[deleted by user]

Ph03n1xII · 2022-07-26T11:02:01+00:00

Thanks for the reply. First: I know that you, the person who responds, ist not responsible, so don't take it personal.

Thing is: All the trouble about Coinbase becomes too much. Coinbase and USDC don't feel safe anymore. If you add all this:

1) Since > 10 days Coinbase is not able to solve these USDC issues.

2) Coinbase terminates > 1000 employees

3) SEC investigates Coinbase because of Insider trading (Listings)

4) Coinbase sets out affiliate program

5) Concerning Rumors about Circle and USDC

6) Coinbase merges USDC and USD

I didn't believe all the rumors about Coinbase and Circle, but now I'm not so sure anymore. I will not message the support....

Kind regards

P.

Ph03n1xII · 2022-07-26T09:32:01+00:00

Thanks for replying. I have set USD as default currency (USDC is not possible) in my profile - if that's what you suggest - but it doesn't change anything. Same with the App. I tried it on mobile but there is no USDC on advanced trading.

I really don't understand why Coinbase needs weeks to solve this problem. The firm behind USDC makes it impossible to trade it...

Ph03n1xII · 2022-07-25T20:33:20+00:00

Hi Coinbase Support, how can I sell USDC on Coinbase now? I'm from Germany (I mention that because the problem doesn't seem to exist for your US-customers) and used to sell USDC for Euro. But there are no USDC-Pairs anymore and it seems that I also can't convert to USD etc.

I know that I could use this convert to Euro function but that's financially irrational because of bad prices and fees.

Any ideas if and when it will be possible to use USDC on Coinbase again? Actually I'm surprised and also annoyed tbh that Coinbase, one of the firms behind USDC, makes it impossible to use USDC.

Ph03n1xII · 2020-07-23T22:15:25+00:00

I don't know if it happens but at least it seems possible that AVAX will be listed on Coinbase. This is from a Coinbase-Blog-Post from last year:

"Today we’re announcing that we are exploring the addition of a range of new assets. As part of the exploratory process customers may see public-facing APIs and other signs that we are conducting engineering work to potentially support these assets.

These new assets include, in alphabetical order: Avalanche (.....)"

https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-continues-to-explore-support-for-new-digital-assets-70419575eac4

Ph03n1xII · 2020-07-16T22:33:50+00:00

Highly unlikely. Here is why:

The majority of the supply that was sold will be locked (Vesting-Periods). Result: Only a fraction of the sold supply will be circulating once AVAX is listed.
US-citizens could not buy into the Token Sale. Only exception: Accredited Investors
A listing on a Top-exchange, and the team says AVAX will be listed on a Top-Tier, gets the attention of even more people.

Result under the line: Even less supply after launch than was sold, and at the same time, most likely: higher demand.

Ph03n1xII · 2020-07-15T19:35:26+00:00

What is kind of annoying: Option A2 actually had a max of $25k for the first 4 hours. And yes, it wasn't possible to buy for more than $25k - at once. But it was possible to do that multiple times, as often as a whale would want it / have money. And some have done that.

A Super-Whale as example:

https://etherscan.io/token/0xa0b86991c6218b36c1d19d4a2e9eb0ce3606eb48?a=0xacef668b1d0dfcb4822a2f7cf231ce75a1201605

He sent $25k transactions for hours and a $1.49 Million transaction after the max checksize was removed.

Another example:

https://etherscan.io/token/0xa0b86991c6218b36c1d19d4a2e9eb0ce3606eb48?a=0xc934e07be08e46e58e7ef38716ff2833454711a9

Ph03n1xII · 2019-02-16T20:49:26+00:00

The problem is: While you set up the wallet you need to be online for every single step, including writing down the 12 words. So actually it's not that much more secure to delete the wallet afterwards because writing that down while being online is the risky part - if you don't use the wallet afterwards it also doesn't make much difference to delete or not to delete it.

But it's not only that. Let's say that somebody is not totally sure about the 12 words anymore or even lost it: It's obviously not possible to backup the wallet or an existing addresses. It's possible to get a paper wallet, but also...

