Based on some quick calcs, it looks like you'll be trying to average 7% a week compounded. Do you know how many trades you normally average to get there? (the 1-2% risk is a good place to start from though).

I hope you've fully tested your strategy though. In crypto and possibly the markets in general, things that you don't think will ever happen often do after a while...

Have you restarted electrum since?

First, addresses can't expire, it's the invoice you make in the receive tab that does (and invoices are only selectively supported).

You could also go to file >preferences >network and make sure "select server automatically" is checked.

I've not paid much attention to "analysts" there are far too many and a few just look like they could've had some lucky guesses that got them where they are at this point.

And yeah I could see us breaking $30k but I'm not sure how decisive any move will be. Investors seem to be expecting more drops in stocks (specifically tech stocks too) so we might see that hitting bitcoin again and causing an event similar to what we had at the start of the pandemic.

I do think if $30k is new $6k, $15k may as well be the new $3k too and a break that far wouldn't be unlikely.


There's probably a lot of people trying to time the market and wait for sub 29k though, we can break it and go down to 25k but I imagine it being a bit more of a flash crash than a sustained move (if it's sustained for a few hours, lower is probably possible then though as some people will get bored of holding if all they're doing is watching their funds diminish.

I remember coinbase not recognising my visa card from the UK too (but that was fine because they charge fees on that and don't on bank transfers).

I've had no experience with gemini but it's possible if you've already set up one mode of authentication that you'd have to disable that before enabling a different type (but that's just my guess).

Could we not even say your 25k figure was a bit low?

I think people might look to buy at 25k or 30k so much that it COULD drop down back to the 28.3k we saw last time and then take a large bounce up from there (I made a thread here a few weeks before then saying I didn't think it was unreasonable for us to hit near 29k but not go below it, and we got into the 28k regions then so)...

I feel like I could've been on board with the cryptocurrency slander and the overvalued stocks because those two are what everyone jumps to but investing in Japan doesn't sound that much of a solid plan - their population remains to be sinking and they are one of the most developed countries in the world but they've also been reported to have had 5 recessions in the past 2 decades (I think the UK, US and Germany have each had 3).

Property markets seem very bubbly but if the weirdly balanced pin stays standing, the pressure on it will just keep building rather than it collapsing - which could be more likely.

Governments either have no idea how to deal with anything or just don't want to as they won't be reelected if they're the reason for a crash.

I think Russia banning cryptocurrencies is quite a lot different from China attempting to ban them (even if Russia had the 70% China was estimated to).

Russia have very strong transport links to Europe so if a ban goes through, a lot of miners could offload to other places there (or mine if the country's electricity is cheap enough).

There are cases where adding one large buy order makes the asset drop in price quite a bit while the order hasn't been filled - in bitcoin it normally causes the same thing on the other side though so the price could just stay the same.

---

When I last checked, a few weeks ago, I think 1kbtc would fall through the coinbase order book and completely empty it of buys, I don't know whether that was just slippage protection though (I think this was the btc eur pair though too).

I think defi lending is quite expensive now (potentially for the liquidators because of gas fees for eth) so you'll probably not get anything other than high caps on a trusted/large service.

Most things that are leant are done specifically because they have better stability and market volume/liquidity - with lower levels of those both you and the exchange end up risking too much.

The methods often stay the same but new ones can be added by the devs and there's a default recommendation miners can mine with but a lot of miners and pools might decide by themselves when things are more stable to be supported.

Transactions don't need to be verified by many nodes before reaching a miner but it has to be verified by the node and miner mining that block. Nodes are used to store the blockchain and unnconfirmed transactions and distribute them, the miners are used to make new blocks and normally send them to a node so thst it can advertise it's found the block to other nodes.

There are two forms of consensus mechanisms at play with a lot of blockchains.

One is where miners essentially decide what protocols they're happy supporting in their blocks and this is normally done by adding additional data with a binary option of for or against somewhere inside data for the block. After a certain proportion of blocks support a certain method, it gets added to the generic consensus algorithm of nodes and other applications at some point. Most of the blocks are mined by a few pools so there's normally a 90%+ consensus on things that are added afaik.

