I don't know why you replied to a post that is about 7 months old, but you didn't write anything smart considering how people who use their brains (still) communicate on this forum. I don't understand your thinking about "beautifying posts" with AI, because in the end it's not you, but some machine processed your post and released its "beautified" version.

As for those academics you mention, I would not agree that this is something completely normal, but as we see, it is becoming the "new normal" more and more. Those who invented all those AI chat bots want it to become normal and to get into every pore of society in order to profit even more from it, but in which direction does it actually lead?

I don't use CEX, so I don't know what the situation is with the most famous ones when it comes to that coin, but what I do know is that a few years ago in the EU there was increased pressure on the so-called "privacy coins" and that all local crypto exchanges in my country over night removed that coin (and some others) from their trading pairs. Given that people in most cases buy cryptocurrencies because they want to profit from them, privacy is not something that is valued, especially if it is also marked by the authorities as something bad.

---

I read the entire article from OP and I can only say that I am not at all surprised that all this is happening, because any decentralization that goes in the direction of finance is literally a thorn in the side of every government that wants to have absolute control over every individual and his life. Although there is quite clear evidence that cryptocurrencies are to a very small extent responsible for financing terrorism or money laundering (according to what Chainalysis claims) and that there should be much more focus on the classic methods used by terrorists/criminals. Unable to admit that their (FIAT) system is as full of holes as Swiss cheese, some governments look for the culprit on the completely wrong side, and it's even easier if that someone might not even defend himself.

No matter how you look at it, 44 seconds from when the post was published until your reply is perhaps enough to make a copy/paste of a post that you have already prepared - but in any case the matter looks suspicious, and even more so if we add the merits you received (and which you didn't comment).


I see only two possible options:

1. You have already prepared posts on the questions asked by beginners and you want to be the one to answer first and thus increase your chances of getting merits.

2. You create new accounts yourself, ask questions and give answers, and then with your alt accounts you merit yourself.

I wouldn't call it a very risky method if you know what you're doing, but if you treat serious things in life carelessly, sooner or later it will backfire on you. However, in the specific case, all that BTC was actually a reward for the work done, and considering how much it was worth 10+ years ago, it was obviously not important for him to save the backup in a better way, or to make several of them.

From the article it can be guessed that that BTC is not that important to him, because he saved enough BTC to have more money than he needs, but it seems to me that he just wanted a little attention, and that he wants his case to last as long as possible.

Saylor and his company are specific because they don't hide that they invest in Bitcoin, and I'm sure there are those who do it in secret for various reasons, whether it's that they want to protect their privacy or maybe in the past they spoke very ugly about BTC, and they don't want to admit that today they think differently.

Regardless of the fact that some consider Saylor a very smart man with business sense - it is hard to imagine that 10 years ago he was quite pessimistic not only about Bitcoin, but also about online gambling. Even then, he was an adult with enough knowledge to understand that people will always gamble, as they have been doing for thousands of years.

Of course, it is not realistic to believe that he will never sell the BTC he bought (and is still buying), but maybe he will sell only a part when the price is such that he will be able to return his total investment, and at the same time he will still have enough BTC left.

What is fascinating to me is that someone manages to respond to someone's post in less than 1 minute, so even though the post has been edited, I don't believe that @Cantsay types so fast. In addition, it is not at all suspicious that he gets 3 merits from a newbie

I leave to the forum detectives to investigate if there is anything suspicious in this case...

The OP didn't find anything that wasn't already found and published on the forum, and he could have easily placed his post in one of the topics that already exist. This information was published in the topic you linked, and was originally published 2.5 years ago by @DdmrDdmr

Why would I be disappointed by anything Saylor or anyone like him says? I don't want to go into whether he invested in Bitcoin because he thinks it is something unique and superior, or if he just wants to earn a few billion more dollars (because everything revolves around profit). If today Saylor were to dump all the BTC he bought in the last few years, should that mean we should all sell and forget that Bitcoin even exists?

If we're going to talk about disappointment, why go back only 3 years, maybe we should go much further so we can be "disappointed" much more

I'm not 100% sure you are serious about this, but what wealth of China are you talking about when it comes to BTC? Do you even realize the total value of all BTC in circulation compared to China's GDP? No country except El Salvador has officially announced that it buys and holds BTC, and everything else is just speculation and conspiracy theories.


Nothing is certain until the SEC makes an official announcement, and that could be in a month or in some 4-5 months at the latest, but it is obvious that moves like this signal that something is happening in the background. If nothing else, people have begun to understand a little bit what this is about, and whether it will be something that will change the rules of the game when it comes to large investments in Bitcoin remains to be seen.

The spot ETF will be good for the price (at least in the short term), but in the long term it is not in favor of Bitcoin.

For someone who buys large amounts of BTC, the price difference of $5000 or maybe $10 000 is really something that can have a decisive factor in the decision whether to buy or not - but I don't understand why it is such a problem for those who buy for several tens or hundreds of $ per week/month?

It is true that you pay a higher price for less BTC, but that problem stems from the fact that you are always waiting for some kind of sign, and how long have you been given the opportunity to invest below $30k, and even below $20k? Bear market periods are the best for accumulation, and the same thing has been repeated with some minor variations for at least ten years.

---

The same question was asked when the price of BTC was $1000 and $10 000, and your question is actually a good answer - let's put it this way, anything under $100 000 is cheap

I'm not an economist, but I've read several times that Japan tested some very strange economic models in the past that led to exactly these results. In addition, I think that Japan (as well as some other countries) actually owe most of these debts to themselves, because it is about borrowing money that happened between various domestic institutions.

