Topic: FixedFloat — fully automatic cryptocurrency exchange with Lightning Network⚡️ (Read 1895 times)

Yeah, the service is still working. I would however advise you to thoroughly check out their KYC/AML policy to avoid any possible KYC disputes in the future in case you are planning to create orders.
You can also look through some reviews — https://www.bestchange.com/fixedfloat-exchanger.html

Is this project still working?

I see their API and I'm considering to add to my projects their exchange features.

Shhhh, don't disturb the scammers' business model. You don't want to stop them from running giveaway ads of Elon making a million-dollar generating trade bot.

---

It is pathetic, Google companies literally won't do anything about scams unless you start fining them $30 billion, $40 billion, $50 billion and so on. The Youtube subreddit in particular is full of 1) users complaining about ads 2) users complaining about *dangerous* ads.

It's always about money, 

Maybe the fixedfloat team can try reporting abuse to the domain registrars, those they can sometime disappoint too even when there is a strong case.

They are probably going to start tightening the KYC and AML checks.

They haven't theymos on their board, right?     

btw. Is Fixedfloat safe (by authorities) considering that part of the stolen funds by hacking the Binance wallet ended up on this exchange?

https://twitter.com/zachxbt/status/1694326221511794706

Be careful for phishing sites! In the past days, I've seen "fixedflaot" and "fiixedfloat" advertising on Google.

Google responded to my report:
As long as they can earn from it, right?

I reported abuse to it's domain registrator and to Cloudflare (FixedFloat uses it). So, it's domain registrator is godaddy.com ([email protected] - for reporting) and Cloudflare's page for reporting abuse is: https://abuse.cloudflare.com/general. But after reporting it I went to exchangers ratings to do the same and saw there is a person who has a dispute with FixedFloat and FixedFloat stole $12000 from this person! So I don't know if it would be correct to report to it's domain registrator right now. Because if the domain registrator takes fixedfloat.com domain from them and closes their website then how would the person who has $12000 stolen contact FixedFloat admin? So I don't know if it's a good idea to report to Godaddy now.

Also reported to antiviruses:

Kaspersky:

[email protected]

ESET:

https://phishing.eset.com/ru-ru/report

DrWeb:

https://support.drweb.ru/new/urlfilter/

Avast:

https://www.avast.ru/report-malicious-file.php

I'm talking about small exchangers. Thay have malicious terms and don't get shut down because in Russia it doesn't work like this. In Russia you don't get shut down if you have malicious rules. I mean, normally nobody cares. As for big centralized exchangers, in their cases rules about blocking funds are inappropriate but aren't malicious and aren't against the law. Because they are legal registered companies. So you can sue them, they have duties etc.


I don't want them to shut down. I want to show them they must respect customers and must remove crazy rules. The community doesnt't want these rules. And this would solve the bigger problem partially. If small exchangers stop to use big centralized ones and start to use noncustodial wallets for their coins, the part of the bigger problem will be solved.


In this case I think "both parties agreed" works Because as a legal financial organization a big exchanger unfortunately has a right to confiscate funds. In fact in this case funds are confiscated by governments with help of big exchangers. But when someone registers on a big exchanger and then puts his coins there he expects his coins to be reviewed and maybe confiscated. Because in this case it's pretty much like putting your coins in a bank. Big exchanger's users are well informed and agree with this. They accept this because want the government to control their financial operations and want to have guarantees a big exchangers gives them. I know these guarantees are BS and it's much safer to use a noncustodial wallet but many people don't agree with that and consider Binance a safer place to keep coins. And also many people think governement control gives them safety. It's their decision.


Because of different legal status. I explained this above. The difference is a big exchanger is a legal registered company, it has duties and responsibility and acts according the laws, provides you it's legal data so you can go to court etc. That's why a big exchanger has authority to block funds. And a small exchanger isn't a company, it's some anonymous guy. He doesn't give you any guarantees, doesn't have duties and doesn't have any authority. So he wants to stay anonymous and have zero responsibility but he doesn't want you to be anonymous and can just take your coins.

It's like asking "if police can detain people why some random guy you see on the street can't?". Because there is a difference


I'm not people's nanny Also I don't want small ones to get banned. I want them to work like normal people and according to their legal status. They can't demand from clients anything they want. Or both a customer and an exchanger stay anonymous (and in this case nobody asks for documents and nobbody blocks funds) or both give personal and legal info to each other, exchanger gives guarantees, has authority to block funds and does it legally etc. But it can't be like "I stay anonymous and work illegally but you give me your docs and I block your money".


Showing them alternatives is very important. But it doesn't mean we just should accept anything small exchangers do. Both things are important. And also as for small exchangers if many people knew how crazy their rules are I think the market would decide to get rid of them very soon. The problem is nobody can't even imagine some random anonymous guy puts in his rules he can confiscate your funds.

They must be legal though, otherwise they'd get shut down. I'm not talking about instant exchangers but any kind of centralized exchange, in general. They basically all have such a clause.

