I would add one more important thing, which is that you should not gamble with money for which you do not have a valid proof of origin - because I recently read a case where a user won almost $4 million with a deposit of $100k, and now the casino refuses to pay him win because he still hasn't been able to show them where the money he gambled with came from.

The price can go in any direction, and currently the only "positive" is the speculation about the final approval of the spot BTC ETF in the US, and in this regard, you should pay attention to the date October 17, 2023. That is the next deadline in which they will reject the request again, or maybe accept it.

If this does not happen, the first option is that the price will continue to move between $25k and $30k, and the second option, which some are speculating about, is that we are expecting another more pronounced drop towards $20k.

---

How can you say that the market is bad, if at the end of last year we had a price that was close to $15k, and at one point this year we even reached over $31k, which is about 100% growth in just a few months. I would call it (regardless of everything) a very positive year if we take into account inflation and the war in Ukraine, and many other bad events that marked this year, such as record heat, great floods and earthquakes.

I wonder what you would say if you were here in say 2015 when the price of BTC was only a little higher than $200 and when the pessimists were saying that the end for BTC was around the corner...

@Dictator69, apart from the fact that you can (and should) report such PMs by clicking on the "report to admin" button, you can also protect yourself from receiving such messages from newbies by simply blocking them from sending you messages.

Profile -> Personal Message Options -> Allow newbies to send you PMs. (uncheck)

---

Of course we know that such links from newbies are automatically removed in public posts, the question is why are they even allowed to send such links through PM?

If there was any truth in the fact that "no such agency" was behind the creation of BTC, then everything that the most famous whistle-blower brought to the public on that topic would be a fabrication - and I think that it was his revelations that broke the myth that this agency was responsible to create Bitcoin. If they created it, then why would they do everything possible to bring it under control?

---

Of course they cooperate, but they are still two different agencies that have their own working methods and areas in which they are active, and it's not like they really interfere in each other's work if it's not absolutely necessary. In addition, the agency we are talking about is still much more secretive and deals with some things that are much more shrouded in secrecy than other agencies. That's why it earned the nickname "no such agency".

He can be stubborn as much as he wants, but he still has to admit that some things have changed, and that is first of all the fact that the biggest of the biggest got involved in the race (BlackRock), and that Grayscale managed to win in court and that any further delay than what is allowed by law will not end well for the SEC.

Therefore, I believe that the preconditions have been created for such an ETF to finally be approved, and for it to be in March of next year at the latest - which again perfectly coincides with the next halving and could result in a big bull run in the months after that.

Why do you think that we will have to wait until the end of next year when there is enough time for the SEC to make a positive decision, perhaps even before the end of this year? Except for Ark, which has a deadline of January 10, 2024, all other companies will receive an answer no later than March 16, 2024, and if even then the answer is negative, all these companies in question should submit new requests very quickly, because the SEC can make its decision to be extended to a maximum of 240 days, which would mean that the ETF would not be possible even next year.

What you imagine does not make much sense, because today's quantum computers are far from being able to be a threat to Bitcoin in any way - and therefore the scenario you are talking about cannot just happen overnight. In other words, there is enough time for Bitcoin to adapt to this threat, and there are dozens of discussions on the forum where you can find a lot of useful information about the quantum threat.

For those who want to know more, interesting reading -> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/08/nsa_plans_for_a.html

One of the payment options is directly to a bank account, so I wonder why someone who just wants to get cash as soon as possible would choose a payment in Bitcoin at all? All these stories and speculations about how the price will fall because people will start selling en masse when they get all the coins is one of the biggest FUD that has been going around for years.

If we were somewhat realistic and divided those 140 000 BTC in the following way, then we could end this story once and for all.

- 40 000 BTC will be paid directly to clients in their wallets and they will mostly keep it.

- 40 000 BTC will be sold by the bankruptcy trustee via OTC (over a period of time) and the money will be paid into the clients' bank accounts.

- 60 000 BTC will be paid out in BTC and (there is also a BCH option), and the majority will be sold through various CEXs over a period of several months to perhaps a year.

If you take this scenario into account, then it is completely stupid to think that a few tens of thousands of BTC that will be sold gradually could have any impact on the price. Of course, all this would make sense in a world where people behave rationally, but given the obsession with this topic, I have no doubt that it will be very easy to sow panic when the time comes.

So everything is for profit and everything because of profit, buy cheap, sell expensive and repeat it as many times as possible? It looks good in theory, but in practice it obviously doesn't work that simple, otherwise the world would be full of ordinary people who would get rich in a fairly simple way.

Even if we take into account that most people invest in BTC only to make a profit, the fact is that most people wait for the bull run to start and only then buy. If you are already there just for profit, then learn how to detect the bottom and then buy as much as you can. DCA is not a bad method for those who do not have savings and have to buy in smaller amounts, but I would say that the real deal was done by those who bought under $20k.

It is completely irrelevant what Satoshi would think about where Bitcoin is today compared to the time when he was still active, because the essence of everything was to create something decentralized and to offer people an alternative to the existing financial system. He did his part of the job more than well, but he could not or did not want to influence what happened afterwards.

