#cryptocurrency skepticism | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

cryptotechnews24 · 1 year ago

Text

BlackRock's Surprising Move: Applying for a Bitcoin ETF Spot

BlackRock (NYSE: BLK), the world's largest asset manager, recently caught the attention of the cryptocurrency community with its unexpected decision to apply for a spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF). This move is significant, considering the firm's previously skeptical stance towards digital currencies.

Shifting Views: BlackRock's Skepticism Towards Cryptocurrency

In a 2018 interview, BlackRock's CEO, Larry Fink, openly expressed the company's skepticism regarding cryptocurrency. Fink stated that none of the firm's clients had displayed any interest in digital assets and, consequently, BlackRock saw no need to prepare for offering crypto-related products. This stance reflected a general sentiment within the company at that time. During the Bloomberg interview on July 16, 2018, Fink acknowledged the importance of blockchain technology but dismissed the possibility of BlackRock's clients seeking exposure to cryptocurrencies. He confidently stated, "I don't believe any client has sought out crypto exposure. I have not heard from any one client that they're looking to buy a cryptocurrency."

Triggers for Potential Entry into Crypto

While maintaining skepticism, Fink did mention that BlackRock would consider venturing into crypto investments once established structures and a sense of legitimacy were in place. The company emphasized the need for a more regulated and transparent environment surrounding cryptocurrencies. Since that interview, the cryptocurrency market has undergone notable developments, witnessing a surge in institutional players and overall market capitalization, despite ongoing regulatory uncertainties. Fink added, "When it becomes more legitimatized, when it has the true open nature of it that you identify who the players are on both sides, that's when we'll probably look at it as an alternative to all currencies."

BlackRock Embraces the Crypto Sector

In the years following the interview, BlackRock has taken various initiatives to embrace the crypto sector and adapt to changing market dynamics. In March 2022, the firm announced its active exploration of digital currencies, stablecoins, and the underlying technologies, driven by growing client interest. Furthermore, in August 2022, BlackRock formed a partnership with Coinbase, a leading cryptocurrency exchange, enabling select institutional clients to gain direct access to Bitcoin. This strategic move aimed to provide clients with increased exposure to the cryptocurrency asset class. BlackRock's reputation with regulatory bodies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has been commendable. A Finbold report highlighted the company's impressive track record of 575-1 in terms of SEC-approved ETFs. This positive relationship with regulators could potentially play a crucial role in the approval process of BlackRock's spot ETF application.

Implications for the Cryptocurrency Market

The potential approval of BlackRock's spot Bitcoin ETF application holds significant implications for the cryptocurrency market as a whole. It is important to note that the SEC has not yet granted approval for any spot Bitcoin ETFs, although it has given the green light to Bitcoin futures-based ETFs in the past. If approved, the introduction of a spot Bitcoin ETF would have far-reaching consequences. Such a product could exert a considerable influence on the value and perception of the cryptocurrency market. Investors would gain a more accessible and regulated avenue to invest in Bitcoin, potentially attracting a broader range of market participants.

Conclusion

BlackRock's surprising move to apply for a spot Bitcoin ETF spot demonstrates a shift in their stance towards cryptocurrency. From initial skepticism to actively exploring the crypto sector and forming strategic partnerships, the company has shown a willingness to adapt to the changing landscape. The potential approval of BlackRock's application could mark a significant milestone for the cryptocurrency market, opening doors to increased institutional participation and potentially shaping the future of digital asset investing. For more articles visit: Cryptotechnews24 Source: finbold.com

Latest Posts

Read the full article

#assetmanager #BlackRock #CryptoNews #cryptocurrency #digitalcurrencies #institutionalclients #LarryFink #regulatoryapproval #SecuritiesandExchangeCommission #skepticism #spotBitcoinETF #Stablecoins

0 notes

silverlineswap · 2 years ago

Text

IS GARY GENSLER USING U.S. ARMY FOR HIS CRYPTO SKEPTICISM?

SilverLineSwap-SPARCP2E

Who is Gary Gensler?

Gary Gensler, the former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), has been a vocal critic of cryptocurrencies. He has argued that they are too volatile and lack the necessary safeguards to be used as a medium of exchange.

What’s Hot?

Now, it seems that Gensler’s views have caught the attention of the US Army. In a recent report, the Army stated that it is “concerned about digital currencies being used to finance terrorism and other illicit activities.”

What Happened Next?

Gensler was quick to applaud the Army’s report. “I’m glad to see that at least one part of the US government is taking crypto seriously,” he said. “The Army’s report is an important step in recognizing that cryptos are a new asset class with unique features.”

Gensler’s criticism of cryptos has been met with mixed reactions. While some people agree with his assessment, others believe that he is simply trying to protect his former colleagues on Wall Street from competition.

But it turns out that Gensler may have been too quick to dismiss the potential benefits of digital currencies. In a recent interview with Bloomberg, he said that he is now exploring how blockchain technology could be used by the US Army.

How did it all start?

Gensler’s main concern is that most Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) are actually securities offerings, but they are not being regulated as such. He believes that this could lead to a lot of investors losing money when the cryptocurrency market crashes.

Gensler is not the only one who has voiced concerns about cryptocurrencies. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon has called Bitcoin a “fraud” and said that it will eventually blow up. And Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein has said that he is still “thinking about” Bitcoin, but he is not sure whether it is a fraud or a bubble.

Not Against the Source but just against the product.

Gensler said that he was impressed by how blockchain could be used to create trust between different parties, which is essential for transactions in war zones. “The US Army’s need for trust is even greater than Wall Street’s,” he said. “If you’re going to send someone into harm’s way, you better be able to trust them.”