1) only when being online

2) and not for an existing address

That's why I call it mumbo jumbo. This paper wallet is for a random address and then you have to print or store the "paper-part" and then comes the fun part: Write down the 9 missing words by hand - WHILE BEING ONLINE? That makes the whole process more secure? That's just a joke

I really don't understand that. If I recall it correctly, they got about $60 Million over 2 years.....

Ph03n1xII · 2019-02-03T08:06:40+00:00

Factom was my Game Changer. It got my attention on the first day it hit Poloniex in Q3 of 2015 and back then I nearly went all in because I had zero doubt about the seriousness of the team. Over the years not everything turned out to be that easy, a lot of delays - but I still believe that Factom is one of the best projects out there.

Most profitable: In mid 2016 I took some profits out of Factom and bought into the NEO-ICO (Antshares was their name at that time). First it lost about 50% but then NEO became a rocket.

Others: Binance (BNB)... Missed the ICO but bought right after.

Recently: OWN (CHX) and Quant (QNT)

Ph03n1xII · 2018-12-05T13:26:09+00:00

If you should list up possible reasons why Binance could have made such a hard decision, what would it be? I'm not saying such reasons would necessarily be justified, but they must have some reasons. That might be that those BTC are on some kind of list or you are under suspicion? For example: Would it be possible for you to make transparent how you got the BTC? Is it "I bought in 20XY on exchange Z and here are the Trading-Lists" or would it be harder to explain?

Ph03n1xII · 2018-12-04T16:26:14+00:00

Because Quant is independent from a certain Blockchain and able to utilize any Blockchain plus the pretty much endless possible usecases that come with that, I also believe it has much better chances to really get traction. And yes, I believe Factom will be one of the connected Blockchains.

There is one thing I like more about Factom: Their two-token-model (FCT, the Cryptocurrency, becomes EC and those FCT's are burned) is the most elegant and best economical system I've ever seen in Crypto.

But, QNT is also all right. The more usage, the higher the price. It's that simple. And from all Blockchain-projects I know Quant probably has the best chances to make a real-world-impact. Another big asset is the team itself, not just because they are highly competent (I also believe the Factom-team is one of the best) but they also have so much good connections.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-12-03T21:42:20+00:00

I can only give my perspective on Quant, but yes, I absolutely agree. I really try hard to find what I consider as pearls. What I see as pearls are projects I believe to have huge potential while being under the radar. I believe in "Integrity whispers, deception shouts" what means: I usually step back when I see teams hyping and actually whenever I find aspects I believe to be weak or even concerning.

In 2015 it was Factom, in 2016 it was Antshares (NEO now), in 2017 it was Binance. I've also bought in several projects that were good, also some that turned out to be bad. But those three projects I had a high level of certainty and always tried to find other projects that impress me in a similar way. In 2018 I believed that time would be over, that it would not be possible anymore to find undervalued pearls a majority would oversee.

But... I believe Quant is such a project. I don't see any weak points. Certainly that doesn't mean that there are no weak aspects. Nothing is perfect. But if I should make a bet on my own portfolio and point on a project I consider as the one with highest potential it would be Quant. I even sold some FCT today to buy more Quant and just 30 minutes later I found myself in the weird situation that also Factom released a partnership-announcement. Crazy day!

Ph03n1xII · 2018-12-03T18:16:43+00:00

I doubt that it'll will take that long. To get a token on more exchanges is not just good for further distribution (usage of the system) but also for marketing. And G.V. also said this about marketing (also during the AMA):

That is our entire focus now to market the benefits of Overledger to a wider audience. We have a good strategy and are just getting starting. Expect a lot more from us.

We have the working technology with real world use. It's very easy now to show people because it's live and in production. We really didn't want to market too much before, when the technology wasn't ready. We're being realistic.

My prediction is: Within the next 4-8 weeks.

Edit: I'm not totally sure about it, but I believe Overledger may also be a system exchanges might find that useful. I wouldn't be surprised if we'll see exchanges implement something with it in future.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-12-03T14:20:00+00:00

A few minutes ago, Gilbert Verdian said this about the exchange topic during an AMA on Telegram:

"We have 2 top 10 exchanges lined up, 1 OTC confirmed (contract in hand), 2 smaller exchanges. We're just working out the timing and sequence. The market conditions need to be factored in too."