I agree that his idea only partially succeeded and that it works for a small percentage of people, and the rest are just waiting for some influential individual or some company to say something and buy BTC so that they can profit from such a decision. The direction we're going in could very easily result in Bitcoin becoming a toy for the rich (as long as it's fun/profitable for them), while the average Joe will have been thrown out of the game a long time ago because he thought a six-digit number was a great opportunity for an exit point.

The man is the owner of that company anyway, so I don't see how Bitcoin could have benefited at all from the fact that that company still left it as a means of payment, because what is the percentage of people who use BTC as a currency, and especially those who would bought an expensive car with the same?

My opinion is that it would have been better if Bitcoin had never found itself in the same sentence with that company, because apart from having a small pump, the long-term consequences were (and still are) extremely negative.


He should have ended up in prison back in 2018 when he manipulated his company's shares, but he paid a fine and settled with the SEC and received a suspended sentence. Such a man can hardly end up in prison, because he is a state actor who receives billions of dollars in incentives for what he does.

It seems to me that it is more likely that the trustee will leave this world sooner than the payments will be paid. Japan looks more and more like a third-class country where various civil services compete in incompetence.

I was looking for information about the time when the FED will announce the decision on rates for September and here is some interesting information.


In other words, Bitcoin didn't even blink

I deleted my account as soon as the new owner started applying some kind of absolute freedom of expression, that is, returning banned profiles to people who called for violence, denied the Holocaust or in any other way went against common sense or historical facts. I have nothing against people using any social network, but I've done the same as millions before or after me and I don't miss tweeting one bit.

---

As for paying for a service, I think it makes sense, because the world is just becoming that way - free stuff will just become a thing of the past, whether someone likes it or not.

I wouldn't have anything against retiring today, but only on the condition that I have enough money to be able to do the things I want and with which I certainly wouldn't be bored. Unfortunately, many people who do not have to work (for some reason) and have a lot of money, often do not know what to do with themselves, which can be a big problem.

I think that many people dream of early retirement because they do jobs they don't want to do or hate those same jobs from the bottom of their souls, while others you can't force into retirement even when they have to do it by law. However, many see their workplace as something more than making money, whether they enjoy the work they do or the people they are surrounded by.

I think it is important that a person has a goal and an interest in life, and then it is not a problem if for some reason he/she retires early.

It is unbelievable that the members of this forum still want Mr. Mars to do something about Bitcoin, and he has already done so much bad PR with his moves. The problem is not only that he first thought of Bitcoin as something positive, and then changed his mind for no reason - but that with his decision he influenced others and thus led them into the delusion that BTC mining is something that destroys the world - while in at the same time, I guess we should believe that all his companies have no impact on the environment.

The best thing is that this man never touches anything related to Bitcoin again, although my opinion is certainly not shared by the tens of millions who worship him for reasons known only to them.

It's a good thing that you have a stable income, but it's a bad thing that you think that way, because a loss is still just a loss, and maybe you shouldn't look at it just as lost money, but also as lost time, considering that you invest your time to earn money. For this reason, perhaps you should change your strategy and not invest money so lightly.


You have good goals, and if you read the unofficial rules and guidelines and be consistent in applying them, I'm sure you can become a good member of the forum.

If you have the opportunity to buy another HW, then that Ledger definitely deserves to be broken into pieces and thrown in the trash - of course, only when you are sure that you have transferred your funds to safety. Considering everything that has been happening with that company in recent years, I believe that their devices are nothing but a potentially big risk. It seems like a real blessing when they break down on their own.

I wonder if Cobra can get away with paying this fine given that his identity is not known, but that the authorities can always go in the direction of trying to locate him by IP address, even if he is a person who cares about his privacy and uses methods to hide his online identity.

---

I have never considered that the courts anywhere in the world are fair, and here the question of not only justice, but also elementary logic really arises. It's as if the court is saying that Faketoshi failed to prove that he is Satoshi, but also Cobra, with his failure to appear in court, did not prove that he has the right to use the whitepaper in a way to share it publicly.


Of course, Faketoshi can win only if the person does not present an active defense, that is, he wants to keep his anonymity - which was definitely not the case with @hodlonaut's trial where he was literally destroyed - although it must be recognized that the courts in Norway have a slightly different standard, and that something like this would certainly not pass in their court.

You are partially right, because Bitcoin and what you call crypto are not one and the same, so I can agree that sooner or later most altcoins will become worthless because they have no purpose and sense, except that they serve for pump&dump schemes.


When you go to compare tulips and Bitcoin, you expose yourself as a person who actually has no idea what he is talking about, because that topic has long since become meaningless and completely incomparable. Those of you who have been repeating the same worn-out phrases since 2009 experience a painful downpour over and over again when you are proven wrong, but that still doesn't stop you from constantly talking about some kind of doomsday for Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not a tulip, a ponzi scheme or anything like that, and you've been writing nonsense on this forum for years using alt accounts - and that's the only fact that matters in this story.