He also noted that blockchain could help reduce corruption and improve transparency in military operations. “In many cases there are no auditors, no inspectors general,” he said. “You can’t have a modern army without some level of transparency and accountability.”

On an Ending Note:

While Gensler’s concerns are valid, his stance on crypto is a little hypocritical. After all, Gensler was a big supporter of blockchain technology while he was at the CFTC. He even said that blockchain could revolutionize the financial industry.

So why is Gensler so against crypto now? It seems like he’s just trying to protect his own interests. He was a big supporter of Dodd-Frank, and he knows that more regulation in the crypto world will benefit him and other large financial institutions.

Gensler should be careful though. The public is starting to see through his hypocrisy, and they don’t like it. If he keeps attacking cryptos, he could lose a lot of support from the community

#silverline crypto news #crypto #skepticism #Cryptocurrency #bitcoin

0 notes

dannydehek · 2 years ago

Text

Crypto's Journey: From Boom to Bust and Beyond

Cryptocurrency, or "crypto," has garnered a lot of attention in recent years for its potential as a means of payment and investment. However, the rise of crypto has not been without its challenges. In this blog, we will explore the rise and fall of the crypto market, highlighting its key players and the factors that contributed to its decline. We will also examine the future of crypto and consider whether it has a place in the global economy. - Crypto, or cryptocurrency, is a digital or virtual currency that uses cryptography for security and is decentralized. - The rise of crypto, led by the release of Bitcoin in 2009, was driven by its potential as a means of payment and investment. - The lack of regulation and increased volatility in the crypto market led to a loss of confidence and a decline in its value. - The future of crypto remains uncertain, with the market still volatile and many people skeptical of its viability Cryptocurrency, also known as "crypto," is a digital or virtual currency that uses cryptography for security and is decentralized, meaning it is not controlled by any single institution or government. Crypto first gained widespread attention in 2009 with the release of Bitcoin, the first and most well-known cryptocurrency. Bitcoin was created by an unknown individual or group of individuals using the pseudonym "Satoshi Nakamoto." In the years following its release, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies began to gain traction as a means of payment and investment. The decentralized nature of crypto, along with its potential for high returns, made it appealing to many individuals and businesses. Crypto also attracted the attention of investors, who saw the potential for high returns on their investments. The value of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies began to rise rapidly, leading to a frenzied market for crypto. The fall of Crypto However, the rise of crypto was not without its challenges. As more and more people began to invest in crypto, the market became increasingly volatile. The value of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies fluctuated wildly, leading to uncertainty and fear among investors. In addition, the lack of regulation in the crypto market made it a target for fraud and other illegal activities. This further eroded trust in the market and contributed to its volatility. As the market for crypto began to decline, many investors began to lose money. This led to a loss of confidence in the market and a decline in the value of crypto. Despite efforts to stabilize the market, the fall of crypto continued. As the market continued to decline, many people lost faith in the viability of crypto as a means of payment or investment. Today, the market for crypto remains volatile and uncertain. While some people still have faith in the potential of crypto, the rise and fall of the market has left many people skeptical. It remains to be seen whether crypto will ever regain the heights it once reached. P.S. If you like this article, please click “like” or provide comment, as that will motivate me to publish more. Share and inspire. Thank you. Read the full article

0 notes

math-bitcoin-price-prediction · 1 month ago

Text

Math Bitcoin Price Prediction: 2030, 2040, 2050 by Andrey Ignatenko

In 2030, Bitcoin's maximum price is anticipated to reach approximately $100,000, with some projections indicating it could rise to $1 million between the 2060s and 2080s. These insights are thoroughly examined in Math Bitcoin Price Prediction: 2030, 2040, 2050 by Andrey Ignatenko (on Amazon), which delves into a variety of economic elements.

The book provides a detailed analysis of key factors influencing Bitcoin's price, including supply and demand dynamics, historical market patterns, and macroeconomic influences. With a total supply capped at 21 million coins, Bitcoin's scarcity plays a crucial role in its valuation, particularly as interest from both retail and institutional investors continues to expand. Furthermore, the book discusses how advancements in technology and the growing acceptance of cryptocurrencies in mainstream finance are likely to further elevate Bitcoin's price.

The reliability of these forecasts is strengthened by the contributions of experts with PhDs in Economics and Computer Science, ensuring that the mathematical models used are both robust and scientifically valid. This rigorous approach not only adds credibility to the predictions but also provides a deeper understanding of Bitcoin's potential price trajectory over the next several decades.

Readers can explore reviews and feedback about the book at the book’s page on author’s website. This resource offers additional insights into how the analysis resonates with both enthusiasts and skeptics in the cryptocurrency community. The comprehensive nature of Ignatenko's work allows it to serve as an invaluable guide for anyone interested in the future of Bitcoin and the broader implications for the cryptocurrency market.

#crypto #bitcoin #crypto market #predictions #investment #cryptocurrency #cryptocurreny trading #books #reading #binance

9 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 3 months ago

Text

About three years ago, some of Google’s security engineers came to company attorneys with a gigantic mess.

The security team had discovered that Google unwittingly was enabling the spread of malicious software known as Glupteba. The malware had corrupted more than 1 million Windows computers, turning them into vehicles to mine cryptocurrency and spy on users. By hijacking Google accounts, purchasing Google ads to lure in users, and misusing Google cloud tools, the hackers behind the operation were on their way to infecting even more computers.

