Peter Schiff doesn't even understand Bitcoin, and I mean that quite literally. Recently he had to figure out how to post his wallet address on twitter, and he couldn't even figure out how to do that, and didn't know what a wallet address even was.....but this is the same guy who proclaims Bitcoin is just thin air, yet he doesn't understand even how it functions.
Peter is smart, he showed his Bitcoin address on social media so that desperate "Bitcoiners" will send him Bitcoin in an attempt to convince him of its useful nature. These people don't realize that he doesn't give a single shit about Bitcoin. He has used his coins to point out that the value has gone down after receiving them and therefore is a useless currency. It helped his narrative gain more weight. Not in a hundred years would I send this dude even a single satoshi. People should stop wasting time on someone who's signalling for years now that he's not interested in Bitcoin. Spend this time educating people who do have an open mind. |
|
|
|
The difference between Bithumb.com and Bithumb.pro is that the pro variant focuses on clients outside South Korea, hence the reason it refers to itself as Bithumb Global. https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bithumb/ Native KRW trading pairs. https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bithumb-global/ Native USDT and BTC trading pairs. To some degree it's a similar construction as Binance.com and soon Binance through BAM trading services that plans to serve users that the Binance.com site not accepts through a proxy. |
|
|
|
|
It will mainly affect the lower tier traders while the whales will just have to buy/sell into their own order once or twice to significantly reduce their fees.
I'm a Bitstamp user too and I don't really mind it. I'm not a day or swing trader. I do some occasional longer term buy low sell high spot 'trading' where I only start cashing out profits when I'm up at least 25%. 0.5% is just a fart in that regard.
It's also a convenient measure to get rid of those micro scalpers. They cost the exchange more in bandwidth than they get in fees from them. Good riddance. Quality over quantity.
|
|
|
|
Bakkt will make Binance look like a tinker toy...
How? Both platforms are different fundamentally. Binance will offer futures trading at one point, but they aren't going to be offered to US traders. In other words, both platforms don't compete with each others for market share. Also, Bakkt futures have a 1BTC minimum settlement. Most people don't have that much money to throw on the table in order to acquire 1BTC. Binance's futures will have a much lower (very likely sub 0.01BTC) minimum settlement and much higher leverage. For the majority of the retailers, Binance will be attracting a whole lot more users with that product. |
|
|
|
and also believe reason why altcoins are all bleeding because many people are trading their alts again btc and not usd.
Altcoins are bleeding because Bitcoin has been outperforming most of them. If they can't keep up in % USD gains, then their BTC equivalent will drop. If you look at the USD price of altcoins, they have been performing fairly well. People expected altcoins to go back up when Bitcoin would start correcting, but after going from $14,000 to $9,000 altcoins went down with Bitcoin instead of going up. Another thing is that people think that because altcoins have gone down a lot already, they can't go down more, but they obviously can go down a lot more. |
|
|
|
Hold more good assets, and if you have mortgages expect a higher interest rates in the coming years so try to buy more bitcoin for now.
Holding good assets (i.e. Bitcoin, Gold, etc) should be something people by default should do. In times where there isn't much demand for Gold due to strong global economics, its price is usually lower and for that reason a great time to enter and keep adding as time goes by. Most people tend to wait for things to turn bad before they start buying themselves into Gold. It might sound a bit contractictory coming from a Bitcoin maximalist, but it's definitely a good idea to buy up some physical Gold too. As long as Bitcoin is seen as a risk-on asset by the general public, it might get dumped down just as hard as stocks will be dumped down. Gold is generally the last asset that is liquidated when people are in need of fiat. |
|
|
|
What I wanna know is how did he got so much attention from all around the world? I mean newspapers and to or just simply all media gives him way too much credit, I know he is a attention liking guy but nobody in their right mind should give this guy a mic to talk, how does he get all that attention?
I get that he once built one of the best anti-virus companies and if I am not wrong he sold it for a lot of money but right now he is literally nobody, he has absolutely no say in bitcoin and he doesn't even seem like a bitcoin expert in the crypto world, we only see him as an idiot. So if these media people just want to get clicks and what not then why are they spending time with him? We don't care and people who are not in crypto don't care neither, so it makes no sense.
