The latter. The most normal scenario is that between now and halving we will have an upside, without beating the $69K ATH of this cycle, and post-halving we will have a proper bull run, beating that ATH and I believe passing $100K clearly after several attempts. From there I dare say no more.

This is based on what previous Bitcoin cycles have been like, which need not repeat exactly, and this cycle is a sample of that, but they are a guide for us

I don't know why you waste so much time and energy on him. You can also put him on your ignore list and that's it. I put him on it quite a while ago and haven't regretted it for a second afterwards.

What if he leaves feedback in your profile? I personally couldn't care less about untrusted feedback, and even less about neutral one.

Please lock the thread, put him on ignore and pass on him.

That's what I thought. In this forum we should care less. The only thing is that the approval of the Bitcoin ETF is supposed to throw a bullish sign into the market and bring in more institutional money. But that's the theory, that just as it can drive the price up it can drive it down. Imagine x famous company buying many millions of dollars in Bitcoin ETF and then after a year selling it. It would also affect the market negatively, just like when Tesla sold.

So, I don't worry, I keep accumulating real Bitcoin, not ETFs or shit, and that's it.

Even if you haven't heard anything, just think that this is the highest paying campaign now, the most similar to Chip Mixer in terms of payment, with the only difference being that CM paid up to 50 posts per week while this one pays up to 35. That and the fact that the recently accepted participants are all former Chip Mixer campaign participants will have caught some people off guard, I guess.

I, after all the failed predictions about the maximum price for this cycle that were made in 2021 by famous people like these, I don't care what they say anymore. Recall that there were very sophisticated models such as S2F, whose author was still insisting at least until recently on the corrrection of his model despite the dismal failure of the predictions, or Dan Held's super cycle theory, which gave $0.5M as the maximum price for this cycle. Max Keiser also, for example, predicted a high of $288K which we should have reached by now.

So all those predictions have no more value than mine, no matter how sophisticated they are, and the only thing that is clear to me is that as the cycles progress, the price will continue to rise, but the returns in percentage terms will be much lower than in the first cycles, as has already happened in this one. Whereupon, for me a realistic prediction is that in the next cycle, after spring 2024 we will reach a peak that will be between $100K and $200K.

As several have commented, it is most likely a purchased account. Either that or he hit his head and has brain injury that prevents him from remembering basic things, because otherwise it doesn't explain that he has not only applied to signature campaigns in the past, but was accepted and participated in some, for example:


Which does not fit with this at all:


I feel like leaving at least a neutral tag on his profile for quite likely bought account, but I'm controlling my aggressiveness lately, and I want to see how the yahoo62278 thing goes too.

I think the probability for the average citizen is so low, like winning millions in the lottery, that it is not worth spending a lot of time worrying about it.


If there were many millions, a part, at least 10%, would be donated. The rest I would invest in such a way that I could live with passive income and dedicate my time to whatever I wanted, and the rest I would squander without any consideration. Even if I have been managing my finances well for a long time and I have become rich, the possibility that I could win an exorbitant amount all at once scares me a little. Having a lot of money, no obligations and all the time in the world ends up with more than one in rehab or dead from overdoses, things like that.

I do not find this surprising. It is in line with AMLs policies in general. What I also believe is that these thresholds will be lowered over time, in the same way that cash payment limits have been lowered, or the limits above which bank transactions are reported to the IRS or equivalents in other countries. The public authorities want cashless societies and totally controllable, economically speaking, and they move towards that path little by little, slowly boiling us like a frog that does not realize it.

I don't see the point either, but not only for that reason. I can issue you an invoice using their service in the same way that I can write on a piece of paper with a pen that you have paid me x amount with x thing or in a pdf document. But an invoice to be legal you have to be registered as self-employed or a company, if not, it is not an invoice is rather a private receipt. The receipt you can do as you wish, I do not see that your service provides anything to pay 1% more fees, and besides as you say the proof of payment is in the blockchain.

I am pretty sure he reads, especially Meta threads. Another thing is that he doesn't write much, but that doesn't mean he doesn't read.

