XXL_AIImmortality is impossible, for now, rest is not. I'm pretty sure they are already thinking about a solution.

The rest is practically impossible, as in it will cost more than the reward. This is such a case. Trust me here, I know a thing or two about lost wallet recovery.

eidairaman1This is a reason to not trust it, he never was gonna give the funds back but use them inappropriatley...

R-T-BWhat evidence do you have for this outlandish claim, praytell?

I was waiting for a mom joke.

R-T-BI used crypto this year, am I a criminal too?

thieves can't [be]

Learning how the current banking system works is a good first step. All this misinformation is why there even is an altcoin market. Reminds me of all the snake oil surrounding Forex trading a couple decades ago, it's so similar it's impressively uncanny.

DeathtoGnomesthieves can't [be]

Not sure I understand the joke or it's passing completely over my head. Thieves are criminals, yes?

R-T-BNot sure I understand the joke or it's passing completely over my head. Thieves are criminals, yes?

right sorry, Thieves Cant is a language in DND, but its the spelling thats the joke.

yakkLearning how the current banking system works is a good first step. All this misinformation is why there even is an altcoin market. Reminds me of all the snake oil surrounding Forex trading a couple decades ago, it's so similar it's impressively uncanny.

Unlike the banking sector where lax controls make fraud possible, Crypto is basically a lawless area.

And so there are much more loose work arounds:
www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/02/08/quadrigacx-likely-lacked-any-eth-cold-wallets-per-report/

Which some negative people interpret as theft, fraud, embezzlement. hehehe
Did he die, or didn't he? More importantly is Quadrigacx insured?

damian246Unlike the banking sector where lax controls make fraud possible, Crypto is basically a lawless area.

And so there are much more loose work arounds:
www.theblockcrypto.com/2019/02/08/quadrigacx-likely-lacked-any-eth-cold-wallets-per-report/

Which some negative people interpret as theft, fraud, embezzlement. hehehe
Did he die, or didn't he? More importantly is Quadrigacx insured?

As general awareness grows, the initial lawless "golden age" disappears, you can see that with acquisitions like Goldman Sachs buying Poloniex, CBOE issuing Bitcoin Futures... and big investments firms are working to figure out their best options to "control" the market and extract profit at lowest risk. No going back now unfortunately bitcoin is mainstream now just needs legislation to catch up, and is also surprisingly. Many U.S. states independently are hurriedly passing laws to attract this business.

If I remember right, a registered investment business needs to be insured in Canada, so initial investor capital is at least (partially) protected and Quadrigacx was big enough to have to declare it. The real questions become; was the firm properly audited, how much money was really lost on their 1st ETH hack, why wasn't it forcibly shut down, and how much money is really locked up in this 2nd fiasco.

They'll be plenty of blame go around with over 190 million CAD dollars to account for.

I am not surprised. Only hardwallets provide security.

MatGrowOnly hardwallets provide security.

Paper wallets and cold storage are actaully better, but meh.

Guys I just hope they triangulate the whereabouts of individual cold wallets using entanglement and it is for sure how safe.

yakkAs general awareness grows, the initial lawless "golden age" disappears, you can see that with acquisitions like Goldman Sachs buying Poloniex, CBOE issuing Bitcoin Futures... and big investments firms are working to figure out their best options to "control" the market and extract profit at lowest risk. No going back now unfortunately bitcoin is mainstream now just needs legislation to catch up, and is also surprisingly. Many U.S. states independently are hurriedly passing laws to attract this business.

If I remember right, a registered investment business needs to be insured in Canada, so initial investor capital is at least (partially) protected and Quadrigacx was big enough to have to declare it. The real questions become; was the firm properly audited, how much money was really lost on their 1st ETH hack, why wasn't it forcibly shut down, and how much money is really locked up in this 2nd fiasco.

They'll be plenty of blame go around with over 190 million CAD dollars to account for.

I'm not so convinced that a general awareness is growing.
I believe we are in a downturn of society where people shut themselves out of "progress" because it disturbs their peaceful existence.
Too many people refuse to learn just the most simple things. The middle aged group cosy with Instagram and with facebook (Used in their Business)
refusing to broaden their business profile with tags. And it doesn't matter if you show them how effective Tags are for single posts.

