Gold is far from being the most expensive metal per unit of weight. Gold is simply the most common store of value among metals because it's not in high demand for any industry and its supply hits the sweet spot where it isn't too common and easily found, but also not too scarce so a lot of people can own it.

Bitcoin is an entirely different story. It's simply the best coin, because it has the highest PoW, the biggest community, the highest adoption, and its core goal is to be secure and decentralized, while its competitors have abandoned this goal, and it comes to bite them back when they get hacked or attacked.

Username: hatshepsut93
Post Count: 7718
BTC Address (must be SegWit): bc1qqspn43aulm6vyjw35a6snfp7hmn2hkkwjnkf5z

Russia is not fully cut from SWIFT, certain banks were, while others still work with it.


IMO it will be a matter of time until regulators will make it a law and crypto exchanges will face a hard choice whether they want to operate legally or not


Only international transactions are blocked, domestic still work.


And the total donations for Ukraine are even higher, if you consider that there's a lot of NGOs who work for helping Ukraine.

Who exactly will pay in BTC? The West won't use anything other their own currency. China and India are openly anti-Bitcoin. This leaves only a bunch of economically smaller countries, so even if such transactions will happen, it will be purely symbolic, rather than representing a trend shift.

Bitcoin can also be a large cybersecurity risk. We see Anonymous, or whomever operates under that name, hacking Russian government and involved private companies left and right, now imagine if they hack Russian BTC wallets and drain them? And before you say "cold storage", remember that the US successfully used airgap-jumping malware against Iran in the past.

This is only true for Ethereum and other coins where 1 wallet has 1 address. In Bitcoin, it would be okay to just submit one of the addresses of your hot wallet, and simply mark it as used for airdrop to practice coin/address control.

People say that Bitcoin is outdated because it doesn't have smart contracts, but as practice shows, smart contracts often used for scams, hacks, rugpulls, ponzi schemes, and almost never for something productive.

If Bitcoin is banned, the "hedge against inflation" narrative will just disappear, because very few people would want to break the law, plus all the long-term bullishness will just disappear. We've already seen how negatively the price reacts for just a possibility of increased regulation in the West, an actual ban would just obliterate the price.


We are very-very far from it, so at this point it's all just theorizing. But I wouldn't be so sure that Bitcoin can not be banned, circumstances can radically change in a very short time, I think the recent events have proved that to everyone.

No. They have been using other systems for trading between themselves for years. But the West is still the strongest economic force on planet, and they get to dictate which channels to use for trade with their non-Western partners. Putin is currently trying to demand that the West pay for gas in rubles, very unsuccessfully.

Russia's attempts to seriously use Bitcoin would be a net negative for Bitcoin. China and India have already taken strong anti-Bitcoin stance. Bitcoin is the most adopted in the West, if Western governments will start viewing it in a negative light and start taking measures against it, Bitcoin would be globally pushed into the shadow economy. And there will be no more bull runs and mass adoption.

If you are staying within Ukraine, you need cash to be comfortable, especially in the more rural areas where no one accepts payment cards and the closest supermarket is 5-10 km away. Crypto can be useful as a store of value, but it's not as good as a bank account in most situations. If you're about to get robbed and the thief realizes that you have crypto, they will just take it all with a $5 wrench attack. It's much less likely to work with a bank, because if a bank sees suspicious transaction, they will launch multi-step verification to check that you aren't being phished or coerced to make it.

Crypto is practically useless as a payment method in Ukraine. You can't buy gas or food or medicine with it. Maybe before the war you could find a few specialized shops in large cities that accepted crypto, but it's irrelevant now.


Did you even know that PayPal actually STARTED working in Ukraine during the war? They are even offering zero-fee transactions. And all Ukrainian banks are fully operational. And they are all connected to international payment systems. It has been 4 weeks since this war started, and you're talking about "imminent" shut down of these services, lol.

Crypto adoption - not really, cash is king. No one is going to suddenly switch to a completely different and unstable currency when the current currency is still working well.

Satellite Internet - when Russian occupants enter a village or town, one of the first things they do is destroying or jamming local mobile networks. Similar things can be done to musk's starlink dishes. They also can't survive the shelling that often target residential areas.

Every single time there's a crisis in the world, someone will say "this is good for Bitcoin", and yet practice shows that the use of Bitcoin in such situations is just some lone cases rather than a trend.

Never try to make your own changes to the existing crypto systems, you'll either risk locking yourself out of your money or will create something inherently weak.

If you want a password, use BIP 39 seed with an extension word. This way, if someone gets access to your seed, they won't be able to take your funds immediately and instead will have to bruteforce your password. But you will also have to manage this password carefully, otherwise you can simply lose your coins, just like those people who have wallet.dat files from 2011, but don't know their password.

She didn't present any concrete evidence of how this is happening. I have no doubts that there are such cases, but the scale and the precise activity is not really known. I seriously doubt that it is possible on a large scale - it's hard to buy billions of dollars worth of BTC for a sanctioned oligarch, because all accounts tied to them are being monitored, and even the general AML laws would be a major obstacle in this situation.

