Here's a good article i found breaking down the current trend of alt-coin pump and dump schemes and how they prey on suckers
The hilarious part is that there are suckers in the pump-and-dump group, too.
of course
thing to remember with scams is there's always a rube. and if someone innocently invites you to take part in a scam? You're the rube
Well. You're a rube. But there are tiers of rubes there, and gradients.
The guy who signals the pump and dump gets the best deal because he can pick his spot. Those that follow can still earn, but will earn less based on when they get the signal. Then there's the outsiders following the wave mitigating their position, then there's the people on the other end of those trades acting at exactly the wrong time.
Edit: Watching all these ancient stock market pink sheet con tactics come out is surreal and amusing. As is the fact ASUS makes a mining motherboard now that you can slot 18 gpus in.
Once it drops below mean that's when you should buy, assuming it recovers at all
just don't blow your life savings
Just be aware that you're putting money into an ecosystem that launders money for illegal activity including child pornography and human trafficking.
Anonymity means that you don't know if the person you're buying from is Hitler or Jesus.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Once it drops below mean that's when you should buy, assuming it recovers at all
just don't blow your life savings
Just be aware that you're putting money into an ecosystem that launders money for illegal activity including child pornography and human trafficking.
Anonymity means that you don't know if the person you're buying from is Hitler or Jesus.
That's also true of banks.
Yes, but the bank is capable of cooperating with legal authorities in order to track the money and bring people to justice.
The blockchain is being used to obfuscate that kind of tracking.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
Once it drops below mean that's when you should buy, assuming it recovers at all
just don't blow your life savings
Just be aware that you're putting money into an ecosystem that launders money for illegal activity including child pornography and human trafficking.
Anonymity means that you don't know if the person you're buying from is Hitler or Jesus.
That's also true of banks.
Banks are a necessary evil, cryptocurrencies are not.
And you can, to some degree, research banks and their reputation, and there is, in theory, some oversight in what banks are doing, even if it is insufficient.
Legitimate banks aren't willing to take on the risk of a highly volatile currency based on nothing. The only reason to take on the risk of bitcoin is to avoid the much higher risk of something else. And the much greater risk usually involves being arrested for something illegal.
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I want to know how much all that Mt. Gox bullshit has cost me in taxpayer money in litigation administration alone. Because we all know that the people who put their money there were doing so to avoid paying taxes in the first place.
Legitimate banks aren't willing to take on the risk of a highly volatile currency based on nothing. The only reason to take on the risk of bitcoin is to avoid the much higher risk of something else. And the much greater risk usually involves being arrested for something illegal.
Yup their hedge bet agaisnt the dollar will remain other currencies or gold because those are fairly stable
Once it drops below mean that's when you should buy, assuming it recovers at all
just don't blow your life savings
Just be aware that you're putting money into an ecosystem that launders money for illegal activity including child pornography and human trafficking.
Anonymity means that you don't know if the person you're buying from is Hitler or Jesus.
Or, even worse, the guy who bought out that card you were thinking about upgrading to not even 12 hours ago.
For the third time this month.
(Seriously though, if you buy in at the bottom, you're probably buying from someone who was engaging in G-rated capitalism, and is probably kicking themselves for buying in at all)
I have to think that people in the US who have made big money on Bitcoin trading are reporting it and paying income taxes on it because they don't want to go to jail. If you've cashed out any money at all to your bank account, there is a paper trail leading to you. You have to be pretty stupid to think the IRS can't follow that trail or that your US-based exchange is going to fight the IRS for you.
I have to think that people in the US who have made big money on Bitcoin trading are reporting it and paying income taxes on it because they don't want to go to jail. If you've cashed out any money at all to your bank account, there is a paper trail leading to you. You have to be pretty stupid to think the IRS can't follow that trail or that your US-based exchange is going to fight the IRS for you.
*glances at the IRS's budget*
I think that anyone who's not one of the big fish probably doesn't have much to worry about, though.
I have to think that people in the US who have made big money on Bitcoin trading are reporting it and paying income taxes on it because they don't want to go to jail. If you've cashed out any money at all to your bank account, there is a paper trail leading to you. You have to be pretty stupid to think the IRS can't follow that trail or that your US-based exchange is going to fight the IRS for you.
*glances at the IRS's budget*
I think that anyone who's not one of the big fish probably doesn't have much to worry about, though.
I read that something like 800 people actually reported income from one of the exchanges, and that the new tax laws eliminate like kind exchanges of coins (now says "real" property), massively increasing the potential number of violators. It really seems like here's no way they can compel compliance through enforcement on individuals.