The consensus algorithm with nodes works a similar way but they are preconfigured to accept and propagate certain transactions, I'm not sure whether they have an option to reject blocks with non compliant transactions though if they're on the longest chain - I think there was protection against this to stop a chain split.

Before reading the protecting financial institutions I was kinda sure a protocol like this would have had to be paid for by someone external to the exchange (or possibly someone from a bank placed on the exchange to convince them).

Most cases of stopping "money laundering" in this way will stop the people you likely could've traced anyway and who weren't doing much illegal themselves, you won't hurt anything big by telling them in one country they can't buy and withdraw cryptos.

---

I think there was news of crypto.com being hacked though recently and this would link into that quite well "we don't trust ourselves to handle your funds securely". If everywhere you send funds to has to be kycd, it might make it easier to get the funds back (probably not easier to know who took them if the person who took them did it well enough and sprayed them about a bit).

Did it confirm? Can you try to restore your wallet from its mnemonic phrase and see if that helps witb anything (if restarting it hasn't already worked).

You can't delete an unconfirmed transaction from the blockchain, it just gets deleted from your wallet. There's a chance the person that sent you the funds double spent them and replaced the destination of the funds.

A lot of exchanges claim to attempt to peg the coins to a market index (eg bybit and bitmex use indexes for liquidation).

This is kinda helpful to stop this sort of manipulation but it doesn't stop all and there was a binance wick that was quite disputed a while ago because of how big it was (I'm not entirely sure how long ago it was but the price fell much more on binance's exchange and a lot more people got liquidated than reasonably should've - that being said some derivatives markets do protect themselves against such data but I've not seen that in action and I think it has to be sustained for the exchange to do anything).

Additionally, even if you're liquidated based on what the market is doing as an overall index, you're still selling to the market. If the position closing bot has a few delays or just decides not to function for a few minutes, you might end up being liquidated anyway.

Yeah following the trend over a long term is probably one of the best strategies to use (as long as you can work out when and whether to pull out of certain things).

Short term trading strategies shouldn't be learnt using a lot of your portfolio and you shouldn't be using more than about 10-30% risk of your portfolio on a strategy just in case it fails too many times once.

I don't think otc data would help that much as anything that happens on the otc market will affect the normal exchanges too.

It's possible to buy data on otc markets though and may companies might factor it into their main currency data pulls (for example, coinbase pro, coinbase and coinbase prime might be aggregated together in one data pull).

There's still the chance technology will push us towards this at some point though (it won't last long but I can see it happening for a few years if the open sourced versions of a lot of things become the most advanced - before someone privately advances further).

A lot of science already isn't done for the money (especially astrophysics) afaik so you could probably expect more advancements there if something like that were to happen.

(most companies/wealth has been cyclical and don't last very long - if the ceo and cto of any large tech firm die, so might the company).

It's probably also a bad idea to get into crypto mining when we're expected to be in a bull run because there's a lot more uncertainty in the price and miners will price in selling peaks when they sell the miners/list them on market places (because some people will expect to be able to time the market well).

---

You're likely better off just switching off the miner and hoping you can affect the difficulty so you'll be able to mine more the moment it becomes profitible.

I'm assuming the recommendation is coming from the idea that El Salvador might use some borrowed funds to buy bitcoin.

I'm not certain on that but if it is the case, it'll reduce the countries chances of paying back debts in the immediate term (for example, if the price crashes).

Fees would probably be the thing to complain about with bitcoin and not inflation but there's potential el Salvador did this because the imf didn't offer them much in the first place.

I don't think anythings changed that much price strength wise since larger investors came into the bitcoin space.

I think whenever institutions start buying and selling we might see more dramatic volume increases but institutions like to compete with each other so it's likely these will be done over the counter or both executed at the same time so it might just effect the volume.