Google Negligence

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

pro_gnostic_8

L1011 wrote: »

You rail against the state for not regulating advertisers when you choose to use an unregulated financial system and bypass our extremely strong consumer and financial laws.

I'm not bypassing ANY financial laws! Bitcoin is not illegal; I'm quite entitled and juridically allowed to conduct a lawful transaction via the medium of bitcoin if I so wish.

To address the issue of why I used bitcoin in this case .............
Yobit is a bitcoin/alternative currency exchange where bitcoin can be exchanged and traded for other alternative cryptocurrencies. I had funds denominated in bitcoin in my account at that exchange. That is what was stolen.
But anyway, my entitlement to use bitcoin should not really be in question. I may wish to use it for a multitude of reasons -- that I'm libertarian, that I'm a crypto-anarchist, that I wish to avoid a frankly worthless quantitatively-eased fiat built on a mountain of debt, derivatives and untrustworthy state-ist promises.
(None of which boxes I tick, tho', ............. I was just trying to turn a profit by trading it ( the bitcoin).

L1011

pro_gnostic_8 wrote: »

I'm not bypassing ANY financial laws! Bitcoin is not illegal; I'm quite entitled and juridically allowed to conduct a lawful transaction via the medium of bitcoin if I so wish.

To address the issue of why I used bitcoin in this case .............
Yobit is a bitcoin/alternative currency exchange where bitcoin can be exchanged and traded for other alternative cryptocurrencies. I had funds denominated in bitcoin in my account at that exchange. That is what was stolen.
But anyway, my entitlement to use bitcoin should not really be in question. I may wish to use it for a multitude of reasons -- that I'm libertarian, that I'm a crypto-anarchist, that I wish to avoid a frankly worthless quantitatively-eased fiat built on a mountain of debt, derivatives and untrustworthy state-ist promises.
(None of which boxes I tick, tho', ............. I was just trying to turn a profit by trading it ( the bitcoin).

I said you bypassed the regulated financial system, then got very shirty about the lack of regulation for advertising. The two do not add up. The complaints about, and desire to go to, regulators definitely do not tie with claims to be a "crypto-anarchist"!

Have you been paying CGT on profits?

pro_gnostic_8

L1011 wrote: »

What would have happened if you'd looked at the domain name?

Have a look at the screen-grab again, L. You'll see the highlighted part to which the eyes are immediately drawn to is the name of the legitimate site, i.e., YoBit.Net
Completely disingenuous, and ( I think anyway) could fool the average person on a bad day and in a hurry.

L1011

pro_gnostic_8 wrote: »

Have a look at the screen-grab again, L. You'll see the highlighted part to which the eyes are immediately drawn to is the name of the legitimate site, i.e., YoBit.Net
Completely disingenuous, and ( I think anyway) could fool the average person on a bad day and in a hurry.

Actual domain name on display twice including the large font bit, and would have been in your address bar at all times.

pro_gnostic_8

L1011 wrote: »

I said you bypassed the regulated financial system, then got very shirty about the lack of regulation for advertising.

The two can be mutually exclusive. I'm not understanding how the regulated financial system has got an awful lot to do with any lack of advertising regulation.
And I'm not bitching about either of them; I'm complaining about Google's evident lack of duty-of-care to their customers by prominently displaying a criminal website clearly designed to fool people.

Have you been paying CGT on profits?

I'm sorry mate, I'm not answering any question on here on a public forum about anything connected with my tax affairs or my personal financial situation. I wouldn't ask you your's.

pro_gnostic_8

L1011 wrote: »

Actual domain name on display twice including the large font bit, and would have been in your address bar at all times.

Ahh man, I think you're just looking for any reason now to knock me back.
We'll leave it at that, yeah? I think I've outlined my position by now after four pages; I can't detail it any more to be honest. Anything more would be just going round in circles.
But I do thank you yourself and everyone else who responded. (Even though the responses were not what I wanted to hear, really). :pac: :pac: :pac:

L1011

pro_gnostic_8 wrote: »

The two can be mutually exclusive. I'm not understanding how the regulated financial system has got an awful lot to do with any lack of advertising regulation.
And I'm not bitching about either of them; I'm complaining about Google's evident lack of duty-of-care to their customers by prominently displaying a criminal website clearly designed to fool people.

I'm sorry mate, I'm not answering any question on here on a public forum about anything connected with my tax affairs or my personal financial situation. I wouldn't ask you your's.

You very clearly complained about the ASAI not having powers, believing them to be a state regulator.

If you are unwilling to admit to whether you pay CGT or not, I'm going to have to close this thread as bordering on illegality. I believe your issue has been resoundingly answered anyway. Additionally, its very clear you are practicing as a business - this is consumer issues. If you wish to have the thread moved to business, that can be done.