Tech giants such as Google long have had a playbook for destroying botnets like Glupteba. They call up fellow companies and US authorities and together coordinate a massive takedown operation. Sometimes, the cops file criminal charges. But this time around, Google’s legal team recommended an approach that the company hadn’t pursued in years: Sue the hackers for money.

The eventual lawsuit against two Russian men and a dozen unnamed individuals allegedly behind Glupteba would be the first of a run of at least eight cases that Google has filed against various hackers and scammers, adding to a sporadic few filings in the past. The tactic, which Google calls affirmative litigation, is meant to scare off would-be fraudsters and generate public awareness about scams. Now, for the first time, Google is opening up about this strategy.

Leaders of Google’s security and legal teams tell WIRED they believe going after people in court has paid off. Google hasn’t yet lost a case; it has collected almost all of the more than $2 million that it has won through the legal process, and forced hundreds of companies or websites to shut down. The awards are trivial to Google and its parent Alphabet, a $2 trillion company, but can be devastating for the defendants.

“We’re disrupting bad actors and deterring future activity, because it’s clear that the consequences and the costs are high,” says Chester Day, lead of the three-person “litigation advance” team at Google that’s focused on taking people to court. Google, he adds, is “making it clear that we’re willing to invest our resources into taking action to protect our users.”

Google blog posts and similar content about the lawsuits and the underlying scams have drawn more than 1 billion views, according to the company. Google representatives say that the awareness increases vigilance among consumers and shrinks the pool of vulnerable targets. “Educating people about how these crimes work may be the best thing we can do to stop the crime,” says Harold Chun, director of Google’s security legal team.

Several Big Tech companies have pursued affirmative litigation, though not necessarily under that name and with varying strategies. Microsoft has filed more than two dozen lawsuits since 2008 with a focus on securing court permission to dismantle botnets and other hacking tools. Amazon has been a prolific complainant since 2018, filing at least 42 cases over counterfeit products, 38 for reviews fraud, three for copyright abuse, and, recently, two for bogus product returns. Amazon has been filing so many counterfeit cases, in fact, that the federal court in western Washington assigned three magistrate judges to focus on them.

Since 2019, Meta has filed at least seven counterfeiting or data theft cases, with settlements or default judgments in four so far, including one in which it won nearly $300,000 in damages. Like Meta, Apple has sued Israeli spyware developer NSO Group for alleged hacking. (NSO is fighting the lawsuits. Trials are scheduled for next year.)

Some attorneys who’ve studied how the private sector uses litigation to enforce the law are skeptical about the payoff for the plaintiffs. David Noll, a Rutgers University law professor and author of a forthcoming book on state-supported private enforcement, Vigilante Nation, says it’s difficult to imagine that companies could bring the volume of cases needed to significantly stop abuse. “The fact that there is a small chance you might be named in a suit isn’t really going to deter you,” he says.

Noll believes the big risk is that Google and other tech companies could be burdening the court system with cases that ultimately secure some favorable headlines but do less to make the internet safer than the companies could achieve through investing in better antifraud measures.

Still, of the six outside legal experts who spoke to WIRED, all of them say that overall Google deserves credit for complementing the work of underfunded government agencies that are struggling to rein in online abuse. At an estimated hundreds of thousands of dollars per case, it’s a low-risk endeavor for the tech giant, former prosecutors say.

“Reliable and regular enforcement when folks step outside the law brings us closer to a society where less of us are harmed,” says Kathleen Morris, resident scholar of law at UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies. “This is healthy and robust collaboration on law enforcement by the public and private sectors.”

Google’s general counsel, Halimah DeLaine Prado, tells WIRED she wants to send a message to other companies that the corporate legal department can do more than be the team that says “no” to wild ideas. “Legal can be a proactive protector,” she says.

Marketing Scams

DeLaine Prado says that from its earliest days, Google has considered pursuing litigation against people abusing its platforms and intellectual property. But the first case she and other leaders within Google recall filing was in 2015. Google accused Local Lighthouse, a California marketing company, of placing robocalls to dupe small businesses into paying to improve their ranking in search results. Google alleged trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. As part of a settlement, Lighthouse stopped the problematic calls.

Since then, Google has filed complaints against five similar allegedly scammy marketers, with three of them ending in settlements so far. A Florida business and its owners agreed to pay Google $850,000, and a Los Angeles man who allegedly posted 14,000 fake reviews on Google Maps agreed to stop. Terms of the third deal, with an Illinois company, were not disclosed in court files, but Google spokesperson José Castañeda says it involved a seven-figure payment to Google.

Castañeda says Google has donated all the money it has collected to recipients such as the Better Business Bureau Institute, the National Consumers League, Partnership to End Addiction, Cybercrime Support Network, and various US chambers of commerce.

Another genre of cases has targeted individuals submitting false copyright complaints to Google to get content removed from the company’s services. A man in Omaha, Nebraska, whom Google accused of falsely claiming ownership of YouTube videos to extort money from their real owners, agreed to pay $25,000 to Google. Two individuals in Vietnam sued by Google never responded—a common issue.

In 2022, Google won default judgment against an individual in Cameroon who never responded to charges that he was using Gmail to scam people into paying for fake puppies, including a $700 basset hound. After the lawsuit, complaints about the scammer dried up, according to Google.

But legal experts say the most fascinating cases of Google’s affirmative litigation are four that it filed against alleged computer hackers. The suits emerged after months of investigation into Glupteba.

Security engineers at Google realized that eradicating Glupteba through the typical approach of taking down associated servers would be difficult. The hackers behind it had designed a backup system involving a blockchain that enabled Glupteba to resurrect itself and keep pilfering away.