I guess it's more so that he's banking on the assumption of the mainstream media that he is a billionaire tycoon. In reality, this dude might still have a couple of million, but he's also an addicted lunatic. If it was just that he wouldn't be as heavily disliked, but this dude is also a fraudster that made millions of dollars with his ICO scam promotions. People trusted that this 'security expert' "billionaire" wouldn't pull off a scam on them, but he ended doing exactly that. Just think about it, why would a self-proclaimed billionaire tarnish his reputation to make a few million left and right? This dude is toasted. No one takes him serious anymore. He once threatened himself and pretended that people are looking for him.  |
|
|
|
Yes i myself would rather forego 35% than tie more money up. Because it can go down another 35%.
Since you're not the typical hodler type of person, this is a serious question; ever heard of a stop loss? You don't have to let the price go down and deplete your virtual dollar value. I know enough people who similarly aren't the typical hodler type of person, but they make use of every possible opportunity to either long or short the price with well set stop losses so that they don't suffer too much. Another thing is that there isn't much significance to the $13,500 level. As long as we haven't blasted through the previous high of ~$13.900 we still haven't had a higher yearly high. Note how the ~$13,900 wick aligns with the monthly close of the 2017 bull run. It's not out of the ordinary to yet again be faced with a brutal dump when testing it. |
|
|
|
I do agree with you though, this is not something that should happen, and chipmixer should give clarity faster about your issue, and whether it's a fault on their end, or yours.
I'm taking a guess here, but it's very likely operated by just one person with also other things on his mind. This isn't a traditional business and there is always a risk to ANY centralized entity you send coins to that things can go wrong. I'm confident that ChipMixer will sort it out as usual, but it requires some patience in this case. This case reminds me of; https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5173144.0 where ChipMixer admitted that the error was on their side and as expected the user got his funds. |
|
|
|
Quite weird though. As far as I know, if a certain decent-sized online business closes, they mostly continue to annually pay for the domain hosting just to prevent scammers from using their name.
That's usually how it goes, but when it comes to not so professional sites, especially when they're in need of funds, they'll liquidate as much of their holdings as possible. Mixers have been popping up like mushrooms after a rainy day, so it wouldn't really surprise me if an entity has bought it hoping to have a headstart with a domain that already has some history as mixer. I definitely wouldn't risk a single satoshi on a site like this. We have a bunch of solid mixers already. If they have good intent then it will show as time goes by, but for now it's better to avoid it. |
|
|
|
It's very likely related to how it doesn't look to be a serious project, especially with its name being Grin and the logo being a lousy emoticon. Another aspect people dislike about it is its inflation rate, which is 60 GRIN per minute and it will be like this for ever as long as this rule doesn't get forked out. It's admittedly a lot, but the good thing is that it will allow the coin to have a sustainable mining ecosystem with consistent block rewards, unlike Bitcoin where the fees will eventually have to pay for the security. Do I think it's a shitcoin? I'm on the fence about it, but I can see why people do consider it a shitcoin. |
|
|
|
It's probably just around 20% of their total operation that has been affected. Poolin's hashrate dropped a bit but not as much as the news articles make it seem to be. The only downside is that it *temporarily* bumped BTC.com's share to over 25%, but I expect that to go back to 23% whenever Poolin fires up a bunch of new miners. Every large farm has brand new miners ready just in case these natural disasters happen. https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miners-halt-operations-as-rainstorm-triggers-fatal-mudslide-in-china |
|
|
|
When there is inflation but people are positive and there is no panic, it reduces side effects of whole bad process.
I think there not being much panic amongst the average joes is purely result of their ignorance in the economics field. Historically, average joes have always been a victim of recessions and toxic monetary policies. I do not expect them to actually acknowledge how bad the situation is until it actually turns bad and they feel it in their pocket. It's important to keep in mind that with so much (debt) money being pumped into the different markets, it may take a while for things to go wrong. It's basically an attempt to buy time, but with each attempt to buy time the actual implosion will hurt even more. It's not a matter of if, but when. That's the million/billion dollar question. |
|
|
|
I have to classify it as acting positively within this period of time and until it breaks the MA again.
