Maybe no one will get rich trading gold in the way you described, but there are people who make huge profits from gold, and I am primarily referring to gold mining companies. There are also ordinary people who search for gold with metal detectors in their spare time, and there are some TV shows where their adventures are followed, and I remember that some of them get lucky and find a really big nugget of gold.

Bitcoin is something completely different, and its volatility (in the short term), and especially in the long term, is incomparable when it comes to possible profit. In addition, we live in a digital world, and new generations have less and less interest in precious metals.

It is one of the mysteries of the forum that is still unsolved, and the only thing we can conclude from it is that this member has some kind of special status that allows him to do things for which others would very easily get a permanent ban.

As for ranks and merits, the fact that the OP opened this topic only confirms that some members believe that rank in itself means something, but if the member in question appeared on this forum after 2018, he would not even be a Hero member today.

The only thing that the admin should have added to the merit system is an addition that would allow lowering the rank if an active user fails to prove within a certain period that he is worthy of the rank he achieved with airdropped merits.

I can say that I have a similar experience, whether it's Tor or VPN, it all depends on what our own internet traffic is redirected through, but it's nothing that can't be solved by changing the circuit, as you say.

There is no doubt that with Tor we can experience problems with slow page loading or the occasional request to solve a captcha, but I think that many people do not understand how Tor works and that they have to adapt if they want such a dose of privacy.

---

I don't think the question here is that the OP is encouraging someone to do anything, but in my opinion the point is that if you already use Tor as your main browser, then you will use TalkImg with that browser - and if you have problems using it, that means you would have to use another browser at the same time.

The question is how did these people come to invest in cryptocurrencies in the first place? If you are the person who pushed them in that direction then it makes sense that you take care of them and their investments because you are somehow responsible for them. Otherwise, I will certainly not interfere in someone's financial decisions, because in the past it cost me not only nerves but also money.


This is true, at least for those who value life more than money and material things, but there are always those who do stupid things in life and behave frivolously. It is very difficult to help such people, because they do not learn from their mistakes and, moreover, they do not want to listen to well-intentioned advice.


Aren't people drinking too much and driving recklessly whether we are in a bear market or a bull market? I see such people almost every day of the year and they don't need any reason to do something stupid in their life.

As if this is something new when it comes to bounty campaigns in which the owner of a project can at any time refer to the fact that the goals of the project were not achieved at all or were only partially achieved and therefore cannot pay those who promoted it as much as promised. Even if it doesn't go in that direction, some use the option to simply say that most campaign participants are bots or alt accounts that don't deserve to be paid.

No matter how we look at it, the fact is that in this game everyone takes risks, and the only question is who will someone point the finger at and declare him guilty after all. I would say that everyone bears part of the blame, regardless of whether they organize or participate in bounty campaigns.

I agree that there is truth in what you wrote, although there is also a lot of ignorance that results in this kind of nonsense. If the OP who has been around for a while wonders if there is any truth to this, what do those who know absolutely nothing about Bitcoin think when they come across this kind of information?

Not only is the coin that the OP is talking about premined, but as far as I know, there is no defined max supply yet, and it has also moved to POS. When you take all that into account, it's no wonder that someone invents stories like this to diminish the real value of Bitcoin, and I don't mean exclusively the price.

If you live in the belief that this is the main reason (or one of the reasons), then you are really delusional or do you think that the US is so poor that it depends on how much BTC they seize and then sell at auctions? Let's take a hypothetical case in which the US would be able to seize all BTC that is currently in circulation (mined) and sell it at the current price of $27 700 for one BTC, which would total about $540 billion. If you are interested, the annual US budget (2023) for defense is about $850 billion.


You don't think they will mine BTC or something similar, do you? Although it is not disputed that people in the US invest in BTC, it is far from what people think, because they still protect their national currency in all possible ways and the average American still values the US dollar no matter what.

---

As for CBDC, it is only a response to the digital age and aims much more to be a competitor to stablecoins than to Bitcoins. At least that is the position of the ECB when it comes to the EU, but I doubt that the FED has a different position on the matter.

