Topic: "Not your keys, Not your coins" is not enough - page 4. (Read 1016 times)

"We" are not being hacked by centralized exchanges. They are hacked, lost their treasuries and as their users, we lose our money when they reject to compensate users or no longer have enough money for compensation. Exchanges can scam us too and run away with our money, not hack us.

Not we, not all of us store our coins on exchanges. If it is you, it is your choice.

Do you really trade day by day, very often?

Only store a little capital of all you have on exchanges to trade. If you store all capital on exchange account, hopefully you won't pay high cost if one exchange goes away like FTX within a week.

Even they are not 100% decentralized, you can use them more safely for your capital than with centralized exchanges. You must use one wallet for trading on DEX and never use your main wallet for DEX trading.

We all are being hacked by the centralized exchanges and yet we still use those exchanges. We all know that the coins we put on those exchanges aren't ours anymore, and still we let our money there. I'm also among the people who withdraw his earnings to a centralized exchange's wallet because that's the only valid option for me, and that's why I can't avoid it even though I know the risks. I'm putting a lot of money on the exchanges for trading purpose, and currently trusting  decentralized exchanges is more risker than the centralized ones.

I'm quite sure that I would never put my holdings on those exchanges, but I'm still forced to let my trading funds on the exchanges otherwise it would cost me way more to deposit and withdraw many times from the exchange's wallet to my personal wallet and from my personal wallet to exchange's wallet. I'm quite sure that there are many such users who are basically traders and they have to let their funds on those exchange's wallets because they have no other option available.

bitcoin peers just relay, they dont mess around co-signing payments nor take commissions/fee's per peer.. unlike LN

but i see how now you want to make an altnet pretend to be more bitcoiny than bitcoin.. nice try but your mentor has been selling you the bad information.. ask him for a refund
i do laugh when i see the same few people come to each others PR campaign defense

if you cant just take a private key from the wallet holding the coins to another wallet and just spend openly however you want. its not a true "your key, your coin" situation..
LN locks value up in a key and messes with silly units of measure(msat) that bitcoin does not recognise.
and no you cant just take a privkey out of LN and spend the funds openly elsewhere using any other true bitcoin wallet. your locked into a co-signed agreement with someone else. aka co-custodian

also
LN uses channel routing where middle men decide to use their value as a pass-the-parcel game of borrowing their balances to pas a payment, where they can refuse too. and they also charge a fee for agreeing..
and thats a fee per middleman not per payment.
 totally not the same as bitcoins peer relay system

LEARN SOMETHING

as for the second IOU status
many many LN wallets open channels and give inbound balance without a confirmed bitcoin transaction peg..
so yea..
and that onion payment promising to owe something to someone when they later settle.. those onion payment iou agreements are not even in a bitcoin tx format..

stop pretending LN is more like bitcoin than actual bitcoin. becasue LN is nothing like it on make levels

LEARN SOMETHING

even the LN devs know of its flaws hence why their solution is now to open custodian "factory" "federation" "hubs" "watchtowers" to manage users balance

and i do laugh when you say "just broadcast"
time you learn un-cooperative broadcasts

and one last lesson. this one will be the tough one
becasue bitcoin peers do not take a commission not have signing management of payments they are not classed as payment facilitators
however LN routers by have payment signing ability and take a fee. so yes routers are payment facilitators and you will soon learn by reading many countries regulations that they are going to come after LN routers and treating them as such, meaning they will require PF/MSB licences.
goodluck with your education. dont waste another 3 years on your mentors lies and empty promises and fantasies

The classic frankandbeans FUD. Plenty of disinformation for newbies to absorb, no?

 

There's no middleman in the Lightning Network, those are actually peers. Bitcoin Lightning Network is technically more a peer to peer network than Bitcoin's base layer.

