I understand that they set a deadline if they have to send the tokens or coins manually, but they also need to understand that there are people who don't follow the news or social media channels and can miss the deadline. I think there are ways to solve those situations, for example, for people who miss the deadline they can send the coins once a month or every two months.

I don't believe the market will crash now, but I could not tell if the bull market will continue or if we will have a quite and stable period now. It seems the market is testing supports and resistances before deciding which direction it will take.

Facebook does not need to create a new company to launch a cryptocurrency, if they are doing this it's for another reason, most probably, a strategic investment. On the other hand, fintech does not necessarily mean blockchain.

You should take into account that whales can be wrong, in fact, from time to time we can see news about millionaires who lose large amounts of money trading. Whales buying something does not guarantee anything.

I would not compare two projects on the basis of the personalities behind them, but in what these projects have achieved. I don't know if Tron will replace ETH in the future or not but I know I have read similar statements with other coins and, until now, that hasn't happened. Anyway, Tron community should not think about displacing other coins but in following their own way.

I understand the enthusiasm but, with the established and trusted crypto wallets available out there, what is the advantage for the end user of using a preinstalled wallet?

It's like those altcoins developers claiming they will beat bitcoin or their coin will be the new bitcoin. Regarding the topic, like others have stated here, I also think Amazon would adapt to crypto and would keep their leadership.

It's not easy to tell since you need to put yourself in someone else´s shoes before answering this question. For us, everything is easy, we know how things work and we are used to it, but for someone who is new, things can be complicated, especially when it comes to keeping and being responsible for their keys. This is why centralized custodial services, where users only need a username and a password, exist.

Because they didn't send the BTC from a user's account. Hackers allegedly gained access to one internal wallet of Binance and they sent the BTC skipping the exchange's restrictions.

If you pay attention at what I wrote you will realize I'm strictly talking about the coins and tokens that were hacked, not the others. I know not all coins were affected, and there is no reason for not letting users withdraw those unaffected coins. Happy now?

If you mean the hacked coins and tokens, they were gone since the beginning since there is no way to take them back from the hackers wallets. This is why users can't withdraw those coins and tokens, even if they still have them in their balances, since there are no real coins to withdraw from the exchange.

Altcoins will have to wait for a while, everybody is now focused in bitcoin, following its pump. Even so, those altcoins that do not lose too much value against bitcoin, will still gain value against USD.

With the uncertainty around tether and having other alternatives, I'm surprised there still are people holding this coin. Anyway, now the market is changing, I guess people will lose interest in stablecoins soon.

I don't know how they will approach crypto, if they finally do, but I guess they will use a blockchain for internal processes or will create a wallet for people to use Bitcoin through their platform. I don't think they will create a centralized paypal coin since there would be no difference between that coin and paypal money, it would make no sense.

It's still too soon to know if we already are in a new bull run or not, what we know is that the market is starting to recover and that it seems the bear market is finally over.

If this is true I wonder what is what have made them change their mind, apart from the fact that Facebook could allegedly be planning the launch of their own cryptocurrency as some media say. In fact, this could be a good reason. After all, it must be difficult to promote the usage of something when you are banning it yourself on your platform.

I don't know if the number of hacks that have occurred this year is higher than in previous years but we have to take into account that there are many more exchanges now so, there are many more places where hackers can go, especially when exchanges themselves sacrifice their security in exchange for the speed of withdrawals trying to attract more customers. As long as centralized custodial exchanges exist, hacks will keep on happening.

I would not judge projects on the basis of whether they have their own blockchain of not. There are projects that need their own blockchain to work and there are projects that don't need it, that's all.

What are these stablecoins exactly necessary for? For traders and merchants? Traders have already access to fiat money in almost any exchange so they don't really need to buy these coins, and I don't think merchants will be really interested since these coins don't have a big community behind them and they are managed by entities or companies, so they have to trust in those entities.

In theory, that risk is nonexistent, if an exchange runs an IEO and they don't list the token of that IEO, it would be hard to understand. In addition, the main reason why people are interested in this model when it comes to big exchanges is that they know the token will be traded in one of these big exchanges.