waiting to happen.

Thanks for the warning. I am aware that my way is risky as well as more time consuming. Bisq solves the trust issue with a deposit. I was never cheated on Bisq.

[virginorange]

Hi, I could likely accommodate both selling bitcoin to you (this is what my business is registered to do) and/or also swapping BTC for freshly minted coins. I don't mine through the business but I have contacts that could fulfil this need.

Please give me a call or WhatsApp - +447494 032839. Ryan

Hello Ryan,

I'm interested in peer to peer trading with you. Could you give me your email address to discuss further details?

I tried to DM you, but got "User 'DynastyCrypto' has not chosen to allow messages from newbies. You should post in their relevant thread to remind them to enable this setting." as a reply.

[virginorange]

It is pretty common to find sellers, who sell Bitcoin without KYC from a regulated exchange.

However Bitcoin from directly from a miner are more difficult to get.

[DireWolfM14]

Just out of curiosity, when you go to a bank to withdraw cash do you ask for freshly printed bills directly from the mint?

If yes, how often are you laughed at?  If no, aren't you concerned that the bill you receive may have been stuffed into a strippers skivvies?  What if that money was deposited into said bank by a drug dealer or a doctor who overprescribes narcotic pain killers?  What if those funds were donated to a politician who's views you don't share?  Would you still accept them?

It's ideas like yours (and those reprehensible links you shared) that hurt bitcoin's fungibility and keep people afraid of using it.  This plays right into the hands of draconian government overreach which relies on financial control to keep people enslaved.

[virginorange]

Just out of curiosity, when you go to a bank to withdraw cash do you ask for freshly printed bills directly from the mint?

If yes, how often are you laughed at?  If no, aren't you concerned that the bill you receive may have been stuffed into a strippers skivvies?  What if that money was deposited into said bank by a drug dealer or a doctor who overprescribes narcotic pain killers?  What if those funds were donated to a politician who's views you don't share?  Would you still accept them?

My desire:
I prefer fungibility as a user, since it makes the use easy.
➤ If I was god or at least government, I would declare discrimination of Bitcoin illegal or at least not punish depending on Bitcoin history.

The ruler enforces fungibility of cash, because it benefits them, but the ruler interferes with fungibility, if it benefits them:
❶ Similar land can have different values depending on zoning laws.
❷ Similar houses can have different prices if one was build with building permit and one was build without building permit.
❸ Similar people can have different right according to the demographic group they belong to.
➤ Do I like zoning laws? Do I like discrimination of humans? No. But I don't have the guns so I don't make the rules.

In many cases it is possible to interfere with fungibility, if it benefits the people in power.

So is it beneficial for the rulers to attack fungibiltiy of Bitcoin or not?
Probably yes. And they are already interfering with the frangibility, by linking prison sentences to addresses.

It's ideas like yours (and those reprehensible links you shared) that hurt bitcoin's fungibility and keep people afraid of using it.  This plays right into the hands of draconian government overreach which relies on financial control to keep people enslaved.

I dislike tyranny, but closing your eyes only solves some problems, but not others.

Many people already recognised the fungibility issue in Bitcoin.
❶ Some use conjoins to try to solve this.
❷ Some switch to Monero.
❸ Some buy virgin Bitcoin.
➤ The solution is to enable fungibility on the Blockchain layer not pretending this attack vector does not exist.

It is like keeping the gate open when the enemy attacks.
I will say: "Hey, the gate is open. Best to close our gate. But if we can't manage to close our gate I will hide in the basement."
You say: "Quiet, you only destroy confidence in our caste."

We don't have a confidence problem, we have an open gate problem.

The fungibility issue of Bitcoin is not a issue solved at the marketing level or the social shaming level. It is solved on a software engineering level and on the level of Bitcoiner group coordination.

Shaming people to talk about the lack for fungibility, interferes with recognition of the problem, interferes with the group coordination in the Bitcoin community to improve fungibility and delays our response to close the gate, while already being under attack.

I can respect solution ❶ and ❷
I can understand solution ❸
❶ Coinjoins
❷ Monero
❸ virgin Bitcoin
But trying to solve an engineering problem on the marketing level is harmful in my opinion.

[LoyceV]

I prefer fungibility as a user

Then act like it, instead of pretending Bitcoin isn't fungible.

The ruler enforces fungibility of cash, because it benefits them, but the ruler interferes with fungibility, if it benefits them:
❶ Similar land can have different values depending on zoning laws.
❷ Similar houses can have different prices if one was build with building permit and one was build without building permit.

