if you can only invest and want returns within a week, only throw in amounts that wont leave you out of pocket for a week. emotion is not something traders should have. and if its something that makes you physically sick when theprice drops, then you have to detach your emotions or just stop checking the price so often to cause vomit episodes

if your going to cry at each weekly movement then maybe investing isnt for you
forget about the weekly ups and downs if your not prepared to buy/sell every week

forget about the weekly ups and downs if your are waiting to multiply profits.. just hold it and take emotion out of it, and wait for the long term rise

they wish for it to be at a discount when they get paid their wage to buy in cheap.. then they wish for it to jump in price the very same week to cash back out because they owe rent and need groceries..

then they repeat the same thing over and over again
remember for every bunch of people wanting a discount day(drop), theres also people wanting profit day(rise)

it will be the same every time. and forever. for every buyer there is a seller.. its how trade works

first lesson to learn. take emotion out of it.
when the price drops. dont cry saying you cant make profit, instead think of it as a discount day and a god time to buy more cheap
when the price rises. dont cry its too expense to buy in, instead think of it as a profit day and a good time to sell some to have spare cash to get in more at the next discount.. just never sell at a loss

the title is misleading
it should be
man jailed for accepting large amounts of FIAT, thats beyond personal trading amounts and did not declare himself as a FIAT money business nor follow fiat money regulations

alot of people think that just because half of a trade is bitcoin (other half being fiat) that some how fiat laws dont apply
if your going to handle fiat then expect to follow fiat laws

if you hate fiat laws then dont handle fiat.. instead trade bitcoin for bread, milk, baked beans, toilet paper.. and you will not be treated as a money business but as a retailer.. its as simple as that

craig wright is a scammer yes...
the whole jihan/ver drama is just a soap opera for reddit..
the cobra twitter is drama..

when it comes to what really matters to bitcoin, is what core/blockstream have done to diminish bitcoins ethos and utility..
if you want to continue the personality/band camp drama.. you will get your entertainment on reddit.

now sit back have a long think about what you are trying to argue about and realise where your arguments are failing.

chek2fire
take off your blockstream dev defense hat.. and instead of the band camp/defense attack rhetoric... argue about BITCOINS ethos and utility.
all people are trying to hint to you is that you care more about the blockstream devs having ultimate decision powers and no one else should

take a step back from the keyboard. make a cup of coffee and think long and hard about WHO/WHAT you are defending

the only time you should worry about bitcoin cash getting more wide spread, is not about twitter accounts or website links.. but when real world merchants stop accepting bitcoin and choose a different crypto.

and then instead of crying its a conspiracy/attack.. ask yourself what has bitcoin actually done to keep decentralisation and community openness alive.
so far since 2014 (the advent of core/blockstream) all i have seen is bitcoins ethos and utility slowly diminish

but hey.. go back a couple decades and go point fingers blaming a conspiracy that myspace failed because facebook spoofed some twitter account. instead of realising that myspace stagnated and failed to listen to its community, and thus the community decided something else was needed.

personally no one can pigeion hole me into any "camp" because my philosophy is decentralisation. not band camp preference.. and its more than likely that the merchant adopting crypto will be something more like litecoin or even a yet to be conceived coin, rather than any bitcoin fork, if blockstream continue with their roadmap

makes me laugh

person doesnt follow the blockstream roadmap like a bible.. so chek2fire says take away control of website and give it solely to blockstream fanboys... all because of a twitter account.
where said twitter account might be a spoof anyway

thats like saying you want a divorse because you seen a fresh pair of boxers in your wifes bed.. before even asking who's boxers they were.. maybe she likes wearing boxers herself but doesnt want to wear yours because she knows where they have been.. maybe she bought you a fresh pair because she knows where your old ones have been.

but hey deep down people soon realise what you really wanted was any excuse to not have to share the bed with anyone that opposes your opinion
..
chek2fire bitcoin WAS suppose to be decentralised. but instead of having the whole x1 x2 as a single network consensus..
(like unlimited, xt, classic was 2014-2016)
 blockstreamers baracaded themselves into a cabin and then got bloq to help push x2 into altcoin land so that blockstreams x1 got activated even though x1 was only getting 30% of the community node vote prior to their game

by saying anything not core is an attack is the simple admission that you believe core own bitcoin. and thus you admit that bitcoin is not decentralised.