There are no IOUs issued in the Lightning Network. Bitcoins locked in LN channels are signed transactions. They can be broadcasted to the Bitcoin network and be included in the blockchain.

doomads post history for years is his preference that people use middlemen(channel+routing partner) for payments. heck he even celebrates services that middleman the $->altnet token IOU's but he hates people using the same service to $->legacy bitcoin.
if he can persuade people to use their fiat via a middleman to buy his altnet IOU inbound balance of an altnet he is all for it. even at a cost of making bitcoin have more barriers of entry to just hoard bitcoin as bitcoin on the bitcoin network

he wants to ruin bitcoins exchange rate and ability so that people adopt his prefered altnet iou token which people are locked into a partnership with for months

i agree with other people CEX place is for exchanging(and withdrawing same day) and should not be used for custodianising/banking. but the way the games are being played by some. they are making barriers of entry for those that want to own the private keys and self hoard, by getting people to lock value up in other systems and networks pretending it offers more 'decentralisation' when reality if far different

This is insane mindset. So you're literally going to hold your coins in Binance for an undefined time, and with arbitrary reasoning (i.e., why until 100k, and not 90k?). I suggest you switch to self-custody the soonest possible.

Individuals like yourself tend to make utterly unreasonable assumptions that their exchange is too big to fail, and they do so with unwavering confidence. I wonder, how many centralized exchanges need to go bankrupt or experience hacking incidents before you come to your senses?

I've said it a few times, if Satoshi is dead he for sure had died a few more times from rolling in his grave.

That aside, there is a tiny difference here, Satoshi would be probably mad if you would use an intermediary to pay with Bitcoins, such a coinbase or Binance account, but if we talk strictly about buying and selling bitcoins for $ there is little alternative to a third party. Oh, you don't use Binance you sue Bisq, but you still get your fiat in a bank account, via WU, via Swish or any other payment method.
So if you're not going to use cash, you're still definitely going to use a 3rd party that for sure going to do all the above things you mentioned.

But again, despite what OP is claiming, people do this because! it's convenient and unless you find a way to do that p2p just as easily as pressing buy in an app where Gpay is autocompleting your cc details nothing is going to change, hundreds of innovations and companies have failed exactly because of this, we're in an age where everyone wants a tap and that's it, two taps maximum, once you ask them for a few extra steps it's bye bye.


Bitcoin has always been decentralized and will never be centralized.
If people want to use it like that they are free to do so, and not just you as I'm right now replying to more on this topic, you should not forget there are two things that are true at the same time:
"Not your keys, not your coins" but also "My coins, my decision"

Of course, it's not the outcome we would want, it's not making much sense but at the same time, but nothing is broken and the whole environment works just as planned, where everyone is making his moves as he wishes.

I use Binance so to share my point of view as to why I still continue to use it even though I already have Peach in my other phone is that I have my crypto in Earn in Binance and since I plan to hodl until 100k, I don't mind putting my bitcoins there so I can earn some satoshi everyday until it hits my target price, I tried to think of any other reason why I still use CEX but no, that's all the reason why, I guess some people use CEX the same reason as mine. I wouldn't say your idealism is naive, it's noble because you are helping carry the torch that Satoshi left behind which is advocating absolute freedom in financial matters.

In theory it might be better to use P2P to exchange Bitcoins, but for trading of course it is not good and even very impractical to use a P2P system. Indeed, at first Bitcoin was traded with a P2P system, but with the increasingly massive adoption of Bitcoin it is certainly impractical to use a system like this. The presence of the CEX platform is the answer to make it easier for users and traders who want to exchange or trade their Bitcoins more quickly and easily.
Maybe for those of you who use USD and only want to invest in Bitcoin, the P2P method might be more secure, but for some people who use local currency and want to trade quickly, using CEX is much more practical. So I personally think it's up to the user whether to use P2P or CEX, because each has its advantages and disadvantages, neither is much better nor worse.

says the guy that loves transactions getting dropped because he wants everyone to pay more fees, farm beyond a days labour of the unbanked..  just so he can offer a option to offramp users to a different network not made by satoshi that does have middle men that can block transactions.. decide not to pay out when its time to settle

yep if only doomad could see his own agenda goes against what he says today

and he wonders why im disappointed/annoyed/saddened by doomads agenda

I do wish more people saw it that way.  Imagine you are satoshi.  You've just designed a revolutionary new peer-to-peer protocol, where Person A can send funds to Person B without any intermediaries blocking the transaction, freezing funds, harvesting user data, etc.  And then the first thing people do with it is introduce middlemen who do all of those terrible things and more.  Wouldn't you be disappointed/annoyed/saddened by that?

I get that convenience is important to some people (or seemingly most people).  But isn't it missing the point somewhat when the whole idea was to remove the need for trusting intermediaries?  I guess there are always going to be too many daytraders to make my idealism anything other than pure naivité.