That’s in part why Google’s attorneys suggested suing. Chun, the security legal director, had pursued cases against botnets as a federal prosecutor. “I thought this would be something good to do from a civil angle for a company as well,” he says. “Law enforcement agencies have limits on what they can do. And Google has a large voice and the litigation capacity.”

Chun and other attorneys cautioned their bosses that the hackers might use the lawsuit to reverse engineer Google’s investigation methods and make Glupteba more evasive and resilient. But ultimately, DeLaine Prado, who has final say over lawsuits, signed off. Chun says his former colleagues from the government applauded the complaint.

Google sued Dmitry Starovikov and Alexander Filippov, alleging that they were the Russia-based masterminds behind Glupteba after linking websites associated with the virus to Google accounts in their name. The search giant accused the duo (and unknown co-conspirators) of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. The lawsuit also alleged a trademark law violation for hiding Glupteba in a tool that claimed to download videos from YouTube.

Google argued that it had suffered substantial harm, having never received payment for ads it had sold to the hackers, who allegedly were using fraudulent credit cards. Users also had their experiences with Google services degraded, putting them at risk and impairing the value of the company’s brand, according to the lawsuit.

In court papers, Starovikov and Filippov stated they learned of the lawsuit only through friends and then decided to hire a New York attorney, Igor Litvak, to fight on their behalf. The defendants initially offered innocent explanations for their software related to Glupteba and said that their projects had not targeted the US market. At one point, they countersued Google for $10 million, and at another, they allegedly demanded $1 million each to hand over the keys to shut down the botnet. They eventually denied the allegations against them.

Following an ordeal over whether the defendants could obtain Russian passports, sit for depositions in Europe, and turn over work files, Google’s attorneys and Litvak traded accusations of lying. In 2022, US district judge Denise Cote sided with Google. She found in a 48-page ruling that the defendants “intentionally withheld information” and “misrepresented their willingness and ability” to disclose it to “avoid liability and further profit” from Glupteba. “The record here is sufficient to find a willful attempt to defraud the Court,” Cote wrote.

Cote sanctioned Litvak, and he agreed to pay Google $250,000 in total through 2027 to settle. The jurist also ordered Starovikov and Filippov to pay nearly $526,000 combined to cover Google’s attorneys fees. Castañeda says Google has received payment from all three.

Litvak tells WIRED that he still disagrees with the judge's findings and that Russia’s strained relationship with the US may have weighed on whom the judge trusted. “It’s telling that after I filed a motion to reconsider, pointing out serious issues with the court’s decision, the court went back on its original decision and referred [the] case to mediation, which ended with … me not having to admit to doing anything wrong,” he says in an email.

Google’s Castañeda says the case achieved the intended effect: The Russian hackers stopped misusing Google services and shut down their marketplace for stolen logins, while the number of Glupteba-infected computers fell 78 percent.

Not every case delivers measurable results. Defendants in Google’s other three hacking cases haven’t responded to the accusations. That led to Google last year winning default judgment against three individuals in Pakistan accused of infecting more than 672,000 computers by masquerading malware as downloads of Google’s Chrome browser. Unopposed victories are also expected in the remaining cases, including one in which overseas app developers allegedly stole money through bogus investment apps and are being sued for violating YouTube Community Guidelines.

Royal Hansen, Google’s vice president for privacy, safety, and security engineering, says lawsuits that don’t result in defendants paying up or agreeing to stop the alleged misuse still can make alleged perpetrators’ lives more difficult. Google uses the rulings as evidence to persuade businesses such as banks and cloud providers to cut off the defendants. Other hackers might not want to work with them knowing they have been outed. Defendants also could be more cautious about crossing international borders and becoming newly subject to scrutiny from local authorities. “That’s a win as well,” Hansen says.

More to Come

These days, Google’s small litigation advance team meets about twice a week with other units across the company to discuss potential lawsuits. They weigh whether a case could set a helpful precedent to give extra teeth to Google’s policies or draw awareness to an emerging threat.

Team leader Day says that as Google has honed its process, filing cases has become more affordable. That should lead to more lawsuits each year, including some for the first time potentially filed outside the US or representing specific users who have been harmed, he says.

The tech giants' ever-sprawling empires leave no shortage of novel cases to pursue. Google’s sibling company Waymo recently adopted the affirmative litigation approach and sued two people who allegedly smashed and slashed its self-driving taxis. Microsoft, meanwhile, is weighing cases against people using generative AI technology for malicious or fraudulent purposes, says Steven Masada, assistant general counsel of the company’s Digital Crimes Unit.

The questions remain whether the increasing cadence of litigation has left cybercriminals any bit deterred and whether a broader range of internet companies will go on the legal offense.

Erin Bernstein, who runs the California office of Bradley Bernstein Sands, a law firm that helps governments pursue civil lawsuits, says she recently pitched a handful of companies across industries on doing their own affirmative litigation. Though none have accepted her offer, she’s optimistic. “It will be a growing area,” Bernstein says.

But Google’s DeLaine Prado hopes affirmative litigation eventually slows. “In a perfect world, this work would disappear over time if it’s successful,” she says. “I actually want to make sure that our success kind of makes us almost obsolete, at least as it relates to this type of work.”

10 notes · View notes

jeffhirsch · 5 months ago

Text

Bitcoin Weakness Tracking Seasonality. September Bullseye Buy Again?

After many years as a crypto and Bitcoin skeptic I teamed up last year with Adrian Zduńczyk, CMT @crypto_birb to study Bitcoin seasonal patterns and trends. Our “Seasonality of Bitcoin” white paper came out September 26, the day of the average annual seasonal low. With $BTC continuing to track its seasonal pattern I would not be surprised if the original cryptocurrency settled into another textbook September seasonal low buy point this year as well

Last year BTC’s September low was a bullseye buy. Bitcoin nearly tripled from the September low of about 25,000 to the high this March just shy of 74,000. Take a look at your favorite technical chart and you can see how BTC has struggled to break above this 70K resistance level, which is only slightly higher than the old November 2021 highs.

So don’t be alarmed by recent weakness and volatility. This is just the usual historical seasonality when stocks and BTC drift sideways, chop, flop and suffer normal pullbacks until they tend to find support in late-summer or early-autumn.

8 notes · View notes

aemarling · 8 months ago

Text

Projected at X-Twitter in San Francisco.

Solarpunks must be skeptical of anyone saying it’s important to buy something, like a Tesla, or buy in, with cryptocurrency. Capitalists want nothing more than to co-opt radical movements, neutralizing them, to sell products.

People shilling crypto will tell you it decentralizes power. So that’s a lie, but solarpunks who believe it may be fooled into investing in this Ponzi scheme that burns more energy than some countries. Crypto will centralize power in billionaires, increasing their wealth and decreasing their accountability. That’s why Space Karen Elon Musk pushes crypto. The freer the market, the faster it devolves to monopoly. Rather than decentralizing anything, crypto would steer us toward a Bladerunner dystopia with its all-powerful Tyrell corporation.

Promoting crypto on a solarpunk podcast would be unforgivable. That’s not quite what happens on S5E1 “Let’s Talk Tech.” The hosts seem to understand crypto has no part in a solarpunk future or its prefigurative present. But they don’t come out and say that, adopting a tone of impartiality. At best, I would call this disingenuous. And it reeks of the both-sides-ism that corporate media used to paralyze climate action discourse for decades.

Crypto is not “appropriate tech,” and discussing it without any clarity is inappropriate.

#solarpunk #cyberpunk #activism

9 notes · View notes

cryptoolivia · 1 month ago

Text

What is USDT (Tether)? Is it a scam? (A must-read for beginners)

If you're new to cryptocurrency, you've likely heard of "USDT" or "Tether." In the news, phrases like "USDT scam" or "Tether money laundering" frequently appear, causing many newcomers to doubt the legitimacy of USDT. So, what exactly is USDT, and is it a scam? This article will explain what USDT is, its uses, and how to avoid potential scams involving it.

What is USDT (Tether)?

USDT, short for Tether, is a cryptocurrency issued by Tether Limited. Similar to other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum, USDT is a virtual currency. What sets USDT apart is its 1:1 peg to the US dollar, making it a "stablecoin." In other words, 1 USDT typically equals 1 USD (with slight fluctuations). USDT is designed to function as a digital version of the dollar and is commonly used as a stable store of value in cryptocurrency trading.

Launched in 2014 under the name Realcoin, later rebranded as Tether, USDT's goal was to offer a digital asset backed by traditional currencies (primarily the US dollar), helping cryptocurrency users avoid the extreme volatility of other digital currencies. Tether operates by claiming that for every 1 USDT issued, the company holds an equivalent value in USD or other assets in reserve, thus maintaining its stable value.

Why is USDT often linked to scams?

USDT itself is not a scam; it is a legitimate cryptocurrency. The reason we often hear about "USDT scams" is that fraudsters prefer to use USDT's stability and widespread use in their schemes.

Because 1 USDT is roughly equal to 1 USD and is widely accepted across major crypto exchanges, scammers frequently use fake platforms or fraudulent investment opportunities to trick victims into buying or transferring USDT. Since USDT can be quickly converted into fiat currency or other cryptocurrencies, it's a preferred tool for scammers. However, this doesn't make USDT a scam in and of itself.

How do scammers use USDT to commit fraud?

Common methods include:

Fake exchanges: Scammers create fake cryptocurrency exchanges to steal users' personal information and funds. They may lure you into buying USDT, but you soon realize that the USDT is either fake or nonexistent.

Impersonating customer service or friends: Through social media or phishing, scammers impersonate customer service representatives or friends, tricking you into buying USDT and transferring it to them under the guise of investment or transaction needs. In reality, your funds vanish.

Phishing websites: Fraudsters create fake websites, appearing identical to official platforms, to trick users into entering their wallet private keys or passwords, enabling them to steal USDT.

How to avoid USDT-related scams?

Use trusted exchanges: Always purchase USDT through reputable cryptocurrency exchanges (such as Binance, OKX, Bitget, gate·io, bybit). These platforms are highly regulated and more secure.

Be wary of false investment opportunities: Any promise of "high returns with zero risk" should be viewed skeptically. The crypto market is highly volatile, and promises of quick profits often signal scams.

Avoid clicking on suspicious links: If you receive unfamiliar links, especially those encouraging you to buy USDT or make transactions, exercise caution to avoid phishing traps.

Does USDT always maintain a 1:1 peg to the USD?

While USDT is intended to maintain a 1:1 peg with the US dollar, slight fluctuations may occur during periods of market stress or loss of confidence in Tether's reserves. However, most of the time, USDT remains stable at around 1 USD.

For other currencies like TWD or HKD, the USDT exchange rate is influenced by market demand. In domestic markets, USDT prices may slightly differ from the direct USD exchange rate, depending on supply and demand dynamics.

Where can you buy USDT?

Through regulated cryptocurrency exchanges: The safest way to purchase USDT is through reputable global exchanges, which support various payment methods, including bank transfers and credit cards.

