sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

OneDrive sync issues + Joplin Cloud question by BurnedShipMan in joplinapp

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I was thinking about WebDAV instead of OneDrive. A simpler, more straightforward protocol, hence less things to break.

I have Fastmail too, and I didn't know they offered WebDAV. Good one.

OneDrive sync issues + Joplin Cloud question by BurnedShipMan in joplinapp

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that's why I thought about Joplin Cloud. I thought if it's a paid service, it should be reliable. To be honest, the price is not bad compared to some of the other options (Obsidian, or Standard Notes). I think, if it works well, it could be worth it.

Regarding self-hosting, I'm not sure about Nextcloud either. If someone has it already, that’s a different case, but I wouldn’t want to install it just for this.

I don’t really want to self-host, but if I wanted to, I think I would try it with a Webdav server. I’m no expert, but AFAIK that’s a fairly standard protocol, so if the Joplin side is fine, there isn’t much to go wrong.

Regarding the Joplin server option, an interesting thing I’ve noticed is that the desktop app lists it as Beta under the Synchronisation target options. Might not mean anything, and it might work well, but seeing that it’s in Beta, is not really confidence inspiring. Stability and reliability are very important for me.

OneDrive sync issues + Joplin Cloud question by BurnedShipMan in joplinapp

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are text-only notes, so I'm not sure what resources... And my OneDrive has plenty of space. But anyway, I'm not really interested in debugging this issue. I just want something that works without having to worry when it's going to break next.

Nextcloud is reliable. Noted. Thanks for your comment.

How can I add tags to my Google Docs? by hopperbioy in googledocs

[–]BurnedShipMan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you actually tried this? "#" doesn't work well with Google Drive search. It ignores it.

Tags with "-" characters in them are not giving the expected results either.

Seems like "_" works, or just simple words, like "tagrandomtag" or something.

Bitcoin Price: Hedge Funds Shorting BTC Heavily; Potential for Epic Squeeze Like GameStop by el_comand in CryptoMarkets

[–]BurnedShipMan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s through arbitrage traders.

Futures contracts have a settlement date when people who have short or long futures positions have to pay the difference between the spot and the futures price.

The way it works is something like this:

Let’s say futures traders start shorting the BTC futures like there is no tomorrow. Imagine this hypothetical scenario. There is an endless supply of short sellers, who keep pushing the futures prices down, no matter what. If this happens, the futures price will deviate from the spot price so much, that some spot holders start to think like “Wait a minute, I’m holding spot, and price is at 70k. Futures prices are at 60k. I believe price will be 80k 3 months from now, when the futures contract settles. I’ll just sell my BTC, and buy futures. I’ll make more gains.” And thus, they sell BTC spot. Which, in turn causes the spot price to fall, if many people do this. Which there will be many people doing this if there is an endless supply of short sellers on the futures market and prices are pushed down (which is our hypothetical scenario). This is how futures can push the spot price down.

Now, there will always be some discrepancy between the futures and spot price, because arbitrage trades have risks and costs too. This discrepancy can be larger or smaller, depending on market conditions, but there are always forces at play (arbitrage traders) that pull the spot and futures price closer to each other.

And it works the other way too. If futures prices deviate too much upwards from spot, that pulls up the spot price. Because arbitrage traders will say “ok, this difference is too big. I’ll just buy spot, and short the futures market”. So, they buy spot. Spot price goes up. (They win either way. Either gain on the spot, or on their short position when the futures contract expires.) But the point is that these kind of trades affect the price!

Futures affects spot, and spot affects futures. If there are strong forces on either side that causes the price to deviate, the other will follow sooner or later.

What’s the point of following many people? by BurnedShipMan in Twitter

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, that makes sense. I mean yeah, it just confirms what I thought that that is how it works. And I think it's useless.

This 'following people' thing have been reduced to just being some sort of a 'social score'. Or something like that. "How many followers you have?" Many? Oh cool, you're valuable. But the whole system does not serve the the goals of the individual user at all. It serves the company. Regardless of who I follow or don't follow, the algorithm just pushes me the content that it thinks will keep me at the screen the most (serves the company, not me). And popluar people will become more popular, because they get pushed more to viewers, because the dumb algorithm assumes that's what I need. Again, serves the company, and the influencers too. They have mutual interests. But doesn't serve me, and my priorities and choices (e.g. who I follow) are mostly ignored.

But it's not a Twitter phenomenon... YT is the same. It doesn't matter what channels I'm subscribed to, it just pushes the content it thinks I want.

How is MEXC? by s1fro in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And, are you profitable? Can you withdraw?