Nowadays I avoid centralised exchanges wherever possible.  It helps that all the ones that used to be tolerable are either gone or introduced KYC.  Plus I'm not much of a gambler, which I suspect is a considerable part of the appeal for some (I sometimes wonder how many people who call themselves 'traders' are merely people with a gambling addiction).  The cons of CEX massively outweigh the pros, so there's little incentive for me to be sucked in to all of it.

Likewise, the cooperation of centralized exchanges with governments is not always good. This works in favor of people only if they live in a state of law. Trust me, there are countries on Earth where you don't want your bank to know too much about you and who you are dealing with. And even more so, you will not like it if the exchange you use is registered in your country.

Not everything is so clear and local features should be taken into account.

The fact that centralized exchanges cooperate with government, isn't necessarily a bad thing. Obviously it's bad for privacy, but it makes bank transactions look less shady. At least my bank knows I'm dealing with a legit company, even better if it's registered in my country.

This is exactly what would set off all kinds of red AML flags at the bank.

Binance will just take your money when they made a mistake.

Your analysis is sharp and powerful. You want Bitcoin's decentralization back. In Bitcoin, "Not your keys, not your coins" emphasizes personal responsibility and control. We should apply this to Bitcoin exchangers too. You're right that secure Bitcoin storage is discussed more than secure, decentralized exchanges. Decentralized peer-to-peer exchanges show increased hostility to centralized exchanges and its concerns, such as privacy breaches, suspended accounts, and governmental interference.

I agree that we should advocate for Bisq, PeachBitcoin, Robosats, Majestic Bank, and LocalMonero as much as we do against centralized exchanges. Enhance decentralization, privacy, and individual control. The community should passionately support this cause. Celebrate our trustworthy, efficient, and truly P2P options. Let's promote these services. Bitcoin is about decentralization. Lets honor that fully.

It sounds very simple to do that, but we have a problem with many people being used to what is on offer from the Fiat financial system. People do not just use centralized services for the convenience, but rather for the "trust" and "security" that it offers.

The products that you listed are anonymous, but it is unregulated and inherently more risky. People are not used to that, so they look at products that are more in line with what they are used to.

I think most people do not know what the difference is between centralized and decentralized services and they simply do not care. 

I think the only main problem its most of the people still doesnt use the correct tools, its like i put an screw with a plier instead of a screwdriver.
Well this its the same thing, the exchange like his name says its for exchange and make movements, not to save your coins, but most of the people use them like a wallet, so from that comes the troubles.

Its easy as that. Use the things correctly and you are not gonna have any issue.

Many people trade on CEX because of the flexibility of the exchange. We all know that CEX is controlled and followed by governments, but because of the features and flexibility it offers people are likely to trade here. If DEX has no limitations people would not trade on CEX ever.

I think in terms of trading, CEX got more advantage than DEX as CEX have a good platform and base for traders to ply their trading. No fees and easy access to funds instead of paying fees to transfer or swap continuously but at that, your funds are still not safe. Your details with them are not secured at some point, they are likely going to leak your information to third parties in exchange for whatever they deem fit to get. So the idea of "not your keys, not your coin" is not bad but a piece of advice in advance to take caution while dealing with CEX as they can not be trusted to handle funds and data safely.

I think if you say "not your keys, not your coins" consider that you don't have to use CEX. Because what I have observed in the market is that when terms to this kind of exchanges you don't own the private key. You ask why people choose CEX, in my opinion, it's because of CEX is fast and you can easily transfer funds to Funding, Spot Wallet, and Futures Account without any fees. In fact, people mostly uses this exchange for businesses. So since "not your keys, not your coins", it's better to stay away your funds to CEX when you're just holding it for a long time.

While I agree with you, and truth be told I support with all my heart and soul the novel advocacy that bitcoin drives thanks to its decentralized nature, there's a method to the madness that these people who support and use CEXs are under.

For some, it's the convenience that it brings, "don't worry about the KYC process as they say, it's the one that's got 5 stars in the App Store, it got good reviews on Google Play, and a lot of people around me are using it, so why shouldn't I?" is some of their argument, which is a strong one at that too cause for me, there's little that could compete with convenience and efficiency, two things that CEX are able to do so with finesse. The paradigm is slowly changing however, as more and more people see how flawed the CEX world is, so in the future, it's pretty possible that more people use decentralized no KYC platforms in stead of the ones that we use right now.