Question: Are the exchanges breaking some regulation by not submitting 1099s? That's probably where the pressure needs to go.
+1
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
PonziCoin has turned out to be a scam for the second time.
The point with the Exchange attack above for PoS is that the exchange is also a miner, and a big miner because of its large wallets.
.. Also I assume exchanges will move coin based on completed trades from their holding wallets to the buyer's wallets, usually based on the seller's confirmation of receipt of fiat currency from the buyer.
No, it's on the buyer to withdraw their funds from the exchange to their own wallet (and pay fees). Lots of customers will just leave the coins on the exchange because they are trying to swing trade, or they don't want to wait for an on-chain transaction back to the exchange to confirm if they want to sell back to fiat. Exchanges are happy to store your coins because they want you to trade a lot and pay them lots of fees.
In that case, the exchange-miners in PoS can simply increase transaction fees (more) on any transaction that doesn't go through them.
And then refuse to list low value trades on their exchanges seperately, if they choose.
OMG, so someone literally started a ponzi scheme, called it a ponzi scheme and then ran away with all the money. And this happened twice. And people still fell for it.
Cryptocurrency, I would love you if you weren't fucking up the environment and PC prices.
+25
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
OMG, so someone literally started a ponzi scheme, called it a ponzi scheme and then ran away with all the money. And this happened twice. And people still fell for it.
Cryptocurrency, I would love you if you weren't fucking up the environment and PC prices.
Um, it looks to me like the second time, someone used smart contacts to automate, make transparent and ensure a ponzi scheme would be created, announced the ponzi coin, specifically stated it was a ponzi scheme, and advised people not to invest because it's unlikely they were in a position to gain money from the ponzi scheme.
And then had to close the exchange to the ponzi scheme because too many people were investing in it.
OMG, so someone literally started a ponzi scheme, called it a ponzi scheme and then ran away with all the money. And this happened twice. And people still fell for it.
Cryptocurrency, I would love you if you weren't fucking up the environment and PC prices.
No, someone told a bunch of people that he was running a Ponzi scheme, when he was actually running an entirely different, much simpler scam.
The point with the Exchange attack above for PoS is that the exchange is also a miner, and a big miner because of its large wallets.
.. Also I assume exchanges will move coin based on completed trades from their holding wallets to the buyer's wallets, usually based on the seller's confirmation of receipt of fiat currency from the buyer.
No, it's on the buyer to withdraw their funds from the exchange to their own wallet (and pay fees). Lots of customers will just leave the coins on the exchange because they are trying to swing trade, or they don't want to wait for an on-chain transaction back to the exchange to confirm if they want to sell back to fiat. Exchanges are happy to store your coins because they want you to trade a lot and pay them lots of fees.
In that case, the exchange-miners in PoS can simply increase transaction fees (more) on any transaction that doesn't go through them.
And then refuse to list low value trades on their exchanges seperately, if they choose.
Even if an exchange's PoS wallet has a large number of coins, they still need everyone else's wallets to confirm the blocks they put out. Consensus still needs to happen. If they produce a block that omits transactions they don't like, all of the other wallets will reject that block because they know about those omitted transactions. A 51% attack could still happen, just like in PoW, if a malicious group had 51% of the coins. But getting 51% of a coin will probably cost more than you would ever be able to make in a 51% attack, especially considering the market will likely decide the coin is worthless as soon as a 51% attack is noticed.
Although if people are buying shit called Ponzicoin, they will probably also buy confirmed broken coins
A quick search suggests that Proof of Stake algorithms do not give miners rewards on block creation, but instead solely from the transaction fees.
Which implies that the miners can select transactions with the largest bribes attached to add into their block, and not others.
Omitted transactions do not prevent consensus, but instead live in unconfirmed-transaction-limbo until some miner adds them to a block.
There is no reason a miner ever needs to add a transaction to a block as far as I'm aware.
Consensus is just everyone agreeing that the next block added to the chain is indeed the next block added to the chain, and ensuring no chain-forking is going on.
A quick search suggests that Proof of Stake algorithms do not give miners rewards on block creation, but instead solely from the transaction fees.
Which implies that the miners can select transactions with the largest bribes attached to add into their block, and not others.
Omitted transactions do not prevent consensus, but instead live in unconfirmed-transaction-limbo until some miner adds them to a block.
There is no reason a miner ever needs to add a transaction to a block as far as I'm aware.
Consensus is just everyone agreeing that the next block added to the chain is indeed the next block added to the chain, and ensuring no chain-forking is going on.