I do expect a bullish continuation at least until the price meets the descending resistance. From there things will start to get very interesting; people probably already count their profits by going short near that descending resistance as they expect another rejection. It wouldn't surprise me if we break out and at least move towards $12,000 which will rekkt a lot of shorters. When certain patterns become too easy to trade where even your neighbour starts talking about it, they usually break out against the outcome people are betting on. |
|
|
|
If bitcoin reaches 100k at the end of 2021, a crash would result in something between 10k and 20k, and the consequent bear market would be in the five digits area, instead of four.
That's going to be brutal af for peak buyers, but very much a normal sort of correction for Bitcoin. If we look at BRK.A stock price, it had one major (almost 50%) correction above the $100,000 level. This was from ~$144,000 to ~$75,000. If no-coiners dare to complain about Bitcoin falling hard from such levels, they should look at this stock and figure out that it also happens with assets that are considered defensive investments.  I do however hope that the liquidity that this market gains will make the corrections not dip as deep as they used to do. |
|
|
|
|
Roger resigning as CEO of bitchcoin . com after announcing that he's busy working on an exchange was highly suspicious. Seeing how @Bitcoin suddenly starts behaving weird makes it even more suspicious.
I strongly believe that this is another scam attempt where they try to gain people's confidence, promote Bitcoin without bashing it, then refer people to their exchange to buy BCash while noobs think they are buying Bitcoin. Roger did it once already, but in a very amateurish way that got quickly exposed. This is this next improved attempt to unload his bags.
Look at the media album of @Bitcoin; there are still pro BCash and anti Bitcoin/Lightning images.
|
|
|
|
If someone who claims to be Satoshi can't sign a message using the genesis keys, then he/she is not Satoshi. Plus why would Satoshi want to resurface? He already left, and considered gone.
Even if someone ends up signing from the genesis block it doesn't mean that it is Satoshi. The key(s) could be in the hands of a government or someone who knew Satoshi from early on. With all due respect, I honestly don't even care about Satoshi at this point anymore. It's not that Satoshi's appearance will do anything for Bitcoin, positively speaking. The only thing that makes Satoshi stand out is that the general consensus is that the signer of the genesis block with a high degree of certainty will have access to the rest of the hundreds of thousands of coins. It will lead to a massive sell-off. I'm thankful for Satoshi to have left and never made a return. Best for him/her/them and the best for this ecosystem. |
|
|
|
|
This is superb marketing for Bitcoin. It's a pretty big deal that large corporations slowly but surely follow the trend and are less afraid to try out something new.
It would be cool if they accepted Bitcoin through Lightning as well, which would generate them even more publicity because that's technically speaking where we are heading to when it comes to day-to-day transactions. Most of what I spend nowadays is done with Lightning through Bitrefill. I'm definitely looking forward to more adoption in this field.
|
|
|
|
Why do they charge 0.001 BTC (equal to $10.80) for withdrawal fee? To my knowledge there is no high fee when I send bitcoin, so why are they charging 0.001 BTC withdrawal fee? this is something exaggerated, imagine the day the price reaches $20,000, they will be charging $20 withdrawal fee
Pure profiteering because of the fact that they (for now at least) don't charge you for buying and selling. Bitcoin by default is the crypto that generates the most volume and for that reason will be used to squeeze out as much revenue as possible (profit has to come from somewhere at the end of the day). Another reason could be that they have to deal with a lot of smaller inputs that require consolidation from time to time, and they want you to pay for it. I find it hilarious that BCash withdrawal fee is 0.01BCHABC because I know how badly this annoys the crap out of Roger Ver. |
|
|
|
no enforced KYC/AML (I believe), and still support in-person cash trades.
It's only a matter of time before we see that change, because the bigger these platforms get, the more they have to lose and thus seek to comply in least stressing form in order to keep regulators at distance. The main thing is that these platforms start off without KYC/AML requirements to onboard as many users as possible, then later on (could take a year or two) slowly introduce KYC/AML and start to exclude countries. Binance has pretty much followed the same trajectory. There just isn't a way to get around regulators anymore. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