Presenting Bitcoin as a major financial factor is simply wrong, so this lady is definitely pushing her anti-crypto agenda.

Why does this crappy Twitter analysis deserve any attention? It makes no sense, if you try to extrapolate the old data, you must understand that there are long periods of bear markets and stagnation. The bull run was 1 year ago, so based on this you could predict that the bear market will last for another 1-2 years.

There's a lot of theories that the past patterns have been broken, but this tweet doesn't try to construct any such theory.

It would cause a short-term turmoil, that's for sure. After that it would depend on Satoshi's actions. There are many possibilities. Would he support the current course of Bitcoin development or criticize it? Will he step up as a leader of Bitcoin, or maintain distance? Will Satoshi even be contacted, or will we just know the name, while the person will remain unreachable? But I would guess that revealing Satoshi will be a net negative, the current structure of Bitcoin development with no central figures worked well so far, any disruption to this could cause damage to Bitcoin's community and Bitcoin's image.

Pretty interesting case of Bitcoin both being viewed as a more stable and strong currency and being a tool for breaking past the Iron Curtain 2.0. But I think the problem of broader adoption will still hold. For an average person who is not good with technology, there will be many barriers, especially in Russia. We are very-very far from Bitcoin having any observable macroeconomic effects on a scale of entire countries. For now its just lone anecdotes.

That gas from Crimea is very hard to extract and there's no active extraction going on now or anytime soon. And Russia is already a major fossil fuel producer, adding Crimea is like adding a drop to the ocean.

Russia already had access to the Black Sea, so it wasn't exactly a great geopolical victory.


Now consider this, Russia has committed economic suicide with their invasion, their currency crashed, they lost access to a portion of their reserves, western countries and their allies refuse to do business with Russia, so Russia will have to do it on worse terms with China and India. Things will only get worse and worse from now on. Was it worth it?

Ideology is the main and only reason why it has happened. It was Putin's personal ambition to conquer Ukraine and be remembered as a great leader.


You clearly have zero knowledge on Ukrainian and Russian history. At least try to read Wikipedia or something.

I can tell you that there already has been a lot of fraud and phishing attempts here in Ukraine, posing as humanitarian or military aid, but outside of crypto. There's probably a lot of this also happening with crypto too. Especially with NFT, which is ripe for this kind of scam. Just post some crappy drawing on Opensea and claim that it's for Ukraine, and because of the market nature there's a chance someone will buy it without checking.

So, if you want to donate crypto, I strongly recommend only going through large well-known funds and organizations, and check that the addresses and organizations are genuine multiple times.

In the first days of martial law Ukrainian regulator blocked purchase of foreign currency to somewhat stabilize the national currency, so attempts to stop purchase of crypto is a logical continuation of that. You could argue that this is useless, that there will be a black market, that inflation will catch up anyway, but for Ukraine every second matters because it is currently in a very hot war phase.

Living with 5 roommates is the opposite of living like a king. People need personal space, even if they live in a large house. So instead if you think about $300/week and living alone, there's a ton of countries in the world, basically any developing country, that would allow to do that due to cheap rent, bills, groceries. But it's also a question of compromises. If you mostly sit at home, you'd better live in some small and distant city, rather than the country's capital. If you like to communicate with people, you should look for a country with compatible culture and social values. Some people just can't live in a climate that it is too hot or too cold.

Everyone has different understanding of what "living like a king" means. But in countries where most people earn $100 to $400 per month, earning $300/week would certainly make you more comfortable than the local population. Just keep in mind that a lot of the luxury stuff, like electronics or cars, will still cost as much as it costs in the West, or even much more in certain cases.

You don't need to send cash to Ukraine, because Ukraine's electronic payment systems are fully operational. If a person refuses to accept them and wants cash, chances that they will accept Bitcoin are actually pretty low. If you think that a 50 y.o. dude from Ukraine who only uses the Internet for Facebook and Telegram will be interesting in listening in a lecture about the benefits of Bitcoin while being in the middle of war trying to sell his car to the highest bidder, you are a bit unrealistic.

Still, it's nice that Bitcoin exists and is being used and is helpful in extreme situations. Just don't think that this is a common occurrence.



You are drinking some Russian state kool-aid if you think that Ukraine is on a verge of defeat and destruction.


Russian trade with the West got obliterated while Ukraine's trade will only ramp up. Again, if you think that the current sanctions are a joke, it only means you're consuming Russian propaganda in large quantities.

In certain cases, they do. Imagine you are a Ukrianian, you have family members in the US who want to send you money, because you decided to stay at home instead of seeking refuge. Naturally, you will start looking for methods with the lowest fees to receive the most of the money. And PayPal is offering to do it with zero fees. And PayPal is one of the most popular financial services in the world. So now regular people have one more option that isn't crypto.

We saw a lot of donations to Ukraine, but I would guess that they come from crypto enthusiasts and not people who specifically bought crypto to donate it to Ukraine, because they decided it's the best method to send money to Ukraine. So, crypto adoption for payments/remittance is not growing as fast as some people might imagine.