Topic: "Not your keys, Not your coins" is not enough - page 3. (Read 999 times)

I guess this will answer your question.



LocalMonero includes some of the payment methods which are either centralized or banned in Bangladesh. So using any of them could be troublesome. And if you look at the payment methods for Bisq, there aren't any options to choose from for Bangladesh. When it comes to CEX, there are some local online payment methods that are included in some CEXs. Like Binance and Kucoin. It is not the best solution, but if used with some caution, we can protect some privacy from the government. The fear of getting hacked and data leaks is still there for CEX but the privacy we get from the government is quite helpful and as the other decentralized platforms are missing on local payment methods as CEX, we are unable to use it. If the other platforms add those, then that will be the best option.

funny point 1.
your cult(doomad lead) are the ones giving the bad trust rating because you hate that i call out your BS
you even cried to Gmax that i called out on your BS
you hate that i ruin your agenda of trying to offramp people to other networks that use middlemen..
sorry but your altnet middleman proposition is a load of crap with many flaws. accept that and move on


funny point 2
"bilateral split" is not even my buzzword.. funny part is that its a word your cult used first and when your cults narative could not admit(at the time) to the mandated fork(blackmailed vote) for anyone not supporting segwit should f**k off(though you said it many times..they should)  your cult leaders came up with that buzzword saying it was a mutual fork of 2 sides agreeing to split.
so you lot called it a bilateral split to hide that it was a mandated fork made by core
you lot hating that i did not use your buzzword so when i started using it just to engage your idiot army in conversation, you now years later want to pretend i came up with it.. ok now you are completely proven to be an idiot that has failed to do his research

i never said that bch was bitcoin. and you are a complete idiot for not knowing what actually happened. your mentor has lied to you yet again

just accept that your sub network uses middlemen(routers) who take a fee(commission) thus are payment facilitators which regulators have already noticed and are doing something about it.

then learn your subnetwork is a failure because other bridge networks and subnets have more liquidity locked up(with actual locks used) compared to your favoured subnetwork. because people have used your subnetwork. seen its dysfunctional and moved on

No one is debating that LN is more "bitcoiny" than the base layer. I'm merely making it known that you are spreading disinformation and that everyone should read your trust rating. You are NOT to be trusted.


Point which centralized entity issued an IOU. You use confusing descriptions and complex nonesense to make it look to the plebs that you know, but what you're truly doing is just misinforming the newbies.

Remember when you said that BCash is "also Bitcoin" because the network "bilaterally split into two"? Yes franknbeans, we remember.

imagine if bitcoin was popular enough so that people didn't need to first sell their bitcoin for fiat in order to buy things. imagine if bitcoin was useful enough and popular enough that everyone accepted it. but maybe that's impossible to happen without causing higher transaction fees. or having some layer 2 solution which you don't believe works for bitcoin. would you say that using LN is better than trusting some CEX or having to use something like Western Union to pay for bitcoin with some stranger?

you can't have everything. if you want one thing you might have to compromise in another thing. simple as that.

It's an insane mindset for you because you and people who think like you are tied to material things like money, I only have a couple thousands of USD worth of btc there so it's not big of a deal if there's a hack or some shit like that, I want to follow your advice and I know it's reasonable and you're concerned enough to care but I can't care enough what happens to those bitcoins, I'm learning to detach myself from material things, might sound like I'm condescending but that's the truth.
You're making an assumption too that I believe in that exchange and that I'm a bootlicker, no I'm not and I just laugh it off whenever something bad happens to the exchange. To answer your wonder, I don't care how many exchanges will go bankrupt before I change my mind because it won't.

Sometimes it's not as if one doesn't want to totally ignore the use of centralized exchanges, but most times that's just the option and choice left with a lot of people out there. Most people are not as exposed as a lot of us are opportuned to be here, so the only option they are left with is to make use of the centralized exchanges when it comes to exchanging their coins with other pairs.
 
