There's no point trying to extrapolate information from unproven data that can be completely irrelevant - this is an instance of exactly that.

Bitcoin transaction volumes could be a function of price, instead of the other way aronud. We'd be assuming that bitcoin transactions are the independent variable to price when in fact, it could be dependent on price. And it makes sense for BTC transactions to double over time in the long haul as well, since adoption is increasing, and we're recently experiencing a very strong start to 2020 in terms of BTC price growth.

Short term, look at TA, and long term, look at fundamentals. No point looking to these irrevelant statistics.

I'm not sure if one can truly be unbiased presenting any sort of speculative opinion.

The fact is that the coins that he promotes (at least back when I actually watched him) were mostly small caps and as a result, were extremely easy to manipulate the price with given the influence that he has. He could very easily load up on these cheap coins before telling others about the opportunity, thus reaping a profit himself.

I'm not saying that he does that necessarily, it's just something to keep in mind.

I tend to agree with you.

Playing against other punters on the market is almost always playing against a central sportsbook. The site has less conflict of interest when it comes to holding your funds as well as processing your bets, which means that the betting exchange is significnatly less likely to use excuses such as KYC to hold up your withdrawals which is a problem with sportsbooks.

The only exception is if the betting markets don't have sufficient liquidity to take on a big bet. However, with the small limits that sportsbooks like Nitrogen provide anyway, I don't see that as a concern.

Right. But couldn't this be done to bets that are not necessarily related?

Say that within a match, one can parlay ML and over/under points total, but not ML and handicap, for instance.

Would that still be too risky for bookies to accept into their business model?

I'm wondering this because Nitrogen, which is where I usually play on, doesn't allow this. They only allow cross game parlays.

I'm not familiar with how the sportsbook world works in general since I'm just a casual player.

Is it industry standard to reject multi-bets from the same game (e.g. betting on ML as well as the spread, or ML as well as over/under)? Are there any crypto operators that allow you to do this?

Ah, yep. Mr. Schiff is back again with some derogatory news on BTC. Glad to know the world is still running

It's obvious that this was nothing but his own fault. If he's not willing to invest some of his millions of dollars from shilling gold to his clients with little to no returns into a hardware wallet that can secure your holdings 99.999% of the time, then why did he invest in BTC in the first place? I've even used Electrum for a few years before I got a hardware wallet, and even then I've never had issues with losing coins.

Does he not know the importance of backup? I wonder when his supporters will finally start waking up to realize how incompetent this man is

I mean, extrapolating past trends into the future is not always an accurate means of prediction.

I'd say that it is more than likely we're going to see a bull run, there's little doubt about that because of the fact that BTC is indeed based on these 4 year market cycles that drives its pricing, and that we're just out of a bear market that spanned 2 or so years.

But to state the magnitude of the upcoming bull run based on past data is quite inaccurate, imo, because of the fact that the market is nowhere near as immature as it was a couple of years back and as a result, not as volatile. It also has a larger market cap which makes it harder to move.

It makes no sense to positively or negatively label a mechanism provided by an exchange - it's like saying whether or not limit orders are evil compared to market orders. It depends on your exact needs and you simply can't generalise it in that sense.

If you're trading in a market where there is thin support at a particular level and you want to exit your position as soon as the support is breached, since there is a high likelihood of a panic dump, then stop loss can definitely be useful.

But there is no point in saying whether it's good or bad in general terms - longing BTC can be good in some circumstances while bad in others.

Not on the bitcoin blockchain, no.

I think that the closest thing you can get is something like a casino that is hosted on a decentralized network like EOS. Check out EOSbet.io if you want, but I'm not exactly sure if that is what you are looking for since you can't just import a private key and start betting AFAIK.

There has been a handful of casino tokens hosted on the ETH blockchain as well although without much adoption. You might want to check them out as well.

Honestly, there should be no surprises that the alt market is this bullish.

Alts have been undervalued against BTC for a while now given the fact that even during the recovery, BTC rallied while alts stayed relatively the same level throughout.

