Side note: one of the absolute killer features of crypto currency markets is ultimately wij have an always on market. Stock markets and exchanges still operate ter the old days of the hours of the day ter the country they are based te, crypto currency is an always on market which is nice because it eliminates the after hours/before open games that go on with stocks.
week, ",sturdy", is not a word I’d use te the same sentence spil ",coinbase",.
*Te addition intermittent outages which prevented mij from accessing their webpagina, I sent some Satoshi from my tópico wallet to coinbase (Ten days ago at time of writing) te order to unload some, transaction wasgoed marked ",pending",, they’ve since sold the coins, customer support has stopped responding to my emails.
Eventuslly I wasgoed up 5000 I determined to sell 10k so I could let the surplus freeride. When I went to sell coinbase told mij they couldn’t validate my identity and wouldn’t let mij sell.
Which is ridiculous. They had no problem taking 10k from mij, but not the other way around?
At the very least they should have waterput some informatie somewhere telling mij that before I bought any.
Nothing I did worked. It just kept telling mij it couldn’t validate and to attempt again ter 24hr. I contacted support and eventually got a boiler plate email.
Eventually I opened a fresh account on another exchange, sent my eth there and sold it for btc which I sold for usd on localbtc.
Ended up a 2000 dollar loss because this entire process took like a week or so during which eth kept pulling down.
My advice to anyone using cb would be to have a regional wallet and working accounts on numerous exchanges. If I had done that I would have bot okay.
However I still think that if my identity wasgoed no adequately validated to sell, they should have told mij before I went to sell.
Four years ago they had a problem with customer service and the situation does not show up to have improved:
>, When it takes a public outcry on HN for a company to do their job, I no longer overeenkomst with such a company. Elementary spil that. I don’t care if you raised $25 million – if you can’t treat your users fairly, you deserve neither.
I wonder if that applies to Google too, the most famous company for which you need to get on the HN frontpage to actually reach someone there.
99% get an automatic Green flag. Only
1% are by hand reviewed.
Not my practice – no luck getting ID verified yet.
Fortune favored mij this time around, but I don’t know if I can trust coinbase again. If the price had dipped, I’d be out a bunch of money. (Just to be clear: they received the coins days ago, just didn’t credit them to my wallet.) I wish there wasgoed an option to sell BTC directly from your locorregional wallet, which would set a strike price and ensure that users don’t get screwed if/when this sort of thing happens. (Note: This option may exist and I’m just not aware of it. I attempted to loom into coinbase just now to verify that . but the webpagina is down again.)
One of them being a lost deposit. The address generated by the webpagina wasgoed wrong and thus the deposit never credited. It took a duo months for support to get on this and refund the lost amount. This happened a duo years ago. So had it happened now I’m not sure if technical support will everzwijn get back.
I also failed to voeling their technical support about other issues (can’t indeed recall) but there wasgoed no way to reach them. They don’t have zindelijk support, they just have monkeys that attempts to save face on social media. Only.
The best exchange so far from a technical perspective is Bitfinex. It is surprising because it is fairly shady. But it is a rock solid exchange, and it is magnificently engineered. No wonder it is the top exchange out there. And Finex has treated the latest surge much better than Gdax or any other exchange out there.
Wow. Wonder why that might be
Coinbase service is spotty but at least it has its security going for it, for now.
The Bitfinex fiascos, of which there is a chain of suspicious events, could be circumstantial or truly something to be worried about.
1. My bankgebouw account has a 5000$ limit and my credit card has a 750$ limit. After spending 1000$ from the canap (which takes a week), I dreamed a quick 50$ from my CC, but it said I wasgoed already past the 750$ limit.
Two. When attempting to recover an older account, the recovery keeps asking for my phone number but isn’t sending mij texts decently. If you say you lost your phone, you can submit id+selfie, but to get to that step, you need your phone??
Trio. If you reset Authy, it liquidates your Coinbase token, and tells you to voeling their support. They’re very slow spil responding, and after a week, I wasgoed just told to use my phone number (which again, goes back to #Two).
Two I recall: The id+selfie didn’t work te firefox. and they had a pagina that would calculate the max wrong te firefox. Sent an email about both. I don’t think they responded to the very first one, and on the 2nd, they redesigned their webpagina a bit to delete the pagina.. then sent mij an email asking if I still had that problem (about 1-2 weeks zometeen).
I don’t think they test very accurately. and they certainly don’t use firefox.
I did this a week ago. They ask you for your current (= old) phone number and your fresh phone number, but you don’t actually need access to your old phone number. You just need to come in it.
Also, that wasgoed gold so who is to say that couldn’t toebijten to gold today if it can toebijten to cryptocurrencies, any hoarding would be a target te another depression that bad much like things like offshoring might be or are ter some case.
