Bitcoin and Crypto Thread

FUD. Has there ever been a case where a government or corporation stole a normie's BTC by installing a secret key-logger? Not that I can recall. Is it theoretically possible? Probably, but I've never heard of this happening.
I do think with AI being built in to things like MacBooks, someone could possibly write code to look for windows containing 12 or 24-word phrases.

Did you take a screenshot to print your phrase to put into a safe for long-term storage? Well, a bad actor could scan the tmp file on your system to OCR your screenshot.

Gotta be really careful.
 
I do think with AI being built in to things like MacBooks, someone could possibly write code to look for windows containing 12 or 24-word phrases.

Did you take a screenshot to print your phrase to put into a safe for long-term storage? Well, a bad actor could scan the tmp file on your system to OCR your screenshot.

Gotta be really careful.
Seed and private keys never touch a device that will ever be online, or networked with a device online. Your computer, phone, and printer should never see your keys. They should be generated offline and stored offline (unless its a hot wallet or for lightning)
 
Seed and private keys never touch a device that will ever be online, or networked with a device online. Your computer, phone, and printer should never see your keys. They should be generated offline and stored offline (unless its a hot wallet or for lightning)
What he says at 9:30 minutes is just made up, yes. Weird.
 
"Bitcoin is useless..." "Nobody actually uses Bitcoin..."

I just donated 0.00010337 BTC to christisking.cc to help defray site hosting expenses -- yay me!

 
What he says at 9:30 minutes is just made up, yes. Weird.
It's just "made up" that bitcoin exists online and that everything that happens online is being recorded? It's just magical thinking to believe that you can access "your" BTC via a computer/device yet no one else can.
 
It's just "made up" that bitcoin exists online and that everything that happens online is being recorded?
That's not what he said. He said that air gaps don't actually exist as a real thing, or a security measure. That's the entire point of cold wallets.

I'm open to any criticism or point that's actually supported by evidence or data. If we have all this "fake internet money" (and by the way it is the money of the internet, another reason why it's hard for a lot of people to understand) and you can actually trade it for fiat = NOT FAKE, why haven't all sorts of people had their "fake" money stolen??? That seems like someone would want to do if it were so easy, or so accessible for Dick Dastardly hacker out there.
 

Is anybody here familiar with Ledn? They allow you to borrow or ledn BTC, ETH, USDC, and USDT. Currently they offer 2.25% APY on lending your bitcoin if you ledn more than 2 BTC. Anyone here have any ideas about how safe it actually is? The website does make it clear that credit risk is involved. It seems risky because its centralized.
 
... why haven't all sorts of people had their "fake" money stolen??? That seems like someone would want to do if it were so easy, or so accessible for Dick Dastardly hacker out there...
Because...
... the illusion that "BTC can't be confiscated" is the perfect cover for actually confiscating it...
... A giant thieving or "disappearing" (or devaluing) of BTC hasn't happened yet because either it isn't time for that JQ-Lucy pull the football away maneuvre yet or the tech isn't there yet. But you better believe that Dick Dastardly types of (((people))) are working day and night on ways to get to people's BTC. Grandma is just one Nigerian Prince away from losing it all.

It hasn't happened yet but it will. You're a smart guy, and if you really think about computers and the internet you will understand that all of it is hackable and none of it is "safe."
 

Is anybody here familiar with Ledn? They allow you to borrow or ledn BTC, ETH, USDC, and USDT. Currently they offer 2.25% APY on lending your bitcoin if you ledn more than 2 BTC. Anyone here have any ideas about how safe it actually is? The website does make it clear that credit risk is involved. It seems risky because its centralized.
As far as I know they have a good, unblemished reputation. That said, I would not lend my bitcoin for a paltry 2℅ interest. That's not a fair compensation for the risk IMHO. Its appreciating 60%/yr with no risk at all, why go from zero risk to some risk for a small return?

Borrowing is better, because there is still no risk, and also no tax. As bitcoin appreciates just keep borrowing more, never pay taxes on it - buy/borrow/die.

Lending is profitable if you get the money for free - a bad idea if you have to earn it.
 
With the talk of a U.S. government reserve of "digital assets" (read: not Bitcoin) it will be interesting to see if the government moves to issue its own USD stablecoins, with the dual purpose of creating a demand/sink for its Treasury bonds as well as promoting the use of USD in other countries. At the very least, it would certainly seem to be a way to further kick the can down the road in terms of both exporting USD inflation and cementing the dominance of the dollar as the global reserve currency over the coming decades.
 
... A giant thieving or "disappearing" (or devaluing) of BTC hasn't happened yet because either it isn't time for that JQ-Lucy pull the football away maneuvre yet or the tech isn't there yet. But you better believe that Dick Dastardly types of (((people))) are working day and night on ways to get to people's BTC. Grandma is just one Nigerian Prince away from losing it all.
There's a whole bunch of FUD out there. What that generally does, as with your suggestion here, is just stop people from making more money in investments and otherwise. "It's gonna crash!" - Ok, Peter Schiff, what year are we on now of your missed opportunities? He's the funniest example of all, having called for crashes and not understanding BTC for 15 years. It cost him and others massive retirement money and wealth. Think of it.
 
El Salvador's Bitcoin experiment is over.

https://jpkoning.blogspot.com/2025/02/the-end-of-el-salvadors-bitcoin.html

There is a very big hurdle that has prevented El Salvador's one-two punch of subsidies and coercion from working: bitcoin is intrinsically ill-suited to perform as money.