Miners get block rewards in PoS or PoW. The amount and percentage of depends on the coin, but nobody would bother PoW or PoS mining a coin that gave 0% of block rewards to miners. Profit from transaction fees are usually negligible on anything but the top coins because barely anyone uses these things, they are just speculating.
I'm starting to think what you're describing isn't an attack but it just the software running as designed. Higher fee transactions will get processed first and very low fee transactions sit in limbo and never get confirmed. I believe in Bitcoin, unconfirmed transactions eventually expire and the users would need to try again with a higher (more fair) fee.
Miner's can't force fees to a certain level because users (or really their wallet software) decide what fees to attach to transactions. All miners can do is poach the most profitable transactions first. If they started not accepting fees below some artificial inflated level, then 1) user's transactions would stop going through and 2) the attack would become known, probably killing the whole project.
Trades, meaning exchanging a coin for something else, occur off the chain because the chain software has no knowledge of the off-chain thing you are buying with your coin. So miners are not involved and have no control over fees or the transaction going though. I mean, if your exchange is malicious you are just fucked. That has happened a bunch of times in crypto because almost all of the exchanges are shady. But if your miners turn malicious but your exchange is still good, you can sell the coins without the miners' behavior affecting that trade.
The point with the Exchange attack above for PoS is that the exchange is also a miner, and a big miner because of its large wallets.
.. Also I assume exchanges will move coin based on completed trades from their holding wallets to the buyer's wallets, usually based on the seller's confirmation of receipt of fiat currency from the buyer.
No, it's on the buyer to withdraw their funds from the exchange to their own wallet (and pay fees). Lots of customers will just leave the coins on the exchange because they are trying to swing trade, or they don't want to wait for an on-chain transaction back to the exchange to confirm if they want to sell back to fiat. Exchanges are happy to store your coins because they want you to trade a lot and pay them lots of fees.
In that case, the exchange-miners in PoS can simply increase transaction fees (more) on any transaction that doesn't go through them.
And then refuse to list low value trades on their exchanges seperately, if they choose.
Even if an exchange's PoS wallet has a large number of coins, they still need everyone else's wallets to confirm the blocks they put out. Consensus still needs to happen. If they produce a block that omits transactions they don't like, all of the other wallets will reject that block because they know about those omitted transactions. A 51% attack could still happen, just like in PoW, if a malicious group had 51% of the coins. But getting 51% of a coin will probably cost more than you would ever be able to make in a 51% attack, especially considering the market will likely decide the coin is worthless as soon as a 51% attack is noticed.
Although if people are buying shit called Ponzicoin, they will probably also buy confirmed broken coins
It would not actually be hard to implement a 51% attack. Only a handful of people who control the large conglomerates would have to agree
The point with the Exchange attack above for PoS is that the exchange is also a miner, and a big miner because of its large wallets.
.. Also I assume exchanges will move coin based on completed trades from their holding wallets to the buyer's wallets, usually based on the seller's confirmation of receipt of fiat currency from the buyer.
No, it's on the buyer to withdraw their funds from the exchange to their own wallet (and pay fees). Lots of customers will just leave the coins on the exchange because they are trying to swing trade, or they don't want to wait for an on-chain transaction back to the exchange to confirm if they want to sell back to fiat. Exchanges are happy to store your coins because they want you to trade a lot and pay them lots of fees.
In that case, the exchange-miners in PoS can simply increase transaction fees (more) on any transaction that doesn't go through them.
And then refuse to list low value trades on their exchanges seperately, if they choose.
Even if an exchange's PoS wallet has a large number of coins, they still need everyone else's wallets to confirm the blocks they put out. Consensus still needs to happen. If they produce a block that omits transactions they don't like, all of the other wallets will reject that block because they know about those omitted transactions. A 51% attack could still happen, just like in PoW, if a malicious group had 51% of the coins. But getting 51% of a coin will probably cost more than you would ever be able to make in a 51% attack, especially considering the market will likely decide the coin is worthless as soon as a 51% attack is noticed.
Although if people are buying shit called Ponzicoin, they will probably also buy confirmed broken coins
It would not actually be hard to implement a 51% attack. Only a handful of people who control the large conglomerates would have to agree
You mean like if a tiny minority of people controlled the majority of wealth? But that's not possible! That has never happened in the history of humanity!
TOKYO (Reuters) - Coincheck, a major cryptocurrency trading exchange in Tokyo, has been hacked into and has lost about 58 billion yen ($534 million) worth of virtual money, national broadcaster NHK reported on Friday.
I wonder if they mean "lost" meaning "we can't get at them any more" or "lost" meaning "someone else has them but we don't know who" in this sort of situation; if someone steals gold ingots, it's pretty clearly the latter, but with this sort of less tangible thing it's harder to be sure.