My bro in law deals with shares, long turn investment but calls Crypto a Scam.

Pretty sure many Crypto warriors here have a few stories to tell.

damian246I'm not so convinced that a general awareness is growing.
I believe we are in a downturn of society where people shut themselves out of "progress" because it disturbs their peaceful existence.
Too many people refuse to learn just the most simple things. The middle aged group cosy with Instagram and with facebook (Used in their Business)
refusing to broaden their business profile with tags. And it doesn't matter if you show them how effective Tags are for single posts.

My bro in law deals with shares, long turn investment but calls Crypto a Scam.

Pretty sure many Crypto warriors here have a few stories to tell.

Like any new lucrative market, scams are abound to con money out of the would-be uninformed populace. Big firms are taking their first steps like Goldman Sachs as mentioned above, and now this week JP Morgan themselves issued their own new completely centralized and controlled altcoin.

Is JP Morgan's new altcoin a scam? Given their bad fraudulant history, what if Wells Fargo decides to issue their own altcoin, would that be a scam? These are all recognized legal institutions ;)

Meanwhile 10 years later Bitcoin continues on with no controlling owner and value is completely determined by the market with no interventions.

yakkLike any new lucrative market, scams are abound to con money out of the would-be uninformed populace. Big firms are taking their first steps like Goldman Sachs as mentioned above, and now this week JP Morgan themselves issued their own new completely centralized and controlled altcoin.

Is JP Morgan's new altcoin a scam? Given their bad fraudulant history, what if Wells Fargo decides to issue their own altcoin, would that be a scam? These are all recognized legal institutions ;)

Meanwhile 10 years later Bitcoin continues on with no controlling owner.

Well, he is anti-bitcoin and so is Mr. Warren Buffett.

mtcn77Well, he is anti-bitcoin and so is Mr. Warren Buffett.

They both have very, very big incentives to be anti-bitcoin. JPM just showed part of their hand by publicly issuing their altcoin under their own name, which IMO is very surprising. At least Goldman Sachs used a shell company to buy the Poloniex exchange to limit exposure to potential damages amongst other reasons.

If bitcoin was owned by a corporation it would most probably be sued into oblivion by every fiat issuing institution around the globe.

yakkThey both have very, very big incentives to be anti-bitcoin. JPM just showed part of their hand by publicly issuing their altcoin under their own name, which IMO is very surprising. At least Goldman Sachs used a shell company to buy the Poloniex exchange to limit exposure to potential damages amongst other reasons.

If bitcoin was owned by a corporation it would most probably be sued into oblivion by every fiat issuing institution around the globe.

I'm fully on the regulated Randist bandwagon. I just don't see how economies work by non-verified transactions. A transparent proof of concept is better, imo. I don't think GS is in the same league if they have to use shell companies. It is a matter of transparency and openness.

yakkIs JP Morgan's new altcoin a scam? Given their bad fraudulant history, what if Wells Fargo decides to issue their own altcoin, would that be a scam? These are all recognized legal institutions ;)

Only time will tell. I don't see much sense in the JPMorgan Coin. I don't think other banks will accept it.
And for swapping Currency around FIAT is totally capable. In the end its always FIAT.

mtcn77I'm fully on the regulated Randist bandwagon. I just don't see how economies work by non-verified transactions. A transparent proof of concept is better, imo. I don't think GS is in the same league if they have to use shell companies. It is a matter of transparency and openness.

Transactions verified (and by extension approved) by who?

yakkTransactions verified (and by extension approved) by who?

I mean if someone should be able to write out cheques on another personal account and counterfeit the signature, it wouldn't just be forgery, it would be a securities crash. Someone needs to take care of the bounds checking. Only fools believe in foolproof utilities.

mtcn77I mean if someone should be able to write out cheques on another personal account and counterfeit the signature, it wouldn't just be forgery, it would be a securities crash. Someone needs to take care of the bounds checking. Only fools believe in foolproof utilities.

Well, that's fraud, it's the equivalent to double-spend in crypto jargon. That's the cornerstone of all bitcoin transactions which are verified by the open source algorithm with no central overseer. Everything about it is transparent. However it's another story for every other crypto coin aside from bitcoin itself for differing reasons.

Many countries are rushing to impose regulation, or stating they won't have any to attract that industry. In the U.S. states like Wyoming are leading their country in terms of regulation.

yakkWell, that's fraud, it's the equivalent to double-spend in crypto jargon. That's the cornerstone of all bitcoin transactions which are verified by the open source algorithm with no central overseer. Everything about it is transparent. However it's another story for every other crypto coin aside from bitcoin itself for differing reasons.

Many countries are rushing to impose regulation, or stating they won't have any to attract that industry. In the U.S. states like Wyoming are leading their country in terms of regulation.

'No overseer' isn't transparent, imo. It is just hidden from sight. There is always the risk of a rogue hijacker seizing the blockchain. The problem isn't double spend, it is spending at the deficit of someone else. For all intents, if anyone can pull it off, I'd be more worried for myself than to try blocking it.

mtcn77'No overseer' isn't transparent, imo. It is just hidden from sight. There is always the risk of a rogue hijacker seizing the blockchain. The problem isn't double spend, it is spending at the deficit of someone else. For all intents, if anyone can pull it off, I'd be more worried for myself than to try blocking it.

Seizing a small blockchain by brute force is relatively easy and happens all the time, similar in concept to buying stock in a company for a hostile takeover. Doing that to bitcoin itself would be the equivalent to trying to buy your way to a hostile takeover of Apple or Amazon. In theory possible, but not practically possible.

Ok, so if someone has their private keys offline, how can somebody else hijack them?

yakkSeizing a small blockchain by brute force is relatively easy and happens all the time, similar in concept to buying stock in a company for a hostile takeover. Doing that to bitcoin itself would be the equivalent to trying to buy your way to a hostile takeover of Apple or Amazon. In theory possible, but not practically possible.

Ok, so if someone has their private keys offline, how can somebody else hijack them?

I'm sure that question underlines a possibility, regardless.

mtcn77I'm sure that question underlines a possibility, regardless.

Ok then ;)

damian246Only time will tell. I don't see much sense in the JPMorgan Coin. I don't think other banks will accept it.

Of course you don't. There's a huge misunderstanding of what it is on tech forums (which I find quite surprising, to be honest).
This is not a public coin, like bitcoin. You won't be able to buy it and sell someone. We won't be mining it. I doubt it will actually be visible to clients in any way.
It's just an IT solution that JPM will use internally. They're simply implementing a distributed ledger. 1 "JPM coin" will be worth 1 USD.

Why are they doing it? That's pretty simple.
When you transfer money to another person/account in the same bank, it can happen instantly. It's an internal operation.
When you transfer money to another bank, it has to go through an inter bank transfer system. That's why these transfers take at least few hours in the same country and usually at least a day between countries.

Remember JPM is a global bank. However, their offices in different countries are technically separate banks with separate books (even if they're all on the same server).
So every transfer has to go via the inter bank systems.
What will change, is that JPM will be able to secure the transaction based on distributed ledger and transfer money in seconds. The formal confirmation will still take 1-2 days (it'll have to go via the inter bank systems), but clients won't have to wait.
Also, this means that I, as JPM client in Poland (and I'm thinking about it), can open an investment account in JPM USA, that I'll use for investing on NASDAQ. So I'll be able to transfer money instantly and make instant operations (which makes intra day trading possible).
How this work today is: I can either have everything in US (which means I have to keep my money there, in USD) or I can invest in NASDAQ from my broker in Poland, but I pay high fees and every operation takes 1-2 days.

notbThat's why these transfers take at least few hours in the same country and usually at least a day between countries.

So far I know not any more, as SWIFT modernized its money transfers.
But you have a point as a third party usually cost more money. JP Morgan thinks alike the lines of the Crypro crowd ;)
Not bad for a bank which gave partially reason to the creation of Bitcoin.