Expect significant pumps coming from major altcoins when it comes to times where BTC is stable and isn't taking liquidity away from the alts markets. Bitcoin dominance could continue to slip for a while for sure.

Halving is definitely not priced in. That's a no brainer.

100%+ in 2020 is also very possible given the fact that the year started out at around $8k and a 100% increase would not even mean breaching the last all time high. It would take some serious bullish trends to do so but it's certainly not impossible.

Fundstrat is finally making some somewhat believable predictions

What do you even classify as artificially driven?

If you're talking about whether or not gains were due to speculators, it probably is, but then isn't basically everyhting driven by speculation in any market, commodities, equities, bonds alike?

Anyhow, a free market with no regulations is bound to be volatile and unpredictable like BTC markets. There is no way around that. The best you can do is to hedge your bets and not to leave yourself too exposed to the downside risks.

The $8500 support has been tested 3 times and held up each time it was tested. So I don't think that it's wise to expect much more downside compared to the potential upside when it comes to BTC potentially breaching $9k and $10k once again after the weak hands were flushed out of the market.

Do your own due diligence, but I do think that dollar cost averaging right now would be a wise move to make.

That way, you ensure that you don't run the risk of entering your positions at too high a price but at the same time, not missing out on any bullish price action.

I suggest that you don't rely on them at all.

From what I've heard from most countries, it seems like that almost all of them have some sort of KYC restriction placed on users and that is unavoidable given the fact that bitcoin ATMs are a subject of regulation in the majority of countries.

You should just look on Localbitcoins for cash deposits trades, I find that is the best possible way to get a decent rate while not worrying to have to travel far for a Bitcoin ATM that may not even be available without KYC.

It's very unlikely.

Stablecoins can help institutions as well as traders in terms of hedging their bets, but at the end of the day, it doesn't necessarily promote decentralized cryptocurrencies to the extent that people seem to make it to be.

After all, that's not what fundamentally motivates people to adopt crypto. The intrinsic value of crypto comes from being a long term store of value, as well as a means of payment without substantial fees associated with it that can be used across the world. Stablecoins do not necessarily tackle either of these issues.

No. I haven't seen any real progress in terms of adoption from them since they first came out.

Blockchain based social media seems to be somewhat of a failed experiment at least at this stage when you look at even big names such as Steem significantly decreasing in market cap after the initial hype and buzz around it. There seems to be no real usage case around it, which is what is ultimately causing this failure.

I would certainly not expect BitTube to make such a strong recovery when even at its peak, it was not in the top 100 AFAIK.

I'm not sure about this.

There is an abundance of supply for XLM from all the airdrop programs that it has associated itself with, including blockchain (ID verification) and Keybase (no ID verification, so you can imagine the amount of bots that signed up and claimed the coins multiple times).

That leaves excess supply and an extremely inflationary coin base. I'm not sure if I would want to invest in that in the long run at least.

A lot of alts come and go very quickly.

WAVES's hype came from its ICO initially but the development and hype around it did not sustain, it was as simple as that. There is virtually no use for their DEX which is why there is a lack of adoption, and when there is a lack of fundamentals it makes it hard for speculators to bet on it.

It could still make some short term sizable gains from pump and dumps, but honestly in the long run it has no apparent future.

Even John McAfee has said that he's pulled out of the prediction. So why are we still talking about these absurd figures?

Drawing comparable data from the past could be useful for analysis, but this is certainly not comparable data by any means given the simple fact that you're obviously going to see much harsher conditions to pump BTC under this market, which is much more mature and has larger market capitalization which requires more capital inflow to influence prices in the short term.

Be realistic, guys. The all time high of 2017 could still stand after this bull run is all said and done, simply because of how high it went and how overpriced BTC was compared to its fundamentals at the time.

Honestly, I'm not that concerned.

BTC has been pumping lately without much corrections, and something was obviously going to have to give as a matter of time.

For long term holders of BTC longs this shouldn't be a concern whatsoever, given the fact that it is normal market activity that has been seen countless times before.

There is already some recovery as well, with prices now above $8660. I wouldn't doubt that in a few days we'll be testing the $9k resistance once again.