Of course, it is very strange that we see such numbers in a country where people are very hardworking, mostly very honest and have a sense of business - but since the time of capitulation in the Second World War, they have been greatly influenced by those who defeated them, and this is the case even today. I read that part of the Japanese population is even protesting and demanding the departure of US military forces from Japan, but Japanese politics is anything but sovereign and free to make such a move.

Many members of this forum will not agree with this statement, because we live in different parts of the world and for someone even 1 BTC at a price of $30k is real wealth that can fundamentally change their life. 45 BTC at a price of $30k is $1.35 million, and if you really want to be "rich" then maybe that is too small an amount to be able to buy expensive cars, apartments, yachts and similar things.

But given that Bitcoin has the potential to increase its price in the future, even those who have 1 BTC today can hope that one day it will be worth much more than it is today. In addition, anyone who owns Bitcoin (private key) in a non-custodial wallet can be considered "rich" in some way, although of course this does not necessarily have a direct connection with the value, but with complete control of their digital assets.

I'm not in the least interested in using such technology when it comes to something like the price of Bitcoin, because any publicly available AI at this point is no better than various "experts" publishing various analyzes hoping to be at least approximately right.
---

Regardless of the fact that this AI supposedly has access to fresh data, it still thinks very limitedly and gives very general answers without taking into account the bull run and the corrections that follow after that. The price will very likely reach $50k, maybe even before the end of this year, but the next one is almost certain, now it's just a question of what the next ATH will be and when the bear market will start again.

For some average user who can hardly understand the risks of such a feature, perhaps such a feature is even positive in the sense that they will feel safer if they lose their device or backup. There should be no doubt that it will be a salvation for some users, but the whole thing should not have been done in such a way as to cast doubt on the company's reputation (or what is left of it).

If they already wanted to do that, they could offer a firmware that would enable such an option and one that would not have such an option, or even better, a completely new device. What they managed to do is that I now feel safer having my private keys in Electrum than in their HW.

This is an answer that is more suitable for an average "expert" who wants to appear smart by covering the entire range from the bottom to a possible ATH, rather than something that is today called artificial intelligence. I could still somehow take into account such artificially created answers if by any chance AI has access to the internet and can analyze all available data, but as @Tytanowy Janusz has already written, it is completely pointless to ask for an answer from someone or something who has been in the dark for almost two years.

Even if this is not the case, everything would again come down to speculation, because who can say whether by the end of 2025 the world's lunatics will turn this wonderful planet of ours into a pile of ashes, or in the best case we will find ourselves in such problems that the price of BTC will be completely a side issue.

I am quite convinced (without going to check the OP's post history) that he always said that only part of his investment is directed towards altcoins, but it seems that he has completely changed his strategy because x4/x5 profit is not enough for him, which is a bit illogical to me personally, but again on the other hand, I understand that some people want at least x20 or more, and they doubt that they can achieve it by investing in Bitcoin.

Without going into what exactly the OP invested in, it is possible that he will profit in the next bull run because altcoins usually follow Bitcoin, although we have witnessed that sometimes there are exceptions. In the last 7 days, BTC is up about 10%, the next coin is only a little more than 5%, and all the others in the TOP 10 (with one exception) achieved a smaller price increase.

You still haven't learned anything from all those topics you opened and asked similar questions?

To begin with, I will tell you that no one can tell you when the moment is right, because no one has insight into the future. You have to be honest with yourself here, which means that you decide for yourself how much profit is enough for you, and if it is 100%, then you will sell then, and if you have set a higher goal, then you will wait and hope that the price will reach that point. You can reduce the risk by selling gradually as the price goes up.


You concluded everything yourself, the choice is yours to decide if it makes sense to be happy to sell and get out what you invested - but that means that all this time was pointless. I think you are too burdened with things that should be quite simple.

---

I was convinced that part of your investment was in BTC, but this statement changes the whole thing. Any discussion about altcoins should be in the Altcoins board.

My personal feeling combined with the attitude that the SEC has when it comes to spot ETFs tells me that they will use the maximum legal time they have to delay their decision, while at the same time they can come up with a good excuse why they will ultimately reject all requests. The only thing that is different this time is the involvement of a company that is very powerful and allegedly very closely connected to the top of US politics, and we all know that politicians are the ones who make decisions in the end, especially if they are motivated to do so.

In view of the upcoming presidential elections, a logical question arises whether the current politicians should anger some big players and not grant them something and thus take generous donations out of their pockets. It's no secret how the system works, and lobbying is something they've perfected in the US, right?

I found the source, but I was wondering why the OP didn't mention it - so although I assume he forgot, when I see who is involved in journalism today, maybe sometimes it makes sense to hide the sources and attribute everything to "unknown author".

I assume that in the next months we will be waiting for a bunch of reports from various "researchers" who will try to hit the target, considering the price of BTC, everything smells of a new FOMO.

I think that there is a clear difference between DT1 and all other levels of the DT system, because it is more than clear that my feedback does not have the same weight as the identical feedback of one of the respectable DT1 members. Their lack of interest (with some exceptions, of course) first of all encourages sellers and buyers, and creates an image of some kind of situation that can be defined as "I don't really care about it".


Perhaps the problem is that most DT1 members do not visit the board where such topics are found, and although it is true that there are not dozens of such topics, at least one or two new ones appear every week.

---

There is no need for any analysis, if you see that someone is selling or wants to buy a BTT account, the matter is completely clear - you are obviously mixing the fight against plagiarism and AI with what we are discussing.


This is something that was discussed a lot, but we all know that without sig campaigns this forum would look completely different and it would probably lose a lot of members. It is an extreme measure, but it should also be emphasized that it is one of the measures on the table in case nothing else can help.