You are trying to get instant exchangers offline by pressuring the hosting services that they use?
In my opinion, that doesn't solve the bigger problem, which are the actual centralized exchanges behind these services. That's where the largest sums of money are 'stolen'; people depositing whole coins and getting them confiscated.

Why would it be illegal for small exchangers to confiscate funds (and write it in their terms), but legal for the big ones? Even if you get all the little ones banned, people will just lose their money to the big ones. That's why I believe showing them the alternatives is much more important. If they get it, the market will decide, i.e. centralized exchanges with shitty terms (big or small) will have to change course to stay afloat.

Yes, of course we should use alternatives. But it's not the only thing we can do.


This is exactly what exchangers do. They have malicious terms.


Yes we are. If many people complain. Nobody complains to hosters, domain registrators, antiviruses, tax department etc. Normally people complain to ratings like Bestchange. This doesn't work.


I don't agree with you. I think we can help the community both ways. Presenting the alternatives and creating problems to exchangers.


Do you think exchangers are billion-dollar companies? You are so wrong about this. I'm not talking about Binance etc. I'm talking about an average exchanger. They are just physical persons like you and aren't companies. And they don't have billions of dollars, normally they work as a thrird-party and don't have this amount of funds. Also as I said before 2 exchangers alreade changed their rules because of me. And I only talked to their supports to achieve this. So why is that if we can do nothing about their scam rules?

You're talking to the wrong person. I've been doing the only thing we can do against this, for years; which is informing people about these practices and recommending alternatives.

I'm just talking from experience; nobody is legally 'scammed' if they agreed to the terms they agreed to; unless a court finds the terms malicious. If exchanges are running with such terms or similar ones, for a decade, we're not going to stop them doing so by complaining online. We can only help the community by developing and presenting the alternatives that do exist.

Good luck! As I've been saying; you're late to the party. How are you envisioning getting billion-dollar companies to change course?

I know. So? Let's just accept this and do nothing about this? If for you it is ok to accept anything you've been told to accept it doesn't mean everyone thinks so.


"You may have a chance"?   Seriously? I didn't get ripped off, I just noticed FixedFloat has a right to scam in their opinion. And informed people. But. "I may have chance to have my own money back"? Am I in an asylum? If this is my money nobody has a right to take and "block" it. This is so obvious. No chances. This is not something customers must beg and hope for. What a wild idea.



So we must act and show them such terms don't go with customers and will result in problems for exchangers that have such terms.

And while you accept any ToS, then beg and hope to have your own funds I already made 2 exchangers to change their rules.

Technically you can, and you'd be surprised how many businesses (especially in crypto) have such terms. You don't seem to read TOS much, do you?
But yeah, as dkbit said, if you did get ripped off, your local TOS didn't include that sentence and also armed with archives of the website showing it was changed after 2020 without updating the date, you may have a chance of getting your money back.

Who's gonna tell him?
Here's a hint: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/newbies-dont-use-centralized-exchanges-5393961

^{Every single exchange has such terms.}

What if a bakery sells poisoned bread because it is in their ToS so "both parties agreed" and "it's a free market"? What if you buy clothes from a clothes shop and they tell you "Well, we took your money now but we'll give you nothing, bye. This rule was stated in our ToS". Free market, no? Following your logic any business can put in their ToS "We can scam you" and just take your money. And then goes "both parties agreed" and "free market". Add to this they put their ToS under the carpet in their shop so you didn't see it so "both parties agreed" I stay for the free market too. But exists a common sense. You can't just put in ToS "I have a right to scam customers" then scam them and tell it's okay because it's in ToS. I mean, technically you can, you can write it in your ToS. But it wouldn't be ok and you would be a scammer.


"We have a right to scam you" - look how short, fits any screen perfectly, doesn't need much space The problem is nobody expects an exchanger to have a right to scam customers stated in a ToS. Because this is against common sense. And it's completely normal people don't expect rules like this. Vice versa it would be very strange if people expected something like that and searched for that in someone's ToS. Again, when you go to a clothes shop do you have an idea you should read their ToS to check if the shop has a right to scam you? No, because this is just crazy. So you are telling we shouldn't use common sense when dealing with exchangers and should expect anything to happen and to be in ToS. So we can expect for example "Our exchanger will ask you for your nude photos" or "Our exchanger will ask you to cut your ear and send to us". Following your logic if it's in ToS it's ok and should be expected. Doesn't matter what it is.


Of course, that's why I said above if clients were informed they never would use such service. You won't use a bakery that is selling poisoned bread. But if you haven't seen other customers dead after eating this bread you would never have in mind "our bakery puts poison to bread" can be in ToS. And you're not supposed to. Because it's ok not to expect crazy things to be there. What is not ok is to have such crazy things in ToS. So if a baker sells poisoned bread I don't think "just don't buy from him" works in this case. I think the baker shouldn't be surprised when some day someone cracks his head. It would be logical and fair.

