Whenever youre satisfied with it, the risk is going out too early or miss timing the market. So think of an amount beforehand, it also depends on the time horizon of your trades. The shorter - the smaller the profits. Dont shy away from taking small profits on short time horizons.

There is an easy solution to this problem. Build 2 independent stacks:

• Stack 1 - Strictly dca, never take profits and always save a consistent amount into it every month/ week.
• Stack 2 - With this one you can actually trade actively and take profits.

With this strategy you will never have the risk of having pulled out profits too early, but can still do active trading and afford mistakes.

Everyone started small at one point, no matter with what in life. Building even something small will make a huge difference over time, if you stay at it consistently. Even small steps will make a huge difference over time, compared to just standing still. If you just wait till you already have a lot of money, you will never get there. And this kinda applies to everything in life, the bigger risk is doing nothing.

So yeah 100$ is a completely appropriate amount to start with. And then just find a monthly/ weekly amount you can afford to save into Bitcoin, then it will really make a difference over time and can better your financial situation a lot, if Bitcoin succeeds. So what matters is more what you do after having invested the 100$. But never forget:

• Never risk money you cant afford to loose.
• There are no guaranteed profits.
• Understand what you are investing in, use this opportunity to really learn about Bitcoin, theres a lot of catching up to do.

Now about the current situation, the prices are down a lot, so its a good time to get into Bitcoin. And as a rule of thumb i would say, 4 years is the minimum amount of patience someone who is going into Bitcoin should bring with. And then you can evaluate if you want to continue or not. And if it was worth it or not.

First connect metamask to your ledger. Like here:


Then you should be able to access the cronos network with the ethereum seed of your ledger.


Try this and lets see if it will give you access to the coins. Im guessing here now too, never used metamask or cronos.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or maybe try this first first:

Maybe they generate the same seeds and you can already simply access them from your ledger by downloading the chronos app on it.

And then just go on ledger live and create a cronos account, then they should be there, if the seed is correct. (If youre using a passphrase use the same passphrase you created the ethereum account with when creating the cronos account)

Im not into shitcoins so i cant fully help you. However from what ive read is that cronos is a different chain, so you probably sent them to the wrong network. You can use some block explorer to check where they went, but if you dont have the keys to them, i dont think they can be recovered. If you generated the address from an ethereum account in ledger, i dont think you have the private keys on chronos.

If theyre on the wrong network, you should be able to type in the address here and see your coins, so atleast you know where they landed.

https://cronoscan.com/


Edit:

There might be some hope, check out this thread, there is some way to recover it trough metamask or something.

I answered this, you just lost at your own bs game, you werent even good enough to construct a bs test that Bitcoin cant pass.

• If you have 200.000 more addresses, you can cryptographically sign 200.000 more messages on different funded addresses.
• You can send out 200.000 more Bitcoin inside the network, you dont need a buyer to send something, you can send to any address without anyones permission.
• You can store 200.000 times more Bitcoin in a permission-less, unconfiscatable way.
• You have collected 200.000 times more Bitcoin.
• You can open 200.000 more channels on lightning for example, if you each fund them with the same amount.
• You can open a channel on lightning with 200.000 times more liquidity, giving 200.000 times more liquidity to the other network.

No single Bitcoin sold, yet a utilisation of 200.000 times more.

What is mindblowing to me is that you have the audacity to say this to the person who still treated you fair and responded constructively, even after the all the bs you produced.

Not every number is a Bitcoin, just writing 1 on a piece of paper wont grant you access to the private key necessary to an address with 1 Bitcoin on it. But Bitcoin isnt just a number its a full peer to peer electronic cash system. We already understood that you prefer to account in cows(with the fetish of barter you keep expressing), but you can even break this down to numbers, by counting how many cows(resources) you have. Numbers are simply the most efficient way to account for something, so Bitcoin uses numbers as a unit of account, it would be a problem if it didnt.

People already did, its proven in reality. You dont have the authority to decide what counts as utilisation and what not, in the first place. If i sign a cryptographic message on the most uncensorable network, its utilisation. If i send or recieve Bitcoin, without selling/ buying them, its utilisation. If i store messages on a public ledger, like satoshi did on Block 0, its utilisation. If theres ways to use Bitcoin as a base protocol to provide security/ enable different networks, its utilisation. We are just at the tip of the iceberg, this is an innovation in computer science with many more applications in the future possibly.

Its like you found out what a market is, then had to think of a way to turn it/ rephrase into something negative and then refuse to apply this logic to anything outside of Bitcoin. Your whole talk is to take something and then find ways to make it seem like a problem, when in reality you are the problem, and other people are happy to use the systems we have now and value the work other people did for them.

We know, but how many times did you actually yourself? And how many times does the regular person do it? An individual probably used Bitcoin more for non monetary purposes, than previous forms of money like gold or fiat.

Bitcoin is used for this purpose too, there is even a whole loan marketplace in Bitcoin on this forum.

Its simply acquiring a fraction of a company, theres no guarantee of profit or anything. You can only buy them on a regulated market as a regular person, when a company is public. Companies dump and buy shares on the market themselves, they actually do what youre assuming about Bitcoin to their own investors, dont make a religion out of economics and assume everyone else is a selfless value providing angel.

We did and again its not something negative that Bitcoin provides utility to everyone, even if they have less of it. This is something positive and not something negative.

And then to your ridiculous requirement. A person with 10 Bitcoin could also split their Bitcoin into more different addresses, than a person with 0.1 Bitcoin. So they could sign more messages on different Bitcoin addresses, for whatever purpose this serves, but its more utilisation. They can also make more transactions before running out of Bitcoin, than a person with less Bitcoin, so again they can utilise it more. With more Bitcoin they can also open more/ higher funded channels on different networks like lightning, which actually influences how many transactions they can route on this other network, because they provided higher liquidity, giving them more income from routing in the other network.

Theres many examples of how a person with more Bitcoin gets 100 times more utility out of it, without having ever touched a Bitcoin/Fiat market.

Your whole existence here in the last months was gaining primary school level knowledge about something and then thinking on how to rephrase it into something negative. Are you a journalist? (No attack against journalists who still do their job, i respect them even more)

Next time try reading what i wrote, because the subjective theory of value means exactly what you just described and i explained it like this. Maybe if you wouldnt ignore 90% of what people are saying your debate would even advance.

It is about behaviour, not just thinking it has no value. People are giving up what they value less for something they value more. People here are switching Fiat to Bitcoin, because they value it more. When i just needed fiat then i might exchange my Bitcoin for fiat, its an exchange where both sides benefit. That most people here hold way more Bitcoin than fiat, shows that they value Bitcoin more. It is not about absolutes. It is always subjective about what is being wanted or needed by the individual. Each good serves us a purpose with differing importance, there are many subjective and objective factors that can influence it and this can vary based on current needs and wants.

I can already deem fiat valueless in my mind, it can be almost valueless to me, i can prefer other things over it. No one here would refuse 500.000$ right now just because its fiat, because in reality they can still use it. And the same way you wouldnt refute 500.000$ in Bitcoin even tho its valueless to you. When people here say it has 0 value, they mean its purchasing power tending to go to 0 and that its not a sustainable form of money. And oftentimes people come here saying Bitcoin doesnt have value, and then coming up with the biggest bs to explain why fiat has value, but if we applied their logic to every kind of money, then nothing would have value. If you are so objective how didnt you notice it yet?

The subjective theory of value