+7
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
TOKYO (Reuters) - Coincheck, a major cryptocurrency trading exchange in Tokyo, has been hacked into and has lost about 58 billion yen ($534 million) worth of virtual money, national broadcaster NHK reported on Friday.
I wonder if they mean "lost" meaning "we can't get at them any more" or "lost" meaning "someone else has them but we don't know who" in this sort of situation; if someone steals gold ingots, it's pretty clearly the latter, but with this sort of less tangible thing it's harder to be sure.
Or they can just pretend to lose them while in actuality just steal them instead.
+17
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
TOKYO (Reuters) - Coincheck, a major cryptocurrency trading exchange in Tokyo, has been hacked into and has lost about 58 billion yen ($534 million) worth of virtual money, national broadcaster NHK reported on Friday.
I wonder if they mean "lost" meaning "we can't get at them any more" or "lost" meaning "someone else has them but we don't know who" in this sort of situation; if someone steals gold ingots, it's pretty clearly the latter, but with this sort of less tangible thing it's harder to be sure.
Or they can just pretend to lose them while in actuality just steal them instead.
If anyone's ever wondered where the real money in Crypto is, this is it.
"Please give us your real money, and we will exchange it for cryptocurrency... It just takes a few days... Maybe a week... Whoops, we're bankrupt/got hacked."
TetraNitroCubane on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
OMG, so someone literally started a ponzi scheme, called it a ponzi scheme and then ran away with all the money. And this happened twice. And people still fell for it.
Cryptocurrency, I would love you if you weren't fucking up the environment and PC prices.
No, someone told a bunch of people that he was running a Ponzi scheme, when he was actually running an entirely different, much simpler scam.
To be fair, it is a ponzi scheme, but instead of a pyramid, it's one guy standing on a platform of suckers.
I’m trying to come to terms with the fact that there’s a subset of crypto people who engage in crypto gambling Ponzi “games.”
People stacked a Ponzi scheme on a Ponzi scheme and only got upset when somebody didn’t play by the “rules.” Of a Ponzi scheme. Because somebody took their money.
Am I missing something? Because there’s a multitude of these sites and it’s blowing my mind.
Posts
Unlike every other bubble in the history of forever, bitcoin will either keep going up or level off at a very high value!
of course
thing to remember with scams is there's always a rube. and if someone innocently invites you to take part in a scam? You're the rube
Well. You're a rube. But there are tiers of rubes there, and gradients.
The guy who signals the pump and dump gets the best deal because he can pick his spot. Those that follow can still earn, but will earn less based on when they get the signal. Then there's the outsiders following the wave mitigating their position, then there's the people on the other end of those trades acting at exactly the wrong time.
Edit: Watching all these ancient stock market pink sheet con tactics come out is surreal and amusing. As is the fact ASUS makes a mining motherboard now that you can slot 18 gpus in.
So you're saying buy at 6000
that is remarkably close
just don't blow your life savings
Just be aware that you're putting money into an ecosystem that launders money for illegal activity including child pornography and human trafficking.
Anonymity means that you don't know if the person you're buying from is Hitler or Jesus.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
That's also true of banks.
Yes, but the bank is capable of cooperating with legal authorities in order to track the money and bring people to justice.
The blockchain is being used to obfuscate that kind of tracking.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
And you can, to some degree, research banks and their reputation, and there is, in theory, some oversight in what banks are doing, even if it is insufficient.
Yup their hedge bet agaisnt the dollar will remain other currencies or gold because those are fairly stable
Or, even worse, the guy who bought out that card you were thinking about upgrading to not even 12 hours ago.
For the third time this month.
(Seriously though, if you buy in at the bottom, you're probably buying from someone who was engaging in G-rated capitalism, and is probably kicking themselves for buying in at all)
*glances at the IRS's budget*
I think that anyone who's not one of the big fish probably doesn't have much to worry about, though.
I read that something like 800 people actually reported income from one of the exchanges, and that the new tax laws eliminate like kind exchanges of coins (now says "real" property), massively increasing the potential number of violators. It really seems like here's no way they can compel compliance through enforcement on individuals.
Question: Are the exchanges breaking some regulation by not submitting 1099s? That's probably where the pressure needs to go.
https://amp.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/7spgef/introducing_the_ponzicoin_ico_the_first/
The first time, in 2014.
https://amp.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zzzq0/ponzicoin_operator_steals_money_investors_get/
In that case, the exchange-miners in PoS can simply increase transaction fees (more) on any transaction that doesn't go through them.
And then refuse to list low value trades on their exchanges seperately, if they choose.