I support the Igebotz application, just as I repeatedly supported the creation of the local board for the large Nigerian community on Bitcointalk. I think the board would do better with Brainboss having some help as a merit source, and as far as I know, theymos now has at least two to choose from, Charles-Tim and Igebotz.

For these things it is always good to have a PO box, regardless of how much we trust the forum member who is going to send us the cards or other physical items, because this way he/she simply knows more or less where we live, but not the exact address. He doesn't know if we live next to the post office or 5 or 30 kilometers away (because it is a post office that is close to our work, for example). Although POs boxes are not usually cheap, it is worth getting one if you are going to use it regularly.

It depends on the type of work. If you are a freelance article writer and you are paid per article written, you don't need to go to the office and you can work from anywhere in the world. Besides, you are not employed in the company's staff, you are paid as an external. Now, in most office jobs, what you've seen is this: everyone has some downtime when what is the main task they have to do runs out. If you're at home, when you're done with the task, you go watch TV, lay on the couch or whatever, but if you're in the office and you see your bosses walking by you find things to do so they don't see you standing around, like organizing old files, going to talk to the partner or section chief about how to change the website and things like that.

I wouldn't waste too much time with people who tend to believe in conspiracy theories. In the end, rational arguments do not convince them.

In this case, simply by him studying a bit about what bitcoin is and how it works, if he wasn't too narrow minded, he would understand. There is some centralization, as ranochigo comments, but compare that with how almost all shitcoins or the fiat system work, and you will see that bitcoin is much more decentralized than these.

I don't see what the problem is with the OP using an alt to make this case, I'm with DireWolfM14 on this. What I also don't see much point in continuing the thread, because what the title says is false to begin with, and from the time the OP created the thread until now, what that statement has done is even lose more strength. Continuing the thread is only going to further piss off the OP, as you can see, and others. So my advice is also to lock it.

Not very realistic. It's not impossible for that to happen, but if the pattern of this cycle resembles previous ones in Bitcoin's short history, there is no way the price will surpass the $69K ATH in what's left until halving. Patterns need not repeat themselves indefinitely, however, and this cycle is an example of that, but on a downward trend.

But as mentioned, him betting only $300 is not very bullish.

If I had even just one satoshi there, I would have withdrawn it from Huobi by now.

Normally, when the first rumor of insolvency reaches us, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg, so it is best to act as soon as possible. This, in addition to the fact that, as has been said, it is not advisable to leave your Bitcoin in centralized exchanges. But if for whatever reason you have the money there (let's imagine that you have an amount with which you trade), better withdraw ASAP and look for a more reliable site to trade.

I don't play a lot of casino games, but I have gotten some 100X. What you have to think is that in casino games, if you get a 100X it is because the objective probability that you get it is lower. In other words, it will take you on average more than 100 times to get a 100X, this is what is known as negative expected value. Apply it to 500X or whatever amount.

In poker the closest thing, although in this case it may be EV+, would be to win multi-table tournaments, and I don't play many but over the years, I have won some and other times I have reached the final table or other prize positions.

How shocking, eh?

I don't know if you have stopped to think about the fact that you are only presenting the consumer's point of view. Of course, if you are a consumer, companies are not even going to think about your financial freedom.

Become an investor in those companies, or create one, and see if things change.

I am talking about companies in general, not only in the crypto world. The example you give of the Paypal stablecoin does not surprise me, a centralizedshitcoin and that they can freeze. What you should not do is to use it.

It is nice to see threads of this positive style.


This is a good sign. If the EU were a shithole, no one would want to go to work there.

Anyway, within the positivity, can you think of any negative aspects, or do you leave those to the critics? For example, over-regulation and an energy policy that could be improved are two weak points, but even so, the EU is better off than many parts of the world that are shitholes.

Because of what I commented before. The trust system is a fact finding system, a posteriori, rather than a preventive system, which is how I think it should be used.

So, the majority opinion is that this type of cases in the forum should be treated as if it were a criminal case in which someone is only convicted when there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt. Then, potential scammers take advantage of it. Just by being careful they can scam or set the stage for it for a while.

And then what happens is that when they have already scammed a lot of money and don't show up on the forum again, then they get 17 red tags on their profiles and flags massively supported, when it's too late.