Does this mean that you do not agree with what the Global Moderator wrote in the sticky topic when he described what is actually a low quality topic? According to what you wrote, that board should not be moderated at all, which makes no sense to me personally, unless the forum goes in the direction that nothing will be considered worthy of being a report anymore.

However, considering that at least 90% of forum members are here only for signature campaigns, it would certainly suit them.

Didn't we read until a few days (months) ago that the chances are only increasing and that they amount to even 75% by the end of this year, and even 95% by the end of next year - and now even 2 years are being mentioned? I understand that everyone has their own speculations, but I already wrote before that I believe that with the entry of BlackRock into this game, things simply have to change.

Otherwise, Gensler could find himself under a rock, figuratively of course

The price actually reached about $20 000 at the end of December 2017, I don't know where you got that information from.


I guess you meant June 2018 or maybe 2019, and certainly not 2023, which was only recently. His speculation has so far failed completely, but he himself admits in one article that he said what he said only because others put pressure on him after he was successful the first time. Although I remember he threw quite a party when he announced it, but he certainly won't be happy if he missed the mark completely this time.

If you have such serious health problems that can obviously result in serious financial losses, you should in some way limit access to your money in such a way that you cannot easily be tempted to throw away tens of thousands of dollars. As much as that online casino is to blame because it shouldn't have sent you an e-mail and it shouldn't have targeted users in a country where it doesn't have a license to operate, it's just as much your fault because you registered, made a deposit and gambled, and in the end you lost.

If there is a similar case in which the deposit was returned to another user, then you have to fight through legal means to achieve the same right - and the fact is that none of us can help that to happen.

I agree that Passport is an excellent solution for those who only have BTC, and here Ledger or Trezor have an advantage, considering that they are multicurrency HW, which for some is a crucial thing when buying such devices. As for us in the EU, the price is of course a little higher (about 260 EUR - a little more than $270), and there are really quite a sufficient number of resellers, and for me it's a shame that one from my country stopped selling this HW.

Considering the events of the past, my first option would be to buy HW directly for cash, and the second option would be to use a PO box, I am not even thinking about the third one.

This is the first time I'm hearing about it, although honestly all the information I get about them comes from this forum - and apparently everyone missed it, or no one considered it something worth mentioning. For those who want to know a little more, there is some information on the official website, but also on some news portals.

---

@o_e_l_e_o, as they say, old habits die hard even when we are aware that we should change them. This is exactly what keeps Ledger still in the competition, regardless of all the scandals they produce. As you say yourself, if someone buys BTC and keeps it in something they consider an online crypto bank (CEX), then I'm sure that Ledger can sell them the story that their new service is actually good, and it's also optional.

I hope that a company (or maybe an existing one) will appear that will offer a product that will be safe, attractive and competitively priced in relation to Ledger HW. It always seemed to me that the Ledger Nano S or X models owe their success to their design, which resembles a regular USB stick, and when I was in doubt between the Nano S and the Trezor, I was somehow more attracted to the design made by Ledger.

I meant society in general, and of course there are always those who are exceptions, like you or me who has had the same smartphone for almost 5 years and I'm still happy with the same one, even though I haven't received any upgrade for a long time. That's the only reason why I'm thinking about a new model that will still be in a higher price range, considering that I don't buy such things every year.

In addition, the iPhone is actually a "Chinese" phone because it is manufactured in China, as are most of today's smartphones with the exception of Samsung, which allegedly does not have its own production facilities in China.

I agree, and it is nothing new that is not already known and has not been discussed. Some members even set that board to ignore, some decided to try with as many reports as possible, but that board is still littered with a large number of low value topics. Fortunately, there is a "report to moderator" option, and anyone can use it to report any topic or post that they think does not meet the criteria - and it is obvious that the vast majority have never read the sticky topic that has been at the top of that board since 2016.

Low quality topics do not belong here.

---

You are obviously one of those who didn't read what low quality topic means - because what would happen if everyone who profited from Bitcoin or bought something for Bitcoin opened a new topic in the Bitcoin discussion?

