Cunning? More like con'ing, as in deceiving and scamming people.

It's an embarrassment that he will end up having a lunch with Buffett, especially with how most of his dislike towards crypto is because of all the shitcoins. I totally agree with most of the negative talk that comes from his direction regarding crypto, but he talks as if all coins are equally shit, while Bitcoin clearly isn't.

Justin can't even articulate two words without sounding cringey. The only positive is that Charlie Lee has been invited to join the lunch too.

Not exactly sure what you're referring to, but the said merchants don't have to do anything. Fold will update it's infrastructure so that merchants will be able to accept Lightning payments whenever a customer is asking for it. Obviously, they will just receive the fiat on their end while Fold is taking care of the conversions and whatnot.

As for when they will implement Lightning, it has been done so immediately after releasing their official statement. Pretty cool. Lightning is the future and a great marketing feature too.

No worries man, they can't do shit as long as you skip using centralized services that work as a third arm for governments to force control over people who are stupid enough to use exchanges as wallet services. I'm pretty certain you're not doing that already so just keep doing what you have been doing for years now.

Trump's Tweet gave Bitcoin a shit ton of free exposure, we should thank him for that. He has almost 62 million followers and we got global media coverage too. No one at this point believes this crap anymore. It would have worked if the price would be heading towards $100 but it is not. Instead, it makes the dollar looks pathetic losing value against Bitcoin year after year.  

They don't. They will boot you off their service just by the slightest suspicion of trading crypto. It's called risk analysis, which every bank is running behind the scenes, but in this case the algorithm responsible for monitoring client activity is so sharply set up that it will return false positives left and right, and you have to proof that you didn't do anything related to crypto through their service.

As for the premiums, in most cases it's just click-bait headline material. The markets where these premiums occur are so thin that you can flash crash the charts by dumping one single Bitcoin.

Mining looks centralized, but isn't so under the hood. Behind a seemingly big pool there are thousands of smaller miners pointing their hashrate to them.

Bitcoin's smaller blocks give miners the incentive to include transactions in a block, while before they may have not really done it. I remember a time where Jihan Wu was mining empty blocks just for the heck of it; the transaction fees didn't add up to a decent enough amount so he couldn't care less about transactions waiting for confirmation, which is completely different right now.

Look at BCash's network for example. Some miners have been mining empty blocks or just the transactions that were of their own. It's an easy to exploit attack factor.

News outlets just release news for the sake of releasing news. Price up = news article. Price down = news article. Stagnant price = news article. Speculation offers news outlets infinite possibilities of content whenever they feel it's time for another speculation/prediction article.

It's time for people to not get triggered by these articles so easily. In fact, I actually enjoy reading through some because of how poorly set up their are. It's hilarious reading through the analysis of a nobody over at a reputable news outlet just talking shit. The moral of the story is that no matter how long they have been reporting about crypto in general, they still don't get it. 

People first speculated about the possibility of seeing sub $100 levels ever again, and now we're at stage two, which is whether or not we'll see sub $1000 levels ever again. Next stage is seeing threads speculate about sub $10,000 levels, and then after some time the same could happen when we're well above the $100,000 level.

I don't think about could this or that lower level be ever seen again. I don't have to. If we see a ridiculously low price level I'll just buy in and get more coins for the same amount of fiat.

You've got to admire how these news outlets manage to be so stupid for so long. 

They (after Bitcoin has gone up a lot) said that Bitcoin bottomed because JPM came out with their plan to launch their coin, then the increase of Bitcoin was related to the trade war between China and the US, then Libra, etc. It looks like these clowns still don't get that Bitcoin doesn't give a shit about all of this. At most the trade war might have stimulated some investors to buy Bitcoin, but the rest is just crap.

People cheer when they see the price go up like 50% in a matter of a week, then cry when there is a 10-15% correction and call manipulation.

Binance obviously chooses the number of confirmations needed, but they MUST at least wait for two confirmations to be sure enough that they won't lose out because of stale/orphaned blocks.

In case of an exchange it's just stupid to accept deposits after just one confirmation because it allows people to participate in the market directly. This will guaranteed lead to Binance rolling back trades of people and thus disturb the overall market activity in case someone's deposit suddenly turns out to not be confirmed at all. Everything for the sake of pleasing greedy traders, right? 

In that case I'm pretty certain that Bitfinex will issue a token or whatever investment round so that it has enough of x/y/z assets to back up at least $1-$2 billion of USDT, and people will swallow it. It's impossible even for regulators to get it down. It has enough adoption, enough exchanges on board, etc. It's not going anywhere.

People just need to stop selling their precious Bitcoin for something that has been minted out of thin air, not even the more reputable stablecoins. It's shite all together.

I think the main problem here isn't necessarily the site, but people themselves. People shouldn't solely depend on a site to tell them whether an exchange is safe to use or not.