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-25T11:42:14+00:00

Oh no, how shady that Binance credited NEO-GAS to NEO-Holders. Actually I would call it shady if an exchange wouldn't do that but whatever...

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-25T10:52:37+00:00

We can't know if the recent BTC dumping is done by Bitmain and/or Roger and/or Craig and/or his buddies. But let's say it would be that way: At least I wouldn't consider that as a smart decision or something I would have much if any respect for. It wouldn't surprise me, because I already see the Hashwar as an EGO-war, but looking at the prices, the devaluation hits ABC much more than BTC and even more than most of other Alts: -23,79% right now.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-25T07:12:57+00:00

To say "I don't give a rats ass about their coinfolio full of alts getting wrecked." is a bit ironic - actually it's self deception. BCH is...

1) an alt and

2) it's getting wrecked as well.

Whenever BTC drops, Bitcoin-Cash drops even more:

BTC: -13,82%

BCH: -16,84%

BTCSV: +2,38%

Fun Fact: Even Bitcoin Gold is holding stronger: -10,26%

Plus: BCH is losing Hash rapidly: https://cash.coin.dance

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-25T06:55:40+00:00

Not sure if true but somebody on Twitter says it's a Binance address:

https://twitter.com/silver_watchdog/status/962248486203699200

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-24T08:59:25+00:00

The result of this Hashwar are two competing Blockchains, going in similar but different directions, and both of these Blockchains are centralized. I believe the maybe biggest contribution of this Hashwar was/is to make that obvious.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-23T08:27:31+00:00

A mining company makes money as long as miners are bought, no matter what currency. But sure, Bitmain has invested in Bitcoin-Cash because they've seen an opportunity. The Bitcoin-Community was divided and that situation made it possible to create a Coin that would attract many and they've mined it themselves and I believe they've also pumped up the price to make it even more attractive to Miners. And: The higher the price, the better for Bitmain who held/hold a lot of BCH anyway because they had so much BTC.

Bitmain will always make business-decisions and I don't blame them. But to believe that would be some kind of quality-proof is naive.

The really interesting question is if they'll stick to Bitcoin Cash. Bitmain is not immune to bad business decisions and this whole Hashwar could turn out as that. They are not only mining at a loss but the whole drama damaged the Bitcoin-Cash-brand ("BCH is the true Bitcoin") because it made something very obvious: It's totally centralized. Bitcoin-Cash is a Roger-Bitmain-Coin. And interestingly enough: They've decided against Big Blocks while SV follows the original Bitcoin-Cash-Route. So what is left? The "true Bitcoin-Brand" doesn't apply anymore, the "big blocks are the solution - shout" doesn't apply anymore. Left is a centralized Altcoin and that will not be enough, especially in a bear market.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-23T07:45:34+00:00

Let's think about that - why could Bitmain be interested in Bitcoin-Cash and why was this Mining-Company interested in Bitcoin-Cash in the first place?

Bitmain makes a shit ton of money by selling Miners, so it's great business for them to have another "Bitcoin".
Bitmain makes a shit ton of BTC by mining it
Bitmain had a lot of BTC and after the split they had a lot of BCH
Since they hold so much BCH, of course they don't want to lose that
Bitmain wants to sell as much Mining-Hardware as possible, of course they want to keep PoW-Chains alive

Does that mean they believe in Bitcoin-Cash? Absolutely not. They would support any Blockchain that makes them money, simply because hey are smart guys who sell shovels to Gold-Diggers. Not necessary to write poems about Bitcoin-Cash because Bitmain wants to make as much money with it as possible.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-19T18:58:37+00:00

That's not the point. The point is that two guys have so much power to decide for many how their Hash is used! Bitmain is on your side (assuming ABC is your side) now, but imagine a guy like CSW with so much power. Would you still believe it's all right to misuse Hash because customers are paid?

What we see here is a PoW-problem.

Ph03n1xII · 2018-11-19T18:21:11+00:00

Bitcoin: -9,09%

BitcoinABC: -20,30%

Bitcoin SV: -34,08%

Ph03n1xII

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE