There are ways to minimize the risks (see another comment reply of mine in this thread). But yes -- carrying a bunch of cash with you and meeting a stranger in a parking lot, then getting in that person's car is definitely a $5 wrench attack vector.
Face-to-face OTC trades remain one of the riskiest things you can do as a Bitcoiner. Do not engage in trades in dark alleys or empty parking lots!
There is an In-person cash/F2F payment method of RoboSats, but there's no geographic filtering, making it essentially unusable for P2P trading with cash.
In-person, face-to-face trading of bitcoin with cash is done all over the world.
There are simple precautions to take that will essentially minimize any risk of physical security and loss of funds.
This person found a counterparty via "social media". Ok, ... but that's a high risk transaction. You don't have any trust history about the "seller". At a minimum the buyer should have insisted on an escrow of the seller's bitcoin, like all P2P bitcoin trading platforms offer. Scammers and fraudsters love Telegram, Whatsapp, Facebook, Craigslist etc. because it is easy to find a gullible mark who will do something like bring a bunch of cash to meet a stranger in a high school parking lot and actually then get into the scammer's car!!
one sites wall of shame is another trolls hall of fame! I hope you likeed my poem, and I also hope it helps you understand that your proposal is probably not the right solution for internet trolls
I dislike that the downvote button disappeared on YT videos since it was helpful to see dislike counts on videos.
But I also don't like when comments get harder to read like on HN or people just downvote because they don't like the opinion of others (reddit comes to my mind there). They could just as well just not upvote.
You aren't going to change a person's opinion by downvoting them. So why downvote them? What does it achieve?
The 19-year-old told police he arranged to meet someone from social media in the parking lot of a Winnipeg high school with the intention of exchanging his money for Bitcoin.
When he got into the person's car, he was immediately held at gunpoint, assaulted, tied up and driven around by a man who demanded his money, Winnipeg police public information officer Const. Dani McKinnon said.
When the vehicle eventually stopped, he escaped and ran for help. He was treated for his injuries and released from the hospital.
Mhh, okay. But I think mentioning "bitcoin" in the title has an agenda. But also maybe not.
It just sounds like a regular hostage situation. It has nothing specifically to do with bitcoin. For me, it's like mentioning: Person X was black/white/whatever.
But on the other hand I agree. I also think it's not good to assume agenda. News should be allowed to describe the situation exactly. So mentioning bitcoin in the article itself is okay.
But would there be such a news article if it wouldn't be about bitcoin? Just a man taking another man hostage? Not sure if that is always reported.
I think in-person P2P trading is the biggest wrench attack vector .. no thanks
There are ways to minimize the risks (see another comment reply of mine in this thread). But yes -- carrying a bunch of cash with you and meeting a stranger in a parking lot, then getting in that person's car is definitely a $5 wrench attack vector.
https://twitter.com/lopp/status/1570369111842078720 [Nitter]
i wonder what made the man take this kind of risks. was he offered bitcoin at 20% discount?
Should have just gone on Robosats
There is an In-person cash/F2F payment method of RoboSats, but there's no geographic filtering, making it essentially unusable for P2P trading with cash.
Based robosats
In-person, face-to-face trading of bitcoin with cash is done all over the world.
There are simple precautions to take that will essentially minimize any risk of physical security and loss of funds.
This person found a counterparty via "social media". Ok, ... but that's a high risk transaction. You don't have any trust history about the "seller". At a minimum the buyer should have insisted on an escrow of the seller's bitcoin, like all P2P bitcoin trading platforms offer. Scammers and fraudsters love Telegram, Whatsapp, Facebook, Craigslist etc. because it is easy to find a gullible mark who will do something like bring a bunch of cash to meet a stranger in a high school parking lot and actually then get into the scammer's car!!
Here's are some resources for P2P trading:
Tips for local transactions
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=137272
Conduct your in-person transactions safely at your local police station
http://www.safetradestations.com
Guide and General Rules for P2P Cash Trading
https://www.binance.com/en/support/faq/0bec3bb9292241e99c20136a4d3dbfe6 <-- Tips applicable to in-person cash trading with any P2P platform
But there are bad people out there regardless. Here's a list of attacks, though few of which are related to P2P trading:
Known Physical Bitcoin Attacks
https://github.com/jlopp/physical-bitcoin-attacks/blob/master/README.md
Let's be real
The guy who pulled a gun on him and tried to Rob him was a nigger
This is why we need downvotes...
Well that would just turn into a free money button, abused by all...
What we need is a seperate reputation score, not censorship.
Of course a proper system would allow you to block seeing anyone with a reputation below your chosen threshold.
why "free money button"?
yes, i think individual blocking is the way to go.
Well if you pay money to vote up, clearly a vote down would be to receive money.
Haha, I see. That would be hilarious.
You essentially stake your money on your comment and people can slash you if they don't like you
Unless the slashing sends the sats to SN devs
I created a PR. Am I a SN dev now too?
how about a wall of shame. so that a specific comment can be put there for eternity
one sites wall of shame is another trolls hall of fame!
I hope you likeed my poem, and I also hope it helps you understand that your proposal is probably not the right solution for internet trolls
I would prefer the option to block someone. I would pay sats to permanently not see threads/posts from select users.
I am not sure if downvotes are what we need here
I dislike that the downvote button disappeared on YT videos since it was helpful to see dislike counts on videos.
But I also don't like when comments get harder to read like on HN or people just downvote because they don't like the opinion of others (reddit comes to my mind there). They could just as well just not upvote.
You aren't going to change a person's opinion by downvoting them. So why downvote them? What does it achieve?
Just throwing in my 2 sats here
Yeah you're right, it was a bit of a kneejerk comment. I'm not sure what the right solution is.
I would prefer to be able to just block these people
https://i.postimg.cc/tCh7bX16/you-get-what-you-deserve.gif
What does this have to do with bitcoin?
On-boarding / Off-boarding via P2P trading of bitcoin.
Mhh, okay. But I think mentioning "bitcoin" in the title has an agenda. But also maybe not.
It just sounds like a regular hostage situation. It has nothing specifically to do with bitcoin. For me, it's like mentioning: Person X was black/white/whatever.
But on the other hand I agree. I also think it's not good to assume agenda. News should be allowed to describe the situation exactly. So mentioning bitcoin in the article itself is okay.
But would there be such a news article if it wouldn't be about bitcoin? Just a man taking another man hostage? Not sure if that is always reported.
Bitcoin doesn't fix this