In the end, these 'risk assessments' are extremely subjective and there is a hint of bias because what if an exchange pays them to be granted a higher/safer score? If you blindly select a certain exchange just because the site has ranked it high you might end up with a big disappointment and blame the site for it, while you are the only one that should be blamed.

Do your own research and know what to look for, which helps you choose the safest possible options. Never take third party information/research for granted.

One moment its weonex and the other moment it's weonix. What's next, weonax? 

This. Creating threads here asking if people know whatever site has never worked well. Firstly, most people don't click on links anyway. Secondly, as you said, there are so many active users here going against scams that it will instantly trash whatever site it is that people promote. Shilling here doesn't work, especially not in the noobish ways we have seen in the past.

It is only a waste to spend coins when you don't replace them. Bitcoin has always had a bias to the upside, so you know that replacing spent coins is very important. I'm waiting for exchanges to provide these services because it will help do the work for you in the background. That way you can spend coins without having to worry about missing next weeks rally.

People spending Bitcoin to regret it a month later have themselves to blame for. It's not a unit of account. It's a new type of money with a heavily fluctuating price. You would expect people to have figured that out already, but nope.

His Tweet;
Stuff like spending money by giving away shitcoins and whatnot, while they could save money by simply batching transactions.

It's quite hilarious. He is the one responsible for ordering the coders what to do, yet he didn't find it necessary to do so. It's not even that hard to do. It would take minimal configuration to accomplish. It literally saves them and their users millions every year. How can this not have any priority? 

Bittrex did it like two years ago and that in their glory time as top exchange. If you look at Brian's Twitter you can see how he almost never even mentions Bitcoin. This guy has messed up priorities.

More like a truckload of salt, but another side that should be blamed for wrongly translating Russian articles and purposely adding garbage to articles to spice them up, are the news outlets.

Most of what we read about isn't what it may look like at first glance. News outlets have an edge over their readers because most people have no clue how to fact check reports in foreign languages, where even if they translate articles the translator will not be able to correctly reflect the context and whatnot.

There also was a time where news outlets came up with a lot of crap when China was still a thing. The circus never ends. Anything will be done for that click/penny.

People have been using centralized services for nearly a decade to use and trade Bitcoin and now Lightning being "centralized" is a problem? People complaining are a joke.

Every participant in the network will become equal to the other in terms of being a hop. Sure, liquidity per channel might differ, but your transaction will not suffer from anything because it will follow the path where the probability of being settled is the highest. As time goes by, people using Lightning won't even be knowing that they are using it, they just use Bitcoin.

I like Bitstamp not just because I have been using it since 2013, but they are one of the very few out there that actually want to see Bitcoin do well. They could have listed a shitton of altcoins but they didn't. Respect to them for following the right path.

I think that the first will be the more likely case. To a certain degree we see this play out already. Dumb money is invested in altcoins for the main part, while smart money parked most of its capital in Bitcoin. Institutions are building products around Bitcoin, not shitcoins. Wealthy individuals buy Bitcoin and not shitcoins.

Dumb money as we speak is desperately hoping for an altcoin season to see their bags pump, while the smart money can sit back and enjoy looking at how the only coin with a legitimate usecase is leaving the altcoins behind.

The main thing is that the more money you have, the more there is for you to lose, so from there it makes perfect sense to buy into the least risky asset in this space. Those with little capital and hopes of becoming rich try their luck by investing in the worst shitcoins hoping to 10-100x their money.

It's a good thing to face resistance around these levels because that means people are unloading their coins, which will make a further increase afterwards easier because their bags will either remain empty or they will re-accumulate to not miss out. I'm confident that the bulls will be able to absorb the selling without too many problems.

The last time we saw a spontaneous dump was on Bitstamp which triggered them to start an investigation, which I'm sure is enough to scare off whales trying to do it another time. It's a bit messed up to be honest, because if someone wants to dump a lot of coins then so be it, it's a free market, but Bitstamp thinks otherwise.

I'm honestly not really impressed anymore by whatever Bitcoin is showing in terms of price gains. It was cool and exciting back in the days where we went from a few hundred to $10,000, but I got so used to it that it's not doing much for me anymore. I'm of course very happy with the price going up, enjoying the volatile price action in the recent months, but it has become normal.

The only moment I will start celebrating is when we go past the $100,000 level. Everything below that is just meh. It has gotten super easy for me to not be tempted to sell anything out of my cold wallets, not even a single satoshi. Full hodl mode over here.

Perhaps I just miss the old times where we were speculating that one day Bitcoin would be worth more than $10,000....

I don't think so. In the long run, even legitimate businesses will be confronted with less demand, weaker local economy, or a global crisis the way we had it like a decade ago. No business is safe from that and as result a lot of these will fail. In the process whatever that can be seen as a scheme will collapse too.

The thing with schemes is that once they fail, others pop up with a few improvements here and there and continue where the rest didn't manage to continue. Schemes as a whole will continue pretty much for ever, but not in the way that one or more entities manage to stay operational more than a decade or whatever other period of time.