And I will inform people about scammer exchangers and will report these exchangers everywhere I can. "Just don't use" doesn't work for me in this case, I won't just observe scam happening daily and think "Oh, it's in ToS so it's ok".


Yes it is illegal. They can't have any ToS they want. Technically they can but it would be against the law. The law tells only financial organizations can perform KYC checks and seize funds. Can't believe I must explain why one physical person can't seize funds of another physical person. If you think so I want to seize your funds too, send me some coins please  I'll seize them only to perform check, I promise. Exchangers aren't police, aren't banks. You agree only police has the right to detain you, don't you? Same thing for seizing funds. Anonymous person from internet can't do this just because he or she wrote it in their ToS. Having such rules in ToS doesn't make it ok.

It's not really illegal, they can have their own terms and change them at any time, and I am not defending anyone here, just stating the fact.
If you examine what was happening with  centralized exchanges, lending platforms and some gambling website, they did hold ands seized coins of their customers many times.
In case you used russian version and there was no ToS rules, maybe you have some chance to get your coins back, that is if you can prove this somehow.

That is really problematic, but I would like to hear someone official from FixedFloat talking more about this issue.
Have they ever registered and wrote something in Bitcointalk forum?

What if both parties agreed to it, though? Like when doing a Bitcoin escrow on this forum?

It's ok if you agreed to it, no? If you don't like the terms, choose another service instead. That's the free market..

It looks absurd to me, which is why I always advocate for https://bisq.network/ for any larger sum of money (and against any centralized exchange in general).
'clients don't read ToS' is a non-argument. In most countries, 'Ignorantia juris non excusat' is a commonly known law, i.e. if you don't know the law or in this case, terms of service, it's your fault and doesn't protect you from punishment. It is your duty to be aware of all terms and conditions before using a service.
It is not their duty to show this information during an exchange. Just like Facebook doesn't have a message next to the 'Post' button about all the evil and wicked ways in which this data you're about to post, will be mined, linked, used and archived forever + sold to everyone who pays them. Of course it doesn't, because it would fill up the whole screen.

Clients aren't forced to use the service, though. It goes either way.

No, it wouldn't. I personally don't know any country where it would be legal for one physical person to freeze other physical person's funds. Because having authority is necessary to do this. A physical person doesn't have one, only financial companies.



I even don't know what to say if you think it's ok when some random anonymous person blocks your funds. If it doesn't look like an absurd to you I don't know how to explain this. "Both parties agree" because normally clients don't read ToS. Nobody would agree after reading. And FixedFloat doesn't show any message stating this during an exchange. And Bestchange doesn't show "asks for personal info" icon near FixedFloat's name. So the majority of clients don't know.

Blocking funds without having authority is a scam. Banks block because they collaborate with officials and must comply with laws as a financial organization. Why does some random person who doesn't have any company, works anonymously and isn't connected with any government institution block? Just because wants to, there isn't any reason. And if you want to say "they do it because they work with Binance", well, it's not client's problem. Clients don't force them to work with Binance. Also working with Binance doesn't give them any authority for performing KYC. They even don't give you any guarantees your personal data will be safe and won't be sold.

Is that so? Wouldn't it depend on the country they operate in, whether they have such authority or not? And if you accept such terms, it should be allowed anyway, right? Sure; some things are 'unlawful' in the sense that even if someone gets you to sign an agreement, it can't and won't be enforced. But 'if you choose to exchange with us, your funds can be frozen', sounds like something that should be legal if both parties agree.

I'm not defending these practices, just saying if it's in the terms and conditions, simply expect it to happen sometimes or use a different service.
I personally found it especially suspicious that the 'last changed' date of their TOU was not updated; therefore leaving users in the belief that nothing changed since 2020. This may even be used in court to argue that any changes to the document since 2020 are not enforceable.

I used Russian version and they don't have ToS in Russian at all. So I think many Russian speaking people won't know about this change. Also please keep in mind they aren't legally registered company. They work anonymously, don't have any legal data on their website. So they don't have any authority to freeze someone's funds. Only banks and other financial organizations can do this. And one physical person can't block funds of another physical person just because he or she wants to. For the same reason they can't demand any personal data. So blocking funds like this is just a scam.


No it doesn't mean they can. I mean it doesn't mean they can put terms like this in ToS. It's illegal. But of course they will block your funds because they'll do anything they want. And as for Bestchange's admin, I already talked with him by email. I wrote about it in my new topic here.


I made a topic about this, please read: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bestchange-keeps-scammer-exchangers-and-probably-collaborates-with-them-5424907

You should try talking with BestChange in forum, but since FixedFloat terms are saying they can freeze your coins, it means they can (and will) do it: 

It's interesting that BestChange didn't mark them with new KYC icon, that just shoes you shouldn't blindly trust statements from any website because terms and rules are changing all the time.
This is how FixedFloat looks in bestchange website, and you can't find icon that looks like a profile:



And this is few random examples how exchanges with clear KYC risks look like: