Also, your offer for bit-x avatar campaign is for the ones with a lot of posts.
Is there a chance to either drop the avatar rule, either offer some per-post rates for avatar campaign for the non big posters?
Thanks.
Topic: [BIT-X.com] [CoinsBank.com] Earn Bitcoins by Posting | Signature Campaign - page 174. (Read 554255 times)
April 17, 2015, 04:26:40 AM
Marco, as I see, currently we cannot use our avatar to advertise other sites.
Also, your offer for bit-x avatar campaign is for the ones with a lot of posts.
Is there a chance to either drop the avatar rule, either offer some per-post rates for avatar campaign for the non big posters?
Thanks.
Also, your offer for bit-x avatar campaign is for the ones with a lot of posts.
Is there a chance to either drop the avatar rule, either offer some per-post rates for avatar campaign for the non big posters?
Thanks.
April 17, 2015, 02:55:22 AM
Referring to a a post above, if someone gains access to your phone the user is at fault. That's like most services, including blockchain.info (and other online wallets) which is where most users (I assume) receive payouts in 'free-address' style campaigns.
April 16, 2015, 10:54:57 PM
Since there is some debate on mandatory 2 FA authentication throws in 2 cents.
I'm against it myself and prefer it optional since it's a pain, I keep it off unless it reaches a certain threshold amount where it becomes worth waiting for a text from the tower.
The same thing can be done with PVC's which is banking standard procedure
(personal verification questions)
What school did you attend in Elementary School
What is your favorite toy
What was your first car
That basically is 2FA without the technological depth or reliance of phone integration, so its all about the alternatives, that said think this should have all been discussed in the suggestions thread you guys fufufu
I'm against it myself and prefer it optional since it's a pain, I keep it off unless it reaches a certain threshold amount where it becomes worth waiting for a text from the tower.
The same thing can be done with PVC's which is banking standard procedure
(personal verification questions)
What school did you attend in Elementary School
What is your favorite toy
What was your first car
That basically is 2FA without the technological depth or reliance of phone integration, so its all about the alternatives, that said think this should have all been discussed in the suggestions thread you guys fufufu
April 16, 2015, 10:09:08 PM
Ill just chime in here because it seems there are a lot of posts about payment timing.
I only had one issue with one payment... Although I dont pay attention if payments come in a bit late.
The one time there was an issue, Marco was very helpful and responsive in getting it resolved.
Strato
I only had one issue with one payment... Although I dont pay attention if payments come in a bit late.
The one time there was an issue, Marco was very helpful and responsive in getting it resolved.
Strato
April 16, 2015, 06:38:04 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
Requiring people to receive their payments via an exchange account also makes little sense when you have a escrow paying participants. There wouldn't be anything to stop the exchange from seizing funds that participants receive prior to them being able to withdraw which defeats the point of using escrow in the first place.
It would make more sense to decrease rates by 0.5% and allow people to receive payment to any address that participants wish. Then people would not need to worry about accidentally eating the only way they can access their account
You'd think that after nearly 7 months of flawless payouts that people would have some trust/faith in a service (mind you, most actually do).
My point is that if someone were to get ahold of your phone then they could easily steal all of your bitcoin as well as the point that regardless of how 'flawless' payments have been that escrow is not really protecting anyone.
Yup, that's another thing. Receiving your payment directly in your BTC address is always a peace of mind. That, coupled with the forced 2FA thing is annoying. As far as I know, only this and Bitmixer offer automated payments. Too bad Bitmixer's payment's rate is shit and the rest are still stuck in the middle ages with the manual enrollment mess. Hopefully in the future someone hits the sweet spot with direct payments in your address, good rates and not compromising your privacy in the process.
If you were to check out this thread then you can see how much you could earn in various campaigns. There is really no advantage to "automatic" payouts as either way you still get your earnings in a timely manner. I think there might be one or two higher paying campaigns out there that allow you to receive payments to your own address what are those?
non automated campaings suck (at least the ones where you need to re-enroll every month or lose your spot). i only bother with those that give you a steady solid income, otherwise i get stressed out thinking i'll lose my spot next month because i didn't enroll on time.
and overall its great to be able to keep track of your earnings easier
April 16, 2015, 05:33:44 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
Requiring people to receive their payments via an exchange account also makes little sense when you have a escrow paying participants. There wouldn't be anything to stop the exchange from seizing funds that participants receive prior to them being able to withdraw which defeats the point of using escrow in the first place.
It would make more sense to decrease rates by 0.5% and allow people to receive payment to any address that participants wish. Then people would not need to worry about accidentally eating the only way they can access their account
You'd think that after nearly 7 months of flawless payouts that people would have some trust/faith in a service (mind you, most actually do).
My point is that if someone were to get ahold of your phone then they could easily steal all of your bitcoin as well as the point that regardless of how 'flawless' payments have been that escrow is not really protecting anyone.
Yup, that's another thing. Receiving your payment directly in your BTC address is always a peace of mind. That, coupled with the forced 2FA thing is annoying. As far as I know, only this and Bitmixer offer automated payments. Too bad Bitmixer's payment's rate is shit and the rest are still stuck in the middle ages with the manual enrollment mess. Hopefully in the future someone hits the sweet spot with direct payments in your address, good rates and not compromising your privacy in the process.
If you were to check out this thread then you can see how much you could earn in various campaigns. There is really no advantage to "automatic" payouts as either way you still get your earnings in a timely manner. I think there might be one or two higher paying campaigns out there that allow you to receive payments to your own address April 16, 2015, 05:20:15 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
Requiring people to receive their payments via an exchange account also makes little sense when you have a escrow paying participants. There wouldn't be anything to stop the exchange from seizing funds that participants receive prior to them being able to withdraw which defeats the point of using escrow in the first place.
It would make more sense to decrease rates by 0.5% and allow people to receive payment to any address that participants wish. Then people would not need to worry about accidentally eating the only way they can access their account
April 16, 2015, 04:44:54 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
Requiring people to receive their payments via an exchange account also makes little sense when you have a escrow paying participants. There wouldn't be anything to stop the exchange from seizing funds that participants receive prior to them being able to withdraw which defeats the point of using escrow in the first place.
It would make more sense to decrease rates by 0.5% and allow people to receive payment to any address that participants wish. Then people would not need to worry about accidentally eating the only way they can access their account
You'd think that after nearly 7 months of flawless payouts that people would have some trust/faith in a service (mind you, most actually do).
April 16, 2015, 04:37:23 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
Requiring people to receive their payments via an exchange account also makes little sense when you have a escrow paying participants. There wouldn't be anything to stop the exchange from seizing funds that participants receive prior to them being able to withdraw which defeats the point of using escrow in the first place.
It would make more sense to decrease rates by 0.5% and allow people to receive payment to any address that participants wish. Then people would not need to worry about accidentally eating the only way they can access their account
April 16, 2015, 04:06:34 PM
And how do they access this public wifi, duh? On a potato? You're making gross exaggerations based on inaccuracies to try fit your argument.
...
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato).
...
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato).
Dang! Potatoes had public wifi all the while! and I never even knew about it!
Potato phones are actually very popular in sub-Saharan Africa:
I love all these multi-purpose phones.
Waiting for the Potato Macbook and iPhone launch in my country...
April 16, 2015, 04:03:08 PM
And how do they access this public wifi, duh? On a potato? You're making gross exaggerations based on inaccuracies to try fit your argument.
No im not. There are lots of cheap ass places to access internet such as:
http://www.cibernetworld.com/wp-content/uploads/ciber-locutorio-locuciber-nor-01.jpg
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato). A phone is much cheaper than an Internet connection or a pc and like you said you could just use public wifi to save money on an expensive Internet connection (but if someone has the money to emigrate to an 'advanced country' I'm sure he has enough money to buy an 'advanced' phone (which are very cheap nowadays)). Not gonna get far without one to be honest (unless people can contact him on his trusty potato).
Yeah, thats why Dana White makes millions and does all his business using this
He literally only got a smartphone to shitpost on twitter, so there. But I guess you are smarter than Dana White and the guys on Coinapult.
Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You have a choice of whether to use this exchange or not and if you don't like the minimum requirements of this one or any others you don't like for whatever reasons just don't use them. And don't give them your personal number if you're that worried about privacy and get yourself a burner phone so no privacy has been compromised but you've just doubly protect your money in the process.
They are forcing you if you want to use this exchange, obviously you can always use another exchange, don't need to be that dense. Im just dropping common sense so this exchange doesn't end up as another of these low volume exchanges no one uses.
Yeah, right up until the day that you do. I've never had an std so I guess it's ok to go bareback every time too? You may or may not know how to secure your devices or coins 100% but many others don't and it's usually those ones that are naive enough to not use 2-f that get burnt because they don't know what's good for them (ie 2-f) or how to safely protect their coins. Every time I see someone on here who is complaining that they've lost their coins from blockchain.info or an exchange I always ask them if they had 2-factor set up. I'm sure you can guess what the answer is every single time - "No".