..

while i do love seeing blockstream fanboys blaming others to distract the attention away from how bitcoin is losing its ethos because of blockstream fanboyerism.. all they are really doing is just pushing people away unless they are part of a roadmapped central agenda

what should have happened is that if blockstream didnt get the 2015 segwit vote and then didnt get the consensus vote. blockstream(core) should have gave up and listened to the community by trying something else. but instead they banished the opposition into altcoin land to 'rig' the vote in blockstreams roadmaps favour

but hey now they can push as many soft forks as they like without a vote. so thats why some are saying full nodes are no longer required. because its all gone centralised..

but hey. as long as you can make people look in the other direction while bitcoins utility diminishes further.. you will be happy right

gotta laugh when people shout bitcoin $1m

if bitcoin was $1m .. then 1 sat would be 1cent meaning the most leanest tx possible would be over a dollar even when there is no spam..
sorry but no one would like to use bitcoin if it was guaranteed to always cost $1 per use forever
(no fanboys dont rebutt with the LN banking hub service as your defence as thats not bitcoin ethos, thats the fiat banking2.0 service ethos)

also if you compare the whole scarcity 'value'
with there being 175,000 tonnes of gold (6,173,000,000 ounces) totalling about $8.2trillian cap.. if there were 21million units of gold that would put each gold unit at just under $400k

so knowing how popular gold is and how long it has been around. on a scarcity unit of 21mill units.. its value would only be just shy of $400k
sorry but bitcoin just doesnt have the utility/function for world usage.. and it doesnt have the popularity, trust, recognition of gold

i do love bitcoin (in its original ethos) but it is worth atleast being realistic and inform people that reality is not a utopia.

with that said.. their is chance of bitcoin being $1m.. but thats when a loaf of bread would be more than a dollar too. so from a cost of living viewpoint, bitcoin being $1m would not mean you could buy 1million loaves of bread. (research Zimbabwe dollar for concept(hint fiat inflation))

that twitter account is only 6 months old... i smell phish

but then again cobra wanted to rewrite satoshi's whitepaper and still call it satoshi's paper.. so i think he has always had a few brain cells short of a braincell

funny part is..
bill gates hands out millions of vaccines in africa each year..

he has become one hell of a big drug dealer himself

banks will only not matter once cryptos stop doing this:
1, stop being measured against fiat
2. stop being traded against fiat
but that would require people to stop buying food, clothing and paying tax in fiat.

as for 'banks' not mattering to society in a crypto utopia..
well if you look at the direction bitcoin is going.. LN hubs become bank2.0 where retailers start being the bank... oh wait in the UK we already have virgin bank, tesco bank, sainsburys bank moving fiat around.. so not much of a step to move crypto around where they control CLTV (1-3 business day fund maturity) and CSV(chargeback/wire reversal)..

and altcoins will have masternodes as bank 2.0

first of all your mining on a nanopool.. not a bitcoin pool

secondly if you were mining bitcoin. you wont make ROI with that small scale of asics/GPU's
your plan is about 4 years out of date for mining bitcoin.

but good luck with your electric bill

i gotta laugh..
when someone wants to introduce something. they try to make it sound official. problem is that the link in the OP is not a real BBC new article thats been vetted and reported by BBC reporters. instead its part of BBC's stories blog area. that anyone can post in.

i really hate it when people try to make it look like thier story/project/ idea has been reported by news/media where the reality is that its just a blog post.

this makes me (a known donator for years) not want to donate to such a cause because the way to introduce their idea has alot of trickery behind it.

the reality is this though.
imagine it cost a country $50k to rebuild a house. a country does deals with developers.. these developers gets government grants of say $20k and also $30k from insurance companies.

these government grants are normally in the form of not charging housing developers corporation tax or its employees income tax. (which makes up the 40% of cost($20k/house)
and the insurance company saves 40% compared to having to pay out the full $50k themselves.
you will even find that telephone companies, sewerage/water companies/electric companies can drop the $50k cost down further because they put in the utility lines for free and then the resident pays for the phone lin rental/water/sewearage charges over years as part of their monthly bill when they move back in.

you will find that donating does not end up putting funds into residents hands but instead the money goes to cut how much insurance companies have to pay out. meaning the same house is built but now the insurance company can tell its board member they have more profit.because they only had to pay out say $25k of a $50k house

this is the other reason i wont be donating for such a scheme. my donations are usually to frontline services and given for water/food/clothing for the victims to survive on while the mega corps do what they should be doing as their legal duty to their customers.

but i only donate to causes where i can see that the funds are going to the victims and not the penpusher office workers waiting for a bonus/salary increase.

until there is a really good and transparent understanding of the end-to-end (donation->victim) path that cannot be siphoned off.. i would not donate to some random american red cross appeal that has a CEO earning $1m a year, even if that cough "charity" cough is well known and established

its not a country..
its not even a civilisation

the liberland is just 7km². it is not even big enough to have a substantial population or area big enough for living, working and growing its own produce to be self sufficient.

imagine something thats been round longer/has more population/land/cultiure and civilisation..
do you really think that native americans / amish have their own "country". even if they have their own land and try to suggest they dont follow the laws of america and and instead have their own laws/courts/punishment system they are still in america and not their own independent country separate from america.

there is alot more that land owners need to do than just design a flag and stick it in the ground while sipping a glass of champagne saying its their independence day.