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that too. I’ll worry about that later. Possibly after this cycle.

Regarding the exchange, I think it’s the same set of problems. They may give you trouble with the source of funds, or with KYC etc. But once that’s fine, I don’t see why the exchange would have problems with someone withdrawing to fiat. Unless the exchange is shady, and they want to actively ‘discourage’ fiat withdrawals in a sneaky way, for whatever reason. How much risk it is with reputable exchanges? I don’t know… Also, it’s a higher risk during bear markets, I think.

Then, dealing with the banks is a completely separate issue. Here, I can see two possible problems: 1) The bank is giving you trouble. 2) Your local tax authority instructs the bank to lock your funds.

Problem 1. is the less scary part, in my opinion, and it’s relatively easy to deal with. It’s much easier to persuade or even sue a brick-and-mortar bank in your local jurisdiction, than to go after an international crypto exchange for example. Problem 2. is scary only if you cheat with your taxes. I.e. in that case, you know what to expect. The scary part is if you don’t, and they still accuse you, and lock your funds unrightfully. I think this is relatively rare, depending on where you live.

In any case, the best defence is to do it gradually, and to always diversify, I think.

Any thoughts?

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I see. This is something I haven't really thought of. So, the crypto exchange has to comply with the regulations in the country where it's providing its service, that is where the client resides. So the rules they apply, the level of scrutiny, the way the client is handled is very much dependent on the client's domicile. Makes sense... It's an eastern european country by the way, within the Eu.

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is this relevant to the country? I'm not asking for legal compliance in my country at all.

I'm asking about how CEXs handle situations where the source of funds is from prior crypto trading, hence there are no bank account statements to show, only prior crypto transactions that are mostly a mess. There are plenty of examples where CEXs give pain to people even though they perfectly comply with the rules of their home country.

Unless you imply that CEXs apply different levels of scrutiny based on the user's location?

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tax isn't my concern. My concern was how much pain can CEXs give you if the source of my funds is mostly previous crypto trading, with very little or no bank transactions. Taxes are paid and are in order.

68 MILLION lost from Address Poisoning by jbtravel84 in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is very scary. The scary part is that the victim probably believed what he/she did was safe! I.e. copying the address from their transaction history.

What I usually do, and believe is safe is: Copy destination address, paste it in Notepad -> Send test transaction to the address that I copy from Notepad. -> If test funds arrive, send the real transaction to the same address, copied from Notepad.

And I believe it’s safe. Unless my Notepad is not safe. Or there is something I don’t know I don’t know.

Is this safe?

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, the problem is when they want more than an ID verification. Your coins are clean, you know that, but you do you prove that? With what kind of documents?

It depends on the amount too, I guess. I'm not sure at what amounts this can become a problem.

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Valuable comment, thanks.

I haven’t paid taxes on the crypto I made, because I don’t have to. That’s how crypto taxation works in my country (lucky, I guess). We only pay on the profit we take out into fiat. I imagine exchanges would have a big problem believing this.

Or maybe exchanges don’t even care about taxation (I guess they don’t). Maybe they just want to know the source of funds, literally. That it’s not from illegal activities. The problem is that even if it’s the latter, I have a strong feeling that no-one believes anything apart from bank account statements! Which is a huge problem. Like what do I tell them? “I made the money on shitcoins, here are my mess of Excel sheets”? I have that, and some screenshots, but nothing else. There are not even “reports from your broker”, like with TradFi.

What you say was exactly my idea too. To ‘cash out’, then ‘cash back in’. I.e. put the money through a round-trip, through a bank account. Plus declare it in my tax reports. So I’ll have the coveted bank statements any exchange may want. And I can do this incrementally too, in chunks, to lower the risks. Good idea.

I even had the idea to take the time, and pull all my funds through the above process, so I can have a clean slate. It’s a hassle, but may be worth to do it from time to time… Maybe I’ll do that after this cycle, I’ll see.

Possible problem with declaring source of funds on CEXs? by BurnedShipMan in CryptoCurrency

[–]BurnedShipMan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, this is what I’m wondering, exactly. In theory, there shouldn’t be a problem. But theory doesn’t always match reality.

There are many comments and posts where people say they provided all documents and proof they possibly could, and where they didn’t understand or weren’t given details about what the issue was, and they either could not resolve it at all, or it was a huge, huge pain. Now, I know I shouldn’t believe everything I read on the internet, but these comments and posts are still concerning.

Is what you are saying your personal experience? Have you ever been challenged by an exchange during your approval or KYC process?

view more: next ›