OTC (Over-the-Counter) dealers: In certain regions like Hong Kong, you can buy USDT at physical stores. However, exercise caution as not all stores are regulated, and scams do exist.

Avoid private transactions: Refrain from purchasing USDT through unofficial channels or individual sellers, especially those involving cash deals, as these carry high risks of fraud or theft.

Common Questions (FAQ)

How is USDT different from other cryptocurrencies? USDT is a stablecoin, meaning its value is relatively stable (around 1 USD), while other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum are highly volatile. USDT is typically used as a store of value in crypto trading, while Bitcoin, for example, is more suitable for investment.

Is USDT safe? USDT itself is safe, but due to its popularity, scammers often use it in fraudulent schemes. Always use trusted platforms to purchase USDT and remain vigilant.

Why does USDT sometimes "de-peg"? USDT can experience minor fluctuations when market confidence in Tether's reserves wanes or in times of market stress. However, these instances are usually temporary.

Is USDT a good investment for beginners? USDT is not typically seen as an investment but rather as a stable store of value. It's more like a "digital dollar" in the crypto market, ideal for transferring value rather than speculating.

Conclusion

USDT is not a scam; it's a widely used stablecoin, designed to maintain a 1:1 value with the US dollar. However, due to its popularity, it is often used by scammers as a tool for fraud. To avoid being scammed, always purchase USDT through official channels and be cautious of investment offers. Remember, all investments carry risks, and caution is key to protecting your assets.

Through this article, I hope you now have a clearer understanding of USDT and how to avoid scams involving it. If you have further questions, feel free to reach out.

#cryptocurrency #bitcoin #usdt #tether

3 notes · View notes

unpluggedfinancial · 2 months ago

Text

Stay Vigilant: How to Avoid Scams in the Crypto Space

The cryptocurrency world is full of promise, opportunity, and innovation, but unfortunately, it's also a breeding ground for scams. As crypto continues to rise in popularity, so do the number of people looking to take advantage of others. According to a report by Chainalysis, cryptocurrency scams cost investors $14 billion in 2021 alone, highlighting the urgent need for vigilance. Scammers are getting smarter and more sophisticated, targeting individuals through social media and other online platforms. I've personally encountered these scams, and today I want to share my experience to help others stay safe.

The Psychology of Scams

At the heart of every scam is one thing: manipulation. Scammers are experts at playing on human emotions—whether it's excitement, greed, or desperation. They know how to make offers seem irresistible, making promises of unbelievable returns or exclusive opportunities. Their entire approach is built around FOMO (fear of missing out) and urgency, pushing people to act quickly without thinking critically.

It's important to understand that these scams often seem tailor-made for each individual. Scammers take time to study their targets, learning their interests and pain points, before crafting the perfect pitch.

Common Types of Scams

There are several common types of scams in the crypto space that you should be aware of:

Phishing Attempts: Attempts to steal sensitive information by pretending to be a legitimate entity. Whether it's a fake email or website, scammers often ask for private keys or passwords.

Fake Giveaways and Impersonations: You might have seen these on social media—"Send 0.1 BTC and get 1 BTC in return!" These scams often involve impersonators posing as well-known figures or organizations.

Investment Scams: These scams promise guaranteed returns that sound too good to be true. The scammer tries to convince you to invest in a project or exchange that ultimately disappears with your money.

Off-the-Wall Exchanges: Many scammers will direct you to sketchy, little-known exchanges, promising quick profits. These platforms often have no regulatory oversight and can vanish overnight, taking your assets with them.

Pump and Dump Schemes: In these scams, fraudsters artificially inflate the price of a cryptocurrency through false statements, then sell their holdings at the inflated price, causing the value to crash.

My Personal Experience

Recently, I've been targeted by scammers on X (formerly Twitter). The pattern is always the same: someone follows me, I follow them back, and within a short time, they slide into my DMs with an investment pitch. They promise incredible returns, sometimes showing fake testimonials or screenshots of "earnings." Every time, they try to send me to obscure exchanges, claiming I need to use their "exclusive platform" to achieve these returns.

The red flags were obvious to me: the promises were outlandish, and the exchanges were completely unfamiliar. It's important to trust your instincts in these situations. If something feels off, it probably is.

Why Scammers Succeed

So why do these scams work? It comes down to psychological tricks. Scammers create a sense of urgency, making you feel like you'll miss out on an opportunity if you don't act quickly. They also prey on greed, offering returns that are too good to pass up. For many people, the idea of easy money is tempting enough to lower their guard, even when the deal seems suspicious.

Scammers also succeed because they create fear or doubt. They might claim that the window of opportunity is closing, or that their "offer" is only available for a limited time. These tactics work because they bypass logical thinking and appeal directly to emotion.

How to Stay Vigilant

Staying safe in the crypto space requires a mixture of caution, skepticism, and research. Here are a few ways to protect yourself:

Recognize the Red Flags: If someone promises guaranteed returns, especially astronomical ones, be wary. Similarly, if you're being rushed into making a decision or are directed to an unknown exchange, stop and evaluate the situation.

Research Exchanges Before Investing: Always take time to thoroughly research any exchange you plan to use. Look at reviews, check for regulatory compliance, and verify if the platform has a strong track record.

Protect Your Digital Assets: Use hardware wallets and enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on all your accounts. Avoid sharing sensitive information like your private keys with anyone, and be mindful of phishing attempts.

Report Suspicious Activity: If you encounter a scam, report the account or platform to the appropriate authorities. On social media, you can block and report scammers to help protect others from falling victim.