You never lose your Bitcoin until you do, so let's let the banks take care of our money!!1
Again, it's all about having options. They could have it enabled by default when you are registering (as an option that's ticked by default) and you could disable it and when you do, get an huge ass POPUP and daily private messages about how you need to enable 2FA if they are that worried. With this you are gaining more users than losing them. If someone loses coins after all that then guess what, it's their fucking fault, just like if you lose your own BTC any other way.
And yes, needless to say im not going to be using this exchange at the expense of losing privacy (even if I could because nowadays there are endless ways to bypass verifications, im just not going to bother when I have Poloniex etc). Im just giving them advice.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
April 16, 2015, 04:00:14 PM
And how do they access this public wifi, duh? On a potato? You're making gross exaggerations based on inaccuracies to try fit your argument.
...
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato).
...
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato).
Dang! Potatoes had public wifi all the while! and I never even knew about it!
Potato phones are actually very popular in sub-Saharan Africa:
April 16, 2015, 03:54:44 PM
And how do they access this public wifi, duh? On a potato? You're making gross exaggerations based on inaccuracies to try fit your argument.
...
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato).
...
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato).
Dang! Potatoes had public wifi all the while! and I never even knew about it!
April 16, 2015, 03:50:45 PM
Interesting debate. In the end it all comes down to what you choose to do. As hilariousandco said: Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You have a choice of whether to use this exchange or not and if you don't like the minimum requirements of this one or any others you don't like for whatever reasons just don't use them.
April 16, 2015, 03:49:34 PM
Duh, about everyone that doesn't live in a first world country?
A lot of people can have easy access to the internet these days in public places.
A lot of people can have easy access to the internet these days in public places.
And how do they access this public wifi, duh? On a potato? You're making gross exaggerations based on inaccuracies to try fit your argument.
Even if that wasn't the case, If you are a guy living in a poor country that emigrates to a more advanced country, what is he going to prioritize, a cheap internet connection (if he can't find a public wifi which he always could) or buying a McSmartphone to use apps?
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato). A phone is much cheaper than an Internet connection or a pc and like you said you could just use public wifi to save money on an expensive Internet connection (but if someone has the money to emigrate to an 'advanced country' I'm sure he has enough money to buy an 'advanced' phone (which are very cheap nowadays)). Not gonna get far without one to be honest (unless people can contact him on his trusty potato).
Again, this, and the fact this is the only exchange forcing 2FA on people are objective facts. It's all about having options. 2FA compromises your privacy when you have to give your personal phone number, people should have an option to risk less security for more privacy.
Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You have a choice of whether to use this exchange or not and if you don't like the minimum requirements of this one or any others you don't like for whatever reasons just don't use them. And don't give them your personal number if you're that worried about privacy and get yourself a burner phone so no privacy has been compromised but you've just doubly protect your money in the process.
Never in my life I used 2FA and I never lost a single coin
Yeah, right up until the day that you do. I've never had an std so I guess it's ok to go bareback every time too? You may or may not know how to secure your devices or coins 100% but many others don't and it's usually those ones that are naive enough to not use 2-f that get burnt because they don't know what's good for them (ie 2-f) or how to safely protect their coins. Every time I see someone on here who is complaining that they've lost their coins from blockchain.info or an exchange I always ask them if they had 2-factor set up. I'm sure you can guess what the answer is every single time - "No".
hmm pretty graphic terms hilarious but ur point is perfectly valid... logic seems to have gone out the window here :?
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
April 16, 2015, 03:45:45 PM
Duh, about everyone that doesn't live in a first world country?
A lot of people can have easy access to the internet these days in public places.
A lot of people can have easy access to the internet these days in public places.
And how do they access this public wifi, duh? On a potato? You're making gross exaggerations based on inaccuracies to try fit your argument.
Even if that wasn't the case, If you are a guy living in a poor country that emigrates to a more advanced country, what is he going to prioritize, a cheap internet connection (if he can't find a public wifi which he always could) or buying a McSmartphone to use apps?
Obviously the first thing would be something to connect to the internet (unless you're going to connect via that potato). A phone is much cheaper than an Internet connection or a pc and like you said you could just use public wifi to save money on an expensive Internet connection (but if someone has the money to emigrate to an 'advanced country' I'm sure he has enough money to buy an 'advanced' phone (which are very cheap nowadays)). Not gonna get far without one to be honest (unless people can contact him on his trusty potato).
