There is no shortage of news outlets hyping up countries and refer to them as crypto hot spots, while in reality there aren't any metrics actually pointing out that there is much happening over there. I haven't seen anything aside from a few local individuals in Venezuela who shared with the world they like crypto, haven't seen anything about Zimbabwe while it was praised for its Bitcoin adoption, etc.

This global 'adoption' that we're reading about seems to be as much of a buzz hype as the blockchain buzz hype itself is. Lots of talk and promises, but next to nothing that actually delivers something.

I understand why some people may not like the product offered by platforms such as Robinhood, but to call it useless is not right. It's a useful service to those who don't mind not owning the actual asset, but still want to trade it. It's also a regulated platform, which can't be said about the countless of scum crypto exchanges faking hacks and whatnot.

I do think that at one point Robinhood will allow people to trade the actual assets, but from a business perspective, it's very costly and time consuming to obtain the right licenses. I can understand why they prefer to just provide fiat settlements for now, and who knows, they might already be working on actual crypto trading.

ETF's are great, but even if they are backed by the underlying asset, which the Vaneck & SolidX ETF is, people still don't own anything but a promise that for every share that they buy, a custodian has X number of coins in their reserve. It's fantastic for those looking to gain exposure to Bitcoin through a non hassle way, but I would always recommend people to buy and store Bitcoin themselves offline.

You only need a sub $100 hardware wallet to store millions or even billions worth of Bitcoin in a convenient and safe manner. It's small and therefore easy to hide, unlike physical Gold where most people store it in bank vaults because they don't want to have it in their house. Good luck gaining access to your Gold after 5PM during business days or in the weekends.

India hasn't really done much yet. It's largely just the regular dose of fud and crap articles we get to read from sources that have sources 'familiar with the matter'. It's just one big circus. What it comes down to is that we should wait for the Indian government to actually do whatever it is that we read in the media, and as long as that isn't happening, I just call it bs.

In the end, India can't do Bitcoin more of a favor than banning it. If they are really out to do so, then it will make people there even more aware of how their government is just trying to control them. It's long term demand for Bitcoin because those who manage to buy coins will very likely hold them for a long time. The more money they have sitting in Bitcoin, the less there is for the government to confiscate.

Trump is not the type of business person to chase after flashy tech stocks or Bitcoin. He's somewhat similar to Warren Buffett in the way that he likes to invest in properties, businesses, etc. In other words, anything with a cash flow and a possibility to earn dividends.

When people are a multi millionaire or a billionaire, they are looking for ways to preserve their wealth, and Bitcoin for these traditional investors poses an incredible threat to their wealth. They invest in things that have proven themselves, have a working product, Bitcoin is nothing like that from how they look at it.

People here shouldn't hope for presidents or other high level entities to share with the world that they love Bitcoin and own a ton of it. It makes me even think people find it necessary for them to jump into Bitcoin in order for it to succeed. Bitcoin has never given a shit about who owns whatever amount of coins, neither should you.

It makes a lot of sense to keep discussing this over and over with how exchanges are changing their policies almost on a monthly basis.

An exchange that has been functioning well for a certain group of people like a month ago, might be utter shit right now, and this will make people look for an alternative. Exchanges even if they don't want to be compliant in full, they will have to stop offering their service to users from certain countries in order to not make themselves be a target for regulators.

Then we also have more and more exchanges that make trading pairs of certain tokens not available for X or Y country. In other words, there is a lot happening in the exchange space, so the more ongoing discussions about it the better.

If these bastards added Segwit and RBF they would allow the users to be more in control of their transactions and bump the fee when needed.

It sucks to see people keep using this despicable service, but they are so strongly positioned with their SEO that newbies automatically see blockchain.com pop up on top. The only positive aspect of this is that newbies aren't using a scam wallet, but still, it may not be a scam wallet, but still a trashy one where they don't allow people to transfer funds to a bc1 address.

You say this because you know the price has dropped to $3000 last year. With all the hype during the 2017 bull run the price could have reached even $40,000 a month or two after the near $20,000 peak. The market was so thin at that point due to how people just didn't want to let go of their coins, that $40,000 wouldn't be all that far-fetched.

I'm pretty sure that you would feel bad having sold at $19,500 while staring at the price that broke through the $30,000 level. In hindsight we all could have done things better.

Also, people who usually say that they will buy low, will mostly keep waiting because even at $3000 they think it has more room to the down side.

Belarus has actually been quite friendly towards the blockchain industry. They do not charge blockchain related startups a single percent tax in order to have them become an interesting enough place to settle at. On top of that, the largest bank in Belarus has shown interest in building a crypto exchange of some sort, which might be where they end up selling their coins, lol. 

In the end, Bitcoin doesn't care about what a president or central bankster has to say. It keeps working with precision just like it has done so in the past. It's governments and banks that need to adapt, Bitcoin came into existence adapted. You're either part of it or not. Those who aren't will eventually pay the price for it.