..
anyway that said.. proper legit countries wont just take bitcoin on as their national currency. they cannot own/licence/control it like they do with fiat. .. at best they can do is allow people to use it as just another secondary means of payment much like its not illegal to let people swap a case of beers as payment for someone fixing their car or doing a bit of house DIY/plumbing

countries wont use bitcoin as their national currency.

what is more likely to happen over the next decade is that instead of using banks standard database models. governments/banks will create their own fiat 2.0 based on blockchain ledgers. and those ledgers will intercommunicate with each other where by something like hyperledger becomes the IMF auditor/controller of each inter-dependant fiat 2.0 blockchain ledger

your trying to ADVERTISE but trying to do it as a PRESS RELEASE...

can you even understand where you failed

i feel that when it comes to merchant adoption.. both bitcoin and all its forks still have onchain issues...
i feel it will end up being something like litecoin will leap ahead or another coin in terms of merchant adoption

bitcoin devs became centralised. commercialised and knuckle dragged real onchain utility growth.. and their 2nd layer project is something that even litecoin can use. so litecoin seems to be receiving alot more chatter as the go-to coin by merchants in the future.. bitcoin just lost too much rep which it wont gain back with its 2nd layer projects. especially when other coins can use them same 2nd layer tools

think about it.. 2 years WASTED and only this week has core made a semi 90% consumer ready version of their 2015 roadmap. and now say 4+ years for a consumer ready 2nd layer

lol
and do you really think that LN can function at its best if LN close channels are not prioritised above normal legacy transactions??

imagine it. a LN channel signed a TX with low tx fee, and its csv revoke tx is then obviously not accepted by the block intime due to onchain spam.. and ofcourse you cant get a LN partner to re-sign a new revoke with a higher fee. because the revoke is sent because a partner disapproves of the channel partnership
ofcourse the next stage is to prioritise LN transactions into blocks as a work around for LN channels with low onchain fee's
thus causing more dev created drama to the onchain delays debate, with the false premiss that doing so is beneficial for the smooth running of LN (at the further distress of normal onchain spenders)

anyone saying it goes against bitcoins ethos is correct.. but go look into LN hubs and realise thats the direction devs want to take bitcoin

oh and dont forget the cltv - 1-3 business day fund maturity before being able to spend
oh and dond forget the csv - chargeback

this is all because, if you have an idea/feature you want in bitcoin. you cannot just make a full node wallet and let it run and promote the community to run it too.
many have tried and the blockstream crew deem it an attack

blockstream deem only core can be the organisation that controls future features of bitcoin. and if you want your feature included in bitcoin this is the process you have to follow:

"People wishing to submit BIPs, first should propose their idea or document to the bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org mailing list.
this mailing list is moderated by rusty russell - blockstream employee

"After discussion, please open a PR. After copy-editing and acceptance, it will be published here. [bitcoin BIPS on github]"
this bip listing is moderated by Luke Dashir - blockstream employee

if you want to discuss a feature on the development category of this forum, you will find it is moderated by gmaxwell - blockstream employee

as for the bitcoin code
the total rewrite of satoshi's code of 2009+.. to what became bitcoin core was done mainly by pieter wuille - blockstream employee
(sipa segwit core rewrite)

the ring network between pools (fibre) is managed by a version wrote by Matt Corallo - blockstream employee

the majority of the DNS seeds for the network are monitored by blockstream employees
    seed.bitcoin.sipa.be
    dnsseed.bluematt.me
    dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org

again if anyone was to dare make their own wallet with new features that are not aligned to the blockstream roadmap of 2015, is treated as an attack

this can be seen by how aggressive blockstream employees have been against xt, classic,unlimited, and many other full nodes that go against blockstreams roadmap

and yes i can predict alot of flaming from some who try their damned hardest to pigeon hole me into some altcoin camp.. yet cant deny the proof..

and yes some will try suggesting that matt corrallo and gmaxwell and luke JR are not employed by blockstream, but we all know thy are the founders of blockstream.. its an immutable truth even they cant rewrite