Some people may find this kind of speculation interesting, but when you read it for more than 5 years, it all becomes boring and tiring, not to mention that in most cases such speculations are a complete failure. However, everyone who plays with numbers in this way has become interesting to the media, and if you can promote the company and yourself for free, why not do it? People have short memories anyway, if you're right everyone will talk about it, if it's the other way around no one will even mention it.

Realistically speaking, we are at the end of 2023 and the price is below $30k, and the question is whether there will be any major upward movements by the end of the year, and someone says "maybe even $1 million by 2026" and I can only laugh at that and nothing more.

The spot BTC ETF already exists in some countries of the world, futures exist even in the US, but some are obviously so convinced that the spot ETF in the US will be something that will pump hundreds of billions of $ into BTC, as if it is the only way for big players to invest in BTC.

It's not that I personally don't believe that there won't be an effect on the price if the approval of the spot ETF + halving is combined, but I guess we all know that the market is a two-way street where something is bought and sold, and pumping up the price of 1 BTC to $1 million is something that it does not seem at all realistic when it comes to the year 2026.

Because we have turned into a society where consumerism rules and where social status is shown precisely with a new smartphone, an expensive watch or an item of clothing. I personally know people who give up a lot in life to be able to buy such things, some even at the expense of their own family, which does not seem harmless at all.

In addition, that famous smartphone has been brought into context with Bitcoin so many times on this forum that I wonder what it has to do with each other and why these comparisons exist at all. I could still understand the fascination when someone found a Bitcoin white paper on Apple computers, and it was interesting to me, especially considering that it was removed from newer versions because someone estimated that something like that could harm them.

---

As for the doubt about whether someone should buy a new iPhone or invest in Bitcoin, I think that one should not necessarily exclude the other - because if you have $1000 for a phone, then it is certainly not a problem to allocate a few hundred $ if you already want to invest in Bitcoin.

I think that this is still too small an amount that could change someone's future, if we are talking about the fact that the cheapest version of the iPhone 15 costs from $800 to over $1000 depending on the country. If you invest $1000 in BTC today, you still won't have an iPhone, and it is questionable how much and when you will profit, not to mention the risks that arise from the fact that someone can hack you, physically steal BTC, or that you can lose access to your wallet or your backup.


Your friend would have to work maybe even two months to buy that smartphone, so I don't think that investment is that simple for him. Maybe if he takes it in installments and then pays 10% of the value for the next 2 years, that would already make some sense and that's how many people actually buy many things.

You actually answered yourself in which ways you could get merits for your posts, but the problem is that you admit that you are not good at any of those things, which is actually a problem considering that you are on a forum where, among other things, the most debate is about Bitcoin.

If you look at your statistics when it comes to posts in relation to boards where you post, it is clear that more than 50% of your posts are in Altcoins, Politics&Society or Off-topic, with the addition that you yourself admit that you have not been very active on the forum in recent years.

If you want some change, then you have to change yourself - and that means that you should start visiting the forum a lot more and reading the posts of other members, and with time you will certainly learn something, so you will be able to participate in discussions.

They definitely deserve some kind of punishment from the community that bought their devices, but I sincerely doubt that they will go bankrupt considering that (unfortunately) most of the people who have their hardware wallets or those who are about to buy them do not understand the risks they are exposed to considering that their seed can be shared with Ledger and at least two other companies. As if the hacking of the data of hundreds of thousands of their clients was not enough of a warning that someone in that company is behaving very irresponsibly.

---

We will only see in the coming years how much trust has actually been lost, but the fact is that Ledger is maintained on the surface only for the reason that no other company has adequately responded to the opportunity that appeared on the market. I am not saying that there are no alternatives when it comes to other hardware wallets, but it seems to me that they are still a step or two behind, whether it is marketing or competitiveness when it comes to the price of the product.

---

I think that the number of employees of the company will perhaps be the best indicator of how successful (unsuccessful) the company will be in the future. Bad business results always fall on the backs of ordinary workers.