Scams that work by convincing the mark that they're helping scam someone else are apparently fairly common.
OMG, so someone literally started a ponzi scheme, called it a ponzi scheme and then ran away with all the money. And this happened twice. And people still fell for it.
Cryptocurrency, I would love you if you weren't fucking up the environment and PC prices.
That's about the time the people at the top start to cash out.
Um, it looks to me like the second time, someone used smart contacts to automate, make transparent and ensure a ponzi scheme would be created, announced the ponzi coin, specifically stated it was a ponzi scheme, and advised people not to invest because it's unlikely they were in a position to gain money from the ponzi scheme.
And then had to close the exchange to the ponzi scheme because too many people were investing in it.
No, someone told a bunch of people that he was running a Ponzi scheme, when he was actually running an entirely different, much simpler scam.
Even if an exchange's PoS wallet has a large number of coins, they still need everyone else's wallets to confirm the blocks they put out. Consensus still needs to happen. If they produce a block that omits transactions they don't like, all of the other wallets will reject that block because they know about those omitted transactions. A 51% attack could still happen, just like in PoW, if a malicious group had 51% of the coins. But getting 51% of a coin will probably cost more than you would ever be able to make in a 51% attack, especially considering the market will likely decide the coin is worthless as soon as a 51% attack is noticed.
Although if people are buying shit called Ponzicoin, they will probably also buy confirmed broken coins
A quick search suggests that Proof of Stake algorithms do not give miners rewards on block creation, but instead solely from the transaction fees.
Which implies that the miners can select transactions with the largest bribes attached to add into their block, and not others.
Omitted transactions do not prevent consensus, but instead live in unconfirmed-transaction-limbo until some miner adds them to a block.
There is no reason a miner ever needs to add a transaction to a block as far as I'm aware.
Consensus is just everyone agreeing that the next block added to the chain is indeed the next block added to the chain, and ensuring no chain-forking is going on.
"lol jk I'm actually cheating them and you out of your life savings"
Banks are capable of paying fines to legal authorities as part of their cost of doing business in illegal activities, while admitting to no guilt.
Miners get block rewards in PoS or PoW. The amount and percentage of depends on the coin, but nobody would bother PoW or PoS mining a coin that gave 0% of block rewards to miners. Profit from transaction fees are usually negligible on anything but the top coins because barely anyone uses these things, they are just speculating.
I'm starting to think what you're describing isn't an attack but it just the software running as designed. Higher fee transactions will get processed first and very low fee transactions sit in limbo and never get confirmed. I believe in Bitcoin, unconfirmed transactions eventually expire and the users would need to try again with a higher (more fair) fee.
Miner's can't force fees to a certain level because users (or really their wallet software) decide what fees to attach to transactions. All miners can do is poach the most profitable transactions first. If they started not accepting fees below some artificial inflated level, then 1) user's transactions would stop going through and 2) the attack would become known, probably killing the whole project.
Trades, meaning exchanging a coin for something else, occur off the chain because the chain software has no knowledge of the off-chain thing you are buying with your coin. So miners are not involved and have no control over fees or the transaction going though. I mean, if your exchange is malicious you are just fucked. That has happened a bunch of times in crypto because almost all of the exchanges are shady. But if your miners turn malicious but your exchange is still good, you can sell the coins without the miners' behavior affecting that trade.
It would not actually be hard to implement a 51% attack. Only a handful of people who control the large conglomerates would have to agree
Google trends Vs bitcoin price is a thing. Or at least it was every time I have checked.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
You mean like if a tiny minority of people controlled the majority of wealth? But that's not possible! That has never happened in the history of humanity!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-cryptocurrency/tokyo-based-cryptocurrency-exchange-hacked-losing-530-million-nhk-idUSKBN1FF29C
I wonder if they mean "lost" meaning "we can't get at them any more" or "lost" meaning "someone else has them but we don't know who" in this sort of situation; if someone steals gold ingots, it's pretty clearly the latter, but with this sort of less tangible thing it's harder to be sure.
Or they can just pretend to lose them while in actuality just steal them instead.
If anyone's ever wondered where the real money in Crypto is, this is it.
"Please give us your real money, and we will exchange it for cryptocurrency... It just takes a few days... Maybe a week... Whoops, we're bankrupt/got hacked."
To be fair, it is a ponzi scheme, but instead of a pyramid, it's one guy standing on a platform of suckers.
People stacked a Ponzi scheme on a Ponzi scheme and only got upset when somebody didn’t play by the “rules.” Of a Ponzi scheme. Because somebody took their money.
Am I missing something? Because there’s a multitude of these sites and it’s blowing my mind.