As we all know, the dex out there always has a limited number of pairs compared to what the CEX has to offer, so in situations like that, if the person really needs to either buy such coins or have such coins to trade, they will be left with no option but to use the CEX in making their trade, but at the end of the day, they will have to take back control of their funds by withdrawing them back to their self-custodial wallet.
 
And that of the P2P option too, when it comes to exchanging to one's local currency, there are always limited kinds of local currency traders that we can find around there. Most times, when you see your local currency buyer, their rates are so low that one will not use them out of privacy and sell off their coins at a cheaper rate, which is nothing to be compared to that of the real market.

Let’s face it,

Centralized exchanges isn’t completely a do without. Your sure to have some dealing with centralized exchanges due to the challenges of decentralized exchanges such as navigation and possibly fees.

Many are aware of the existence of such a thing like decentralized exchanges but, the fact that they aren’t popular haven’t given many crypto users the opportunity they need to use or experiment on the decentralized exchanges out there.

In all that, it is worth knowing that there is a more proper and efficient way to use centralized exchanges and that has got nothing to do with having to save or store your coins on them.

My point is :

-Your CEX is hacked : risk for your funds + risk for your personal data
-Your non-KYC service is hacked : risk for your funds

A CEX is more risky from my point of view

And about Bisq, apart if the user downloads a fake software of Bisq, I don't really see what could go wrong ? its way of functioning is very protective of user funds

I'll have to disappoint the OP even more: even projects like Bisq are still prone to hacker attacks, phishing, malicious actions by the owners/developers etc. CEX or DEX doesn't matter - you can still lose your funds.

Exactly. We cannot control other people to get rid from CEX since they are also benefiting from it. As long as they do it with caution, then they will never create a problem from trusting CEX. However, if you trusted CEX that much that you decide to put all your coins into it, then I would say you are doing a very wrong move. CEX will never be trustworthy forever. Time will come that they’ll be insolvent due to personal reasons and certainly all your coins will be put at risk. The reason why it’s still early, learn to limit your storage in CEX and just use it when it’s necessary.

I don't understand how you can use a CEX in a country where BTC is banned but not Bisq for example ? How can using a CEX be safer than a P2P solution without KYC ?

LocalMonero or Bisq for example protect way more your privacy than any CEX.

Could please provide more details about it ? Very curious about your answer

That's right, I agree with a lot of what you wrote;  people trade and they don't know what they are doing, they don't have a clue what bitcoin or ethereum or monero is.  They don't know the underlying technology or the differences, they don't know why Bitcoin does this and why it does it better than others, they don't know how to keep it in their own private keys, in fact they don't know they really know that it can be moved to a safe place, because they been told to use an exchange and maybe they registered through a referral from a trusted friend.  There is still a long way to go.

We don't care about groups rejecting our advice because they support long term depositing of funds on centralized exchanges but I hope they don't persuade others without explaining the security guarantees of assets held on centralized exchanges. I have guided every trader/investor to recommend keeping funds in their wallet because “not your keys, not your coins/assets”, but I am not forcing anyone to take my advice, they have choices to manage their assets, they just need to know there is big risk if they have trusted the deposit of assets on any exchange.

No matter the level of evangelism, you do about telling people the danger involved in dealing with centralized exchanges, there is always going to be this set of people who will not heed the advice. I'm a big supporter of Not your keys, not your crypto self custody of a thing. Despite all measures, the reality is that you can't have everyone do the same thing because you don't control what the other person wants to do with his/her cryptos' investment, in terms of storage and all sort of things that makes them use these centralized exchanges.

The industry is still in its development stage and things may take full effect in the future.

There is one problem with this quote. This quote assumes that everybody that uses bitcoin understands its underlying tech. In fact, some people don't care about it at all. Some people just use crypto as a way to get rich quick. For them, it doesn't matter what they are trading. BTC, ETH, LTC, XMR, DOGE, SHIB... These are all the same for these people. For them BTC is just another casino token. We can't expect them to think that much even though it is in their interest to think about these stuff. Some people will fail anyway.