That's not what fungibility means. I read this example: if someone borrows your car, you want the same car back. Cars aren't fungible. Just like houses and land.
But if someone borrows $20, you don't expect to get the same banknote back. Just like when someone borrows Bitcoin. Money is fungible, houses are not.

[virginorange]

That's not what fungibility means. I read this example: if someone borrows your car, you want the same car back. Cars aren't fungible. Just like houses and land.
But if someone borrows $20, you don't expect to get the same banknote back. Just like when someone borrows Bitcoin. Money is fungible, houses are not.

Used cars are not fungible by nature, they differ in too many important attributes.

Land (similar location, similar soil quality) is fungible by nature, but violence breaks its fungibility.
Without government land with the same quality and a similar location would be fungible.

Turning land allowed for growing trees into land allowing for growing crops increases its value 5x.
Allowing houses to be build on the same land increases its value 100x. It is the same land in the same location.

So why does the land become more valuable, if the government allows you to build a house? It is not because of the soil quality. It is, because if you build a house without building permit the government will destroy your house and fine you.

Even the same chemical molecule can by (i) a licensed medication or (ii) a street drug. It has the same properties in terms of biology and in terms of chemistry. But it has still different prices and different legal standing.

Being very similar by nature is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for fungibility.

Who would buy Bitcoin for 5% discount from a OFAC-sanctioned Bitcoin address and risk 30 years of prison? I wouldn't. I guess most wouldn't.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm556
I see the slippery slope, today Iran, tomorrow Russia, day after tomorrow the unvaccinated are blocked form using Bitcoin. But do I have the power to change it?

Still maybe better to stop this topic, before I get banned. I do some contributions in the German subforum outside of the fungibility discussion and I value the high quality feedback on the forum.

[LoyceV]

Still maybe better to stop this topic, before I get banned.

I see no reason for that, it's not against the forum rules (see Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ). And there's this:

the forum's mission to be as free as possible

[DireWolfM14]

If I was god or at least government, I would declare discrimination of Bitcoin illegal or at least not punish depending on Bitcoin history.

Then why feed into it?  No one is forcing you to seek out "freshly mined" bitcoin, you're choosing to do that on your own.  No one is forcing you trade on centralized exchanges, again, that's your choice.  There are plenty of alternatives, as you've mentioned.  And since you brought up P2P exchanges, the odds of obtaining a significant amount of ill begotten funds on those platforms is slim to none.

You've allowed yourself to become afraid of "some bitcoin," again choosing to listen to those who would rather keep you afraid so you remain under their control.  If a taco vendor accepts a marked $100 bill from a bank robber, that doesn't make the taco vendor responsible or accountable for robbing the bank.  He accepted a perfectly fungible commodity (the $100 bill) in exchange for goods and services.

And your argument about land makes me think you don't understand fungibility.  Like the example you provided about a used car, land is also diverse in ways that two identically sized and adjacent pieces of land can have significant natural differences that cause their value to be different.  Those differences could create a subjective difference in value, for example; if one parcel floods every year, while the neighboring parcel doesn't that could make one more desirable to a rice farmer, while the other more desirable to a shepherd.  Therefor the value of the parcels is dependent on the individual.  That's exactly the definition of something that is not fungible, and it has nothing to do with government designations or limitations.

I dislike tyranny, but closing your eyes only solves some problems, but not others

I dislike tyranny also, and there's no "but anything."  What better way to fight tyranny than by taking away the tyrant's power?  Tyrants fear bitcoin because it can do just that, if we let it.

The fungibility issue of Bitcoin is not a issue solved at the marketing level or the social shaming level. It is solved on a software engineering level and on the level of Bitcoiner group coordination.

I apologize if you think I'm trying to shame you, my goal is to educate you.  But again, this statement causes me to think that you don't understand fungibility.  The fungibility of bitcoin is not in question, the software has indeed been engineered to provide fungibility, and it's quantifiable.  The only thing that can hurt bitcoin's fungibility is our own capitulation to government attempts to "taint" some bitcoin.

Governments power is provided by the people, not the other way around.  We obligate governmental laws that help to keep us safe, so those who commit crimes are punished, or otherwise deterred.  The use of bitcoin (any bitcoin,) in and of itself is not a crime.  The abuse of power, however is criminal, and should be treated as such.