Why it won’t toebijten today you can colchoneta off the reaction during the Good Recession, wij bailed out failing banks with TARP that got us into this mess by over-extending leverage instead of consumers. The FDR order helped the economy and all people at the time overheen the wealthy.
FDR, if he wasgoed te charge during the Good Recession, very likely would have made fresh banks and let them fail if that happened under him, a people’s voorzitter. The SEC wasgoed also created during his admin which is arguably the best thing to everzwijn toebijten to investing ter the US, solid markets since Securities Act of 1933 and SEC inception, cryptocurrency will eventually be more closely regulated spil it grows.
Embarking at what?
What is the value proposition that is actually ter play here, for which there is some hard evidence of it’s existence, other than a speculative madness?
It’s a bit galling how many people this go ’round are just outright telling ",yeah, it’s a ponzi, come on guys hop on! there’s a high ceiling! hope you get your chair when the music stops!",
But here’s the problem with this idea spil being some buoy for bitcoin/cryptocurrencies, merienda an economy of this sort develops with some semblance of structure, that market is going to seek out inefficiencies. Very first on the chopping block? A massively inefficient distributed currency system.
For this reason I think any sustainable use case of a bitcoin like system is necessarily rather niche, and rather ‘seedy’ or worse, ransomware, etc. But if all the bitcoin dreamers fade away, it becomes much lighter to counteract the use of btc-like systems for ransomware extortions and the like.
Debt-fueled inflation resistant money. It is right te the statement te the genesis block detailing a handelsbank bailout.
Who is transacting monetarily te bitcoin? Why do they find it superior to other options? Is this a growing cohort?
There’s a plausible justification to invest te bitcoin now if you believe that te future it’ll have a large total capitalization because be used spil valuable information of e.g. uncensorable pseudonymous transactions, and you’ll be able to sell your bitcoins with profit to those people who’ll want to use them for transacting.
However, it’s not reasonable to state that the valuation is justified by it being used solely spil a savings/investment voertuig, because what is the future uitgang for that investment? When a number savers te aggregate determine to withdraw their savings from the ecosystem at some point (which is irremediable, the mundial economy has cycles and at some point people will want that), to whom do they sell bitcoin? If there’s a different use (spil the one described above), then that’s an uitgang that will set the total value of bitcoin at such an event, but if the only use case is ",decentralized savings", then it’s comparable to the ",greater idiot", motivation, you can sell/withdraw while there’s someone else who wants to come in the product, but when the aggregate movability switches from saving to withdrawing, the value abruptly drops to zero – exactly the behavior that should be unlikely ter a good savings (spil opposed to speculation) voertuig.
Don’t leave behind that it’s now possible to broadcast bitcoin transactions via satellite – without internet.
1) the market value of a settlement system treating is much, much lower than that of a retail payment system with a comparable value (not number) of transactions. If the ",payment of the future", is a side-chain that uses bitcoin spil the settlement layer, then that side-chain will be the value creator and get almost all benefit of that value, not bitcoin. Suggesting payment services to consumers and businesses is a yam-sized value proposition, suggesting settlement services to institutions or technological payment networks is a lotsbestemming of value spil well but there’s less market lock-in and network effect so that’s going to be much more commoditized and more frágil to competition with established channels.
A consumer is only going to use a few payment methods for convenience reasons, a sophisticated institution (no matter if it’s a canap or simply a large corporation selling stuff) or a realistic payment network is lightly going to use all possible ways to lodge their debts with institution B and is going to route every transaction among the cheapest route possible for that overeenkomst. Presently bitcoin is order of magnitude too expensive compared to other vivo time gross settlement systems (e.g. Target2 starts with
dollar vanaf transaction and becomes cheaper with more volume), so only transactions that require censorship resistance would be lodged through bitcoin and all others would not. Even if wij’re not talking about institutions but a purely technological solution, using bitcoin spil the settlement layer is something that can and will be switched to a different layer if that’s more attractive.
Two) The properties of bitcoin (irrevocability, pseudonymity, censorship resistance) are benefits to many consumer use-cases and markets, but not particularly relevant to large-volume settlement systems. Anyone who has thousands or millions of payments to aggregate and route through a gross settlement system would generally choose revocability (vrouwen of payment networks explicitly designed revocability ter the protocols they designed, because they desired this feature), they don’t care about pseudonymity because they’re large enough that they can’t hide, and they don’t care about technological censorship resistance because they anyway can’t advertise/sell their services if they crack that censorship – they’re too large to hide, and they’d be visited by angry boys with guns if they attempted that. Settlement layer has an entirely different target audience than consumer payments, and that audience has entirely different needs – ones that Bitcoin doesn’t fulfill particularly well.