You said "Not your keys, Not your coins" is not enough... and I say, "Not your keys, Not your coins" is more than enough. (for these people anyway)

Using CEX in some situations is not an option, but THE only way to acquire Bitcoin. I am from Bangladesh and Bitcoin is banned here. So using any online payment method that holds my personal data will be foolish. We can not buy or sell using some of the websites you provided in the OP. Face-to-face transactions are not a good option either. Law enforcement could be hiding in the bush after setting a trap for us. Online banking? Not possible either. But with CEX, even if we are using it only for P2P transactions does not seem a bad idea in this kind of situation.

Again, I am not saying that we should use CEXs so mindlessly. Decentralization is the key and the reason for Bitcoin's existence. It is also a very important thing to consider in our life. We should protect our privacy at any cost. But if those are not available, then using those which will provide at least decent results would be the last resort. It has become a necessary evil for us. Can't eat it, and can't spit it out either. So gotta do what we can do.

Ah, brother it was my way to show out stupidity. We are hacked by centralized exchanges means we have built up beliefs that's making us to deposit our money on those exchanges. It means that our brains are totally hacked by those exchanges and we can't avoid using those exchanges. I assure you that most people who are crypto-traders are using those exchanges and they are also storing their money on those exchanges. I know that hackers can hack money out of those exchanges, and that thing can happen more easily with decentralized exchanges. The security measures of the centralized exchanges are way advanced than the decentralized ones.

I will still favor my beliefs that decentralized exchanges are more risky, and once example of such exchange was BetterCallRaul, they just rug-pulled users money, and created fake screenshots to prove that they were seized by authorities. That event happened on this forum because they were running their campaign on the forum, and after they were done with their rug-pull scheme they didn't even paid the remaining money of the participants of the signature campaign. That's why I think that it's more risky to trust decentralized exchanges because they can shutdown their operations anytime.

I would also clarify that I'm not in favor of centralized exchanges, but right now they are still more trustworthy than decentralized exchanges for conversion of Bitcoin into fiat or any other stable-coin for trading purpose. I wont say that all decentralized platforms are like those, but it would be unfair to say that those all decentralized exchanges can be trusted.

I think centralized exchanges do insure their customer's money like I have seen many users of FTX exchange has gotten their funds back after a long ban. Which indicates centralized exchanges concede about their customers and examples like these urge other traditional minded people who just step into crypto to use their centralized exchanges instead of DEXs.

Because they have not seen any refund case in DEXs. Well I also had not seen any if you have seen any case in which dexs has returned their user's assets after they were banned. Then please increase my knowledge by sharing it.

And you said, money lost by our own mistake on CEXs will not be refunded by them. I say it will also not be funded by DEXs too so this factor is not of big importance here.

Well, if these non kyc exchanges will ask for KYC in future then I hope other new exchanges will replace them with the same non kyc feature. So market is huge new players are keep coming the only thing changed is number of scammers.

I am not favoring centralized exchanges. I am just sharing my thoughts according to my understanding.

Although this approach is indeed profitable (earning some btc while binance keep your coins), it is at the same time dangerous for innumerous reasons.

• Exchange hacks...
• regulation problems may ban binance from your country and you might be unable to reach your coins.
• KYC compliance may force them to ask for documentation with proofs where did that btc come from. And they may just reject your sig campaign/mixed coins, keeping your funds hostage
• financial problems with binance (which can happen, even gigant banks can collapse)
• and list goes on

There is really no point into trying to put him some sense. We must have had this conversation for like at least 20 times. He is a delusional freak who dislikes the fact that people can use bitcoin in manners he disapprove of, and spreads mountains of fud to accomplish it.

I mean, check this shit:

He's trying to portray lightning as a bad protocol, because some don't use good software. That's as sane as portraying bitcoin as a bad protocol, because there's Binance in which you'll have to forfeit custody to use it, or calling bitcoin closed-source because there's Exodus wallet which isn't open-source.

We have literally debunked this shit already, and it has got quite boring now more.

By the same reasoning, miners (which are Bitcoin peers by the way) do get commission, so bad analogy once more.