I just checked, people from the states can still create an account at Bitmex, but they aren't allowed to deposit or trade. I would have expected Bitmex to completely block all incoming traffic from the US. This is weird, why would you allow someone from a country you don't serve create an account?

This is their notification;

I have visited other sites that do not serve customers from the states, and they don't allow me to register or do anything at all.

Altcoin prices in USD will keep rising as long as Bitcoin does, so that's what people should be going for. If you convert your precious Bitcoins to altcoins you will pay the price for it. Thinking that altcoins have suffered a lot already and that they can't go down further is pure bs. Altcoins can and will very likely go down more against Bitcoin.

People hoping for an altcoin season to save them are going to be really disappointed (much more so than they are already). You need to find specific exotic altcoins to pump, but which ones, and what is the criteria making altcoin X or Y a "good" choice? Gambling is the name of the game. Luck is what you need with how altcoins suck in the fundamental value department.

If that's so, why aren't these "experts" long'ing the crap out of Bitcoin? Talk is cheap. It's useless. Putting money where your mouth is how you seperate talkers from doers.

The term expert has been trashed to a point where expert in the world of crypto means crap talker. People who are the actual experts don't ever refer themselves as such, those who aren't do. Seriously, I have never seen an industry with so many self-proclaimed experts as here in the world of crypto. It's hilarious. 

He plays a 'smart' game here by not changing his predictions from bullish to bearish because just like most people here have no clue about the future direction of the market, he doesn't either. The best option is to stay put and don't move an inch. If you keep predicting certain outrageous price levels, and stick to it, you'll be right eventually and the mainstream media will crown you as the expert who called the bull run.

That being said, he became a tad bit bearish towards what right now seems the end of the bear market. People roasted the dude for being wrong again and for becoming bearish, lol. He shouldn't have done that. If he kept repeating his own bla bla he right now would be able to say that it took a bit longer than expected, but I'm still on the right track.

I don't think people forgot what Facebook did (i.e. selling user data to third parties), but people simply don't seem to care anymore. I have seen various groups that have been trying to get people to delete their Facebook accounts, but it was a very short lived hype because of how people actually like the service provided by Facebook.

In the end, Facebook's core business model is selling user data, so what's there to complain about? If you sign up to their service you sell yourself to Facebook. Facebook then resells you. 

It's easier said than done. In most cases a 'bad' leader makes place for one that's just as bad or even worse. At first they present themselves as the people's leader, but when they have what they got, the people suddenly don't mean anything anymore. Self enrichment, that's what they care about and it's so easy to participate in when the rest of the government is already used to these practices.

Also don't forget that the largest corporations within their countries are usually in it as well, and these corporations are where the money is at the end of the day.  

Mesh networks are catching up real fast. Then we also have the Blockstream satellite that will enable people to access Bitcoin without an internet connection. It's definitely not mass ready in terms of adoption, usability and convenience, but at least it gives us a glimpse of what we can expect in the forthcoming years.

The positive thing of there not being mass adoption yet is because it's still going through its initial speculation stage. People aren't yet interested in spending it, not interested in fast and cheap transactions, etc. Great for Bitcoin because it's being given the time to actually scale. What more can you wish for?

Not necessarily. They can have an office there and still not be operational within the US. It reeks though, because I'm pretty certain that them having an office within the US means they are trying to maintain their contacts and partners there. It's definitely something the CFTC can leverage if they feel there isn't anything else to bite into.

It's only going to be interesting when Bitmex is forced to let the CFTC sniff through its userbase for accounts that were previously visiting the platform from a US IP address, but suddenly use a completely different IP indicating the use of a VPN. If I was from the US and had funds over there, I would immediately withdraw it until the storm is over. Better safe than sorry.

It also comes down to risk tolerance. At the age of 60 and up people are more interested in wealth preservation rather than following the latest tech developments and potentially make a buck out of it. If you lose money at such an age, it's very likely lost for ever. In other words, the older generation is thinking through every step they set two or three times before they spend anything.

The younger generation on the other hand isn't as risk averase. For them it's quite easy to recoup losses if they give it a year or two. The consequences are negligible in this case, which can't be said about the older generation.

Can you explain me how the tax revenues as you call it will be affected? I for example can choose to not trade and not profit, which means no tax going towards the government, or I trade and profit but not pay any tax. So how exactly will the tax revenues be affected? The government can't lose or be impacted by something it never had in the first place.

I personally do pay tax over the profits I make because it's done through centralized exchanges, but this is pure profit to them. It's money they have now that they didn't have before, and didn't count on to generate. Governments have to work on being competitive and fair so that crypto businesses will choose their country to settle in. It's a new (additional) source of income for them.

It would require that person to acquire so much hardware that it literally would take years to perform this attack, and then still, existing farms have enough extra capacity to increase their hashrate to a point where the attacker would need +60 or even +70% of the hashrate. It would be an utter waste of time and money.

Just like how they banned drugs? That definitely worked. It made the prices of drugs sky rocket and the industry be worth like $400 billion annually.