The stuff is innately volatile, and so risk-shy individuals don't dare hold it or use it for payments. Risk-seekers can tolerate that volatility, but they expect to be rewarded by a dramatic price rise, and so they refuse to use their bitcoins for payments because they could miss out on the jump. The net result is that no one, neither society's risk-seekers nor its risk-avoiders, ends up paying with bitcoins. Only a tremendous amount of subsidies and coercion will ever overcome their natural preferences, but no sane government would ever try to bring those levels of coercion to bear. (And speeding things up with options like Lightning doesn't change this equation.)
 
For the 20th time, money and currency are different things.

You don't walk around paying for things in gold, or try to divvy up your house to pay for coffee, do you? These are old objections, I think we addressed them on page 37 or something.

Once again, until it fully matures, volatility will remain (which means greater moves up and down, of course). I've termed this nascency bias, something I also talked about at least 2 years ago, probably longer.

The more important point: since it remains, it means it still has outsized gains as part of its profile = we're still early. Yes indeed.
 
A few things to note about this. Firstly Bitcoin is still legal tender in El Salvador. Court ordered debts, taxes etc still have the option to be paid in Bitcoin. They merely tweaked it to stop merchants from being forced to accept it.

For example in Australia cash is legal tender which means any court ordered debts can be paid in cash but retailers are not obliged to accept it.

For example in Australia there are now some shops, cafes etc which only accept card payments because they do not want to deal with the costs associated with handling cash (banking, security, employee time to cash up the tills etc).

Legally speaking they are not obliged to accept cash, however the government is proposing to put in place a bill to force all retailers etc to accept cash by 2030 (it causes some old people and children problems when certain places do not accept cash).

As for the rest of the article I would speculate that usage rates of Bitcoin have been low in El Salvador because people in general there are so poor that there isn't enough capital accumulation and enough of a savings culture for a store of value like Bitcoin to gain widespread adoption. After all why would people bother using Bitcoin if they are just going to consume whatever money is received straight away? The U.S. dollar is a sufficiently stable short term store of value if you are going to spend that cash in a few days or a few weeks and most El Salvadoreans do not have long-term savings so the U.S. dollar suffices.

The other issue is financial and technological illiteracy is still very high amongst El Salvadoreans. Even in the Chivo app there was a fairly modest amount of remittances sent using U.S. dollars (more than Bitcoin but still low). So a lot of El Salvadoreans are still sending U.S. dollar remittances through services like western union which charge huge fees rather than sending U.S. dollars through the Chivo app which is much faster and cheaper.

The other problem in El Salvador is the cash economy. The idea that Bitcoin would reach the unbanked was dumb. People who are unbanked are largely operating in the illegal cash economy deliberately to avoid taxes, labour laws and other regulations. They do not want to be part of any official system whether electronic fiat or Bitcoin. El Salvador is still a mostly cash economy hence why Bitcoin usage did not take off.


If the same pro bitcoin regime adopted in El Salvador was adopted in a wealthy country adoption would be an order of magnitude higher.
 
Last edited:
For example in Australia there are now some shops, cafes etc which only accept card payments because they do not want to deal with the costs associated with handling cash (banking, security, employee time to cash up the tills etc).
You can see their argument, and I do.
Legally speaking they are not obliged to accept cash, however the government is proposing to put in place a bill to force all retailers etc to accept cash by 2030 (it causes some old people and children problems when certain places do not accept cash).
The BUT is that I believe it is immoral to have a currency and then say it's OK that a third party gets a % cut of the transaction by default or definition. It's the very reason, in fact, why bankers and usurers are hated; they find ways into transactions they have no business being in and don't work for any of that fee, which can be substantial in volume. I agree that you should require thetaking of cash for various reasons and am happy the "unbanked" or elderly are the reason why the pols are getting in line.
After all why would people bother using Bitcoin if they are just going to consume whatever money is received straight away? The U.S. dollar is a sufficiently stable short term store of value if you are going to spend that cash in a few days or a few weeks and most El Salvadoreans do not have long-term savings so the U.S. dollar suffices.
Yes, we've talked about this before as well. I find it weird that we have to keep talking about it as a savings technology, commodity, or something like gold when it's really easy to understand and no one applies the "gold isn't used" story but generally doesn't malign gold (which is not gaining value on BTC, just the opposite when you zoom out).
 
The other problem...
The other issue...
You mean there's more problems and "issues" with BTC besides it's use failed in El Salvador, nobody understands it (which means jews invented it), nobody likes it, nobody knows how to use it, 20% of it has been lost forever by guys who accidentally threw their hard drives away or lost their passkey, it takes gobs of electricity to mine and manage, it requires one to plug directly into the Big Brother Matrix to use (i.e. the internet where everything is recorded and monitored), transactions are slow and do not offer true anonymity (part of the Colonial Pipeline ransom was tracked and recovered), it is a speculative "investment" (gambling) that has no intrinsic value because it is not backed by anything, and it is time consuming and cumbersome taking up 123 pages on this forum to discuss?
If the same pro bitcoin regime adopted in El Salvador was adopted in a wealthy country adoption would be an order of magnitude higher.
Nonsense. You have no way of knowing this. Like bitcoin itself, this is pure speculation.
 
Back
Top