Stay Informed: Keep up-to-date with the latest crypto news and scam tactics. Websites like CoinDesk and Cointelegraph can be valuable resources.

What to Do If You've Been Scammed

If you believe you've fallen victim to a crypto scam, take these steps immediately:

Stop All Communication: Cut off contact with the scammer immediately.

Document Everything: Save all communications, transaction details, and any other relevant information.

Report the Scam: Contact your local law enforcement and file a report. Also, report the scam to the relevant crypto exchange or platform.

Inform Your Bank: If you used a credit card or bank transfer, contact your bank immediately to try and stop or reverse the transaction.

Seek Support: Being scammed can be emotionally devastating. Don't hesitate to seek support from friends, family, or professional counseling services.

Conclusion

The world of crypto offers immense potential, but it's also filled with risks. Scammers are becoming smarter, and their methods more sophisticated, but by staying vigilant and doing your research, you can protect yourself from their traps. Remember, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Take the time to think critically, guard your assets, and most importantly, stay informed.

Stay safe out there, and happy investing!

Take Action Towards Financial Independence

If this article has sparked your interest in the transformative potential of Bitcoin, there's so much more to explore! Dive deeper into the world of financial independence and revolutionize your understanding of money by following my blog and subscribing to my YouTube channel.

🌐 Blog: Unplugged Financial Blog Stay updated with insightful articles, detailed analyses, and practical advice on navigating the evolving financial landscape. Learn about the history of money, the flaws in our current financial systems, and how Bitcoin can offer a path to a more secure and independent financial future.

📺 YouTube Channel: Unplugged Financial Subscribe to our YouTube channel for engaging video content that breaks down complex financial topics into easy-to-understand segments. From in-depth discussions on monetary policies to the latest trends in cryptocurrency, our videos will equip you with the knowledge you need to make informed financial decisions.

👍 Like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell to stay updated with our latest content. Whether you're a seasoned investor, a curious newcomer, or someone concerned about the future of your financial health, our community is here to support you on your journey to financial independence.

Support the Cause

If you enjoyed what you read and believe in the mission of spreading awareness about Bitcoin, I would greatly appreciate your support. Every little bit helps keep the content going and allows me to continue educating others about the future of finance.

Donate Bitcoin: bc1qpn98s4gtlvy686jne0sr8ccvfaxz646kk2tl8lu38zz4dvyyvflqgddylk

#CryptoScams #BitcoinSecurity #StayVigilant #CryptoAwareness #ScamPrevention #DigitalSecurity #CryptoSafety #BlockchainEducation #PhishingScams #ProtectYourAssets #Cryptocurrency #BitcoinCommunity #CryptoTips #InvestSafely #OnlineSecurity

2 notes · View notes

ladookhotnikov · 2 months ago

Text

Stablecoins or crypto?

Bloomberg released an interview with Austin Campbell, an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.

It was a discussion, mainly devoted to the role of stablecoin in the financial system. The interview is complimentary towards the stablecoins and generally quite skeptical towards the "traditional" crypto, WEB3 and DeFi.

It is important to understand the difference between stablecions and traditional cryptocurrencies. Both are based on blockchain. However, a stablecoin with the appropriate fiat security is within the traditional financial system. In fact, the technology of storage and transactions changes, but the economic meaning of a stablecion is not basically different from a fiat.

Cryptocurrencies like bitcoin are actually independent from states and have their own rules of emission and control. Ethereum-style blockchain is a multifunctional financial tool.

Our Forcecoin is a tool with fundamental value as a financial part of the Meta Force platform.

Stablecoins are susceptible to all the ills of modern economics, while decentralized crypto can become the basis for a new financial system and has every chance of gaining a head start in global competition.

#WEB3 #DeFi #crypto #Meta_Force #Forcecoin

4 notes · View notes

nightinghoul · 6 months ago

Text

About this NFT thing...

TL;DR I'm a disabled NFT creator, new to the scene, and it would help me to have followers on my design page, especially if they like cute bunny rabbits and mental health.

This is me: https://zora.co/@sourdoughbun

I'm one of these people who doesn't really like new things. Well, I'm autistic. I often feel wary of new technologies.

I think there's probably a lot of ND people in the crypto and NFT space, but I was skeptical. Plus, some people who are into it present themselves as a bit douchey. Some.

But, I have a person in my life who I consider a friend, but really he's a medical professional who does assisted stretching, and I see him once a week. (I have some really bad issues with muscle spasms. This helps a lot.)

He's young and hip and shit. Really nice guy, too. He started explaining cryptocurrancy and NFTs to me, and I was like, "Uuugh, that sounds stupid and annoying." But I was really catching on? And it started to make a lot of sense to me?

One of my special interests when I was a kid was stocks and bonds, because I liked to look at the graphs. When I was around eight, I decided that whenever I got some money, I was going to invest in gold, because commodities tend to be stable. But then I turned out to be bad at math, and have dyscalcula, plus I never had any money.

Anyway. Fast forward a few decades... I learned that NFTs are made from pngs.l (or can be, anyway). I took college courses in digital art, twenty years ago - got certified; have a degree in computer graphic design... But I didn't enjoy doing digital art until recently, after a lot of progress was made in digital technology. Even then, it took me a few years to find a stylus I was comfortable using. But now, I just do digital art all day. I'm usually working on my unpublished aspiring webcomic. Just for fun, I make several pngs every day.

So it turns out, I've been feeling like a failure for my entire life, but my brain is wired for the NFT scene. So I got four audio books on NFTs and cryptocurrancy, and I'm listening to them at double speed while making digital art of cute little bunnies. I also got into some crytpo groups on social media, but immediately felt uncomfortable. In that community, I feel like a real outsider.