Again, this, and the fact this is the only exchange forcing 2FA on people are objective facts. It's all about having options. 2FA compromises your privacy when you have to give your personal phone number, people should have an option to risk less security for more privacy.
Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You have a choice of whether to use this exchange or not and if you don't like the minimum requirements of this one or any others you don't like for whatever reasons just don't use them. And don't give them your personal number if you're that worried about privacy and get yourself a burner phone so no privacy has been compromised but you've just doubly protected your money in the process.
Never in my life I used 2FA and I never lost a single coin
Yeah, right up until the day that you do. I've never had an std so I guess it's ok to go bareback every time too? You may or may not know how to secure your devices or coins 100% but many others don't and it's usually those ones that are naive enough to not use 2-f that get burnt because they don't know what's good for them (ie 2-f) or how to safely protect their coins. Every time I see someone on here who is complaining that they've lost their coins from blockchain.info or an exchange I always ask them if they had 2-factor set up. I'm sure you can guess what the answer is every single time - "No".
April 16, 2015, 02:53:21 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
Duh, about everyone that doesn't live in a first world country?
A lot of people can have easy access to the internet these days in public places. Even if that wasn't the case, If you are a guy living in a poor country that emigrates to a more advanced country, what is he going to prioritize, a cheap internet connection (if he can't find a public wifi which he always could) or buying a McSmartphone to use apps?
Why is this a big thing?
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/coinapult-bitcoin-sms-wallet-allows-world-send-remittances-just-text/
Quote
Earlier today, Coinapult took to the Bitcoin subreddit to unveil their new, global Bitcoin service that functions on plain ol’ SMS technology. This means that users around the world that do not have smart phones or data plans will be able to use Coinapult SMS.
Again, this, and the fact this is the only exchange forcing 2FA on people are objective facts. It's all about having options. 2FA compromises your privacy when you have to give your personal phone number, people should have an option to risk less security for more privacy. Never in my life I used 2FA and I never lost a single coin, and i've used a ton of different exchanges and moved a lot of BTC. Why? because I take care of my coins. People should take care of their coins, get recommended to get 2FA on a daily if you want thought a popup message, but NOT force it.
Forcing things on people for the sake of security at the expense of a loss of privacy is exactly the same perverse argument the governments make.
April 16, 2015, 02:45:34 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
I have had trouble with 2FA and never intends to use it.
There are certain benefits an ancient phone has over a completely vulnerable smartphone. I clearly get the point he is making.
2FA is all hassles, but it might make it a little more secure. I got locked out because of that a few times. (not with Bit-x)
A little bit of hassle for a huge increase in security (a little compromise for a large benefit).
April 16, 2015, 02:43:30 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
How does it 'literally make no sense'? It literally does make sense because people lose their coins all the time and as soon as they do they bog down support with complaints asking where their coins have gone. And who are these people in the third world that don't have a phone but yet have the internet, computer and are actively involved in the crypto community?
I have had trouble with 2FA and never intends to use it.
There are certain benefits an ancient phone has over a completely vulnerable smartphone. I clearly get the point he is making.
2FA is all hassles*, but it might make it a little more secure. I got locked out because of that a few times. (not with Bit-x)
*Conditions apply.
Edit: For the reply below. It is rather the other way round.
April 16, 2015, 02:39:31 PM
It makes literally 0 sense to force 2FA upon people. Big annoying warning that says "2FA is very recommended" it's ok, but not forcing it, there is a reason no exchange does that. I use public numbers to bypass SMS verifications all the time myself because there's no reason you would need to give personal data at that level to do that. Again, there's a reason you don't need phone verification in any exchange to log in and do basic alt to alt trading. Of course, when fiat is involved, it's normal to start wanting more credentials, but forcing people with phone verification alienates people to use your service.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
If you live in a third world country, or lets say you don't have a smartphone (a LOT of people still don't), you can't use Google Auth which leads to being forced to check your phone every single time you log in. This is a big no-no.
Reconsider how you run this.
I don't run the service but I will pass your recommendations onto the team. The main issue you're stating here is that you're too lazy to check your phone every time you'd like to log in. Requiring users to have 2 factor authentication prevents the huge number of issues that other exchanges encounter daily, including hacks where users are at fault. Likewise, this isn't a basic altcoin to altcoin exchange platform.
Even if you use Google authenticator you must check your phone every time you log in so I'm not sure why you're using the fact that receiving a text message is too time consuming (you must check your phone each time) as a point.
Jump to: