Why should basic consumer protection be a little known secret that nobody knows about? Who holds the developers accountable should they decide, nah, I'm not going to refund. What judgment do developers exercise when deciding a refund? Are there hidden transaction fees attached to issuing a refund given the market volatility to even cash out or is that comped when fraud is committed against you as well? Is that a human made decision or one conducted through some machine algorithm? If humans determine the decision ultimately whether a transaction is refunded, what rationality do they use when making their decision and if so how is that any different from a regular banking institution governed by people? Is the rationality to determine whether to issue a refund public or also a little known secret? What authority do developers have over anyone else that their judgment is the final verdict? Why do they get to decide? If it's algorithm based, is the algorithm public or also a little known secret? Who designed the algorithm and why is their algorithm the final authority to determine basic consumer protection?
Can you point me to the procedure for this? I'd like to learn more about how this is done and the time it takes. And why so secretive? When TD Ameritrade or my Chase card number gets hacked or stolen/misused, they return my money to me and those like me -- sometimes within minutes (after a phonecall). This doesn't devastate the value of the dollar or the stock I own with them. If bitcoin itself fails/is hacked, it affects pretty much everyone, what does that do to bitcoin's value since it's the basic unit of exchange itself being hacked.
But your wallet can be hacked, you can fall prey to social engineering and you can find developers that rug pull and don't issue refunds. Is there a governing body within the bitcoin architecture that would protect me should I fall prey to such tactics the way other financial institutions would?
And Bear Stearns will never fail. What's your point? Simply because something hasn't been done doesn't mean it couldn't happen. I'm more concerned with what the ramifications are in the event it does. Because if it does, that would be my savings and anything related. This is why I don't think my trading, banking, savings, etc. accounts won't ever be hacked, but I know I can do something about it afterwards or at least where to go to see what I can do about it.
sure, there are bitcoin custodians that can offer you such a guarantee, if self custody doesn't appeal to you
But it's not default across the entire bitcoin architecture? Basic consumer protection is something you have to search for and opt in and isn't something available to every investor in bitcoin by default like other financial institutions?
Did the FBI Hack Bitcoin? https://www.isaca.org/resources/new...n-deconstructing-the-colonial-pipeline-ransom
I’ve only ever bought Bitcoin once to gamble online , but I think I’d like to take the risk of buying while it’s low. I have Coinbase- is this still ok to use to buy Bitcoin?
i use coinbase without any issues and kucoin for assets not listed on CB. i dont think hack is the right word. not surprised as all transactions are public to the chain.
I bought just under a thousand not too long ago and have sold it 3 times for a small profit and have bought back in cheaper than what I originally paid for each time. I think I will buy back in today. I thought I was using Coinbase until this post. I looked at my phone and I've been using cash app. I could have sworn I was using coinbase.
IMF directors urge El Salvador to remove Bitcoin as legal tender IMF executive directors "stressed that there are large risks associated with the use of Bitcoin on financial stability, financial integrity, and consumer protection, as well as the associated fiscal contingent liabilities," the latest press release stated. "They urged the authorities to narrow the scope of the Bitcoin law by removing Bitcoin’s legal tender status." It continued: "Some directors also expressed concern over the risks associated with issuing Bitcoin-backed bonds." The IMF's take on Bitcoin in El Salvador is especially relevant due to reports that the organization has been in lending talks with the Central American country. Today, Bloomberg reported that the IMF's concerns about Bitcoin have "stymied" talks with El Salvador about providing a $1.3 billion IMF loan. El Salvador made Bitcoin legal tender alongside the U.S. dollar on Sept. 7, a few months after president Nayib Bukele announced plans to do so last June.
@London'sBurning apologies for the extended delay in responding. This is a lot to cover and looking back into these subjects and formulating thoughts on it is a several hours long project. Bear with me. In the interest of time my responses are going to be in-line, sorry for that.
I think it's worth looking into what a "bitcoin hack" would actually entail given how blockchain works. I'm painting with some really broad brushes here, but wouldn't this basically mean you'd have to supercede or coerce hundreds of thousands of disperate ledgers into going along with your malfeasance? The logistics of it seems practically impossible and is part of why blockchain was such an innovation. I'm not gonna lie, it does suck knowing that if a storage or exchange gets hacked, or if I send my money to the wrong place, the asset is gone forever (never heard of the appeal system @Space Ghost spoke of), but if there were no risk involved then there'd probably be no reward either and we'd be living in a post-fiat world. My hope is that BTC gets mainstream enough that all of the supporting infrastructure of the financial world we enjoy today gets brought to BTC.
A hack would be breaking SHA 256 or ECDSA, which is the basis for all sorts of high level encryption, including financial systems. A block reorg wouldnt be a hack, but it would severely undermine confidence in the system. Why do you think it hasn't happened yet? Bitcoin is the ultimate honeypot, there are single addresses worth billions that anyone can try and guess the private key to. Why haven't they succeeded?