Also, I'm not a hustler. I'm a tired person with social anxiety. If I could do this, I would feel like there's something I actually do - Something I could be good at. Narcolepsy keeps me at home - keeps me in bed a lot, and definitely doesn't let me drive. Before this, I was always very physical, and preferred jobs where I was working with animals, and able to be a busy body all day, cleaning up and caring for my shelter kitties. My skill set is all very physical and something I can't do anymore.

Except for this. This, I can do at home. I don't have to keep a set schedule. I don't have to work with other people who think I do everything weird. I don't have to worry about offending people by having a monotone voice, or not making eye contact. And it makes sense to me.

A lot of people hate crypto and NFTs and want them to go away. But there's this huge community of people who are enjoying themselves and staying sharp with this stuff. For me, it's helping so much with my brain fog to be engaged like this.

I just... I know if people don't see what I'm doing and don't care... I won't make any money; I won't feel like I can contribute financially to my household... I'll feel like a failure, and I'll burn out. And... I don't know how to show people what I'm doing. I don't know how to get my foot in the door.

So, having said all that, if anyone wants to follow me on Zora, or share my Zora page, I would be eternally grateful.

My brand is Sourdough Bun. Yes, it's just a cute bunny in a bunch of different little outfits. No, I don't dress my real life bunnies - They wouldn't like that.

But, I didn't want it to be without meaning, so my Sourdough Bun collections will always say, "Sourdough Bun knows it's okay to not be okay."

Sourdough Bun is a bunny who is usually in a bad mood, but she knows it's okay to express herself, and she finds enjoyment in what she loves. For her, that means wearing all sorts of costumes. She's also a shape shifter, and can appear with different patterns and colors of fur, and different kinds of ears. She does so for variety, rather then to fit in.

If you love bunny rabbits, or hate toxic positivity, you might like Sourdough Bun.

If you actually read all this... Wow! Thanks!

#nfts #nft creators #disabled nft creator #disabled artist #narcoleptic creator #autistic creator #autistic nft #bunny nfts #zora nfts

3 notes · View notes

treasure-mimic · 6 months ago

Text

Recently I was watching an old video from a couple years ago and had a moment of shock when the commentator felt the need to placate cryptocurrency by saying that blockchain on its own as a technology has potential. We're still trying to figure out what that potential is, the average user's need for decentralized ledger-holding.

There is a temptation to treat generative AI like this, like oh the hype is forming a bubble but the underlying technology has potential. The average person wants to use ChatGPT. I am becoming increasingly skeptical of this claim.

I've had half a mind to make any of these points individual posts and so I'm just kind of compiling all my points in one place. And, you know, disclaimer, there is a bias here, if you couldn't tell, it's possible that I am attracted to points against generative AI more because I dislike its effects on creative industries.

But a point that constantly, constantly comes up when you point out the shortcomings of the state of AI is that it will get better, it is getting better, as it improves it will become more practically useful for more and more fields, and the farther out we get I'm like. Is it? Every time Open AI comes out with a press release about the AI improving, it seems like it's not an improvement to any existing system but a new system entirely. Now our AI can make images, now our AI can make video, now our AI can interpret audio. But the AI text generator still tells lies, the AI images, while hard coded to not draw 5 hands in one place, still can't make hands, AI video still can't remain consistent. Issues with the current product are continuously paved over by introducing a shiny new product.

And if we talk about the people who actually want to use generative AI, okay. Companies are currently chomping at the bit in order to utilize generative AI in order to replace human workers. This desire is kind of ridiculous. I'm reminded of when Uber talked about wanting to replace its drivers with self-driving cars, this was never going to happen even if we could get cars to drive themselves. Uber's entire business model is predicated on the fact that they don't need to purchase a fleet of cars for every city in the world, the drivers provide the cars. As much as Uber doesn't want to pay its workers, it's not going to fire them for self-driving cars because paying one driver is cheaper than buying a car to replace them.

Generative AI is the same way, it feels cheap and accessible now because all the AI companies are being propped up by investors, but those investors have put in money under the explicit expectation that at some point the company needs to make money on its own. If that ever happens it will, necessarily, become an exclusive product. Making large language models is expensive, running them is expensive, it's so expensive that this boom has made Nvidia the wealthiest company on the planet, every second of GPU manufacturing is booked out for literal years by these companies because you need thousands upon thousands of them to run something at the scale of Open AI. In order for Open AI to become independently profitable, generative AI will have to become an exclusive product. There is no future in which every company is running their own chatbot client. At best there's a future where Open AI holds a functional monopoly and every company licenses out their product, similar to Adobe now. Even that is optimistic, I wish I could give you specific numbers, but needless to say the days of AI being cheap and accessible are numbered. Fees are coming, and if Open AI's financiers aren't able to balance those numbers, then the whole industry collapses.

And all of this is ignoring the issues that Open AI is currently facing, lawsuits from corporations stronger than any pissed off individual may result in LLMs being trained off exponentially smaller datasets than the current "all of the open internet". Public distrust is already being fueled by AI evangelists with no skills and no desire to learn skills. Attempts to implement these tools in a professional environment continuously cause problems because of how inflexible they are, and Chat GPT has already gotten a few companies in trouble by offering customer service that's too good that the companies don't want to back up.

So when people tell me that AI does have a future, that the technology is irrefutably valuable, more and more these days I find myself not fully believing them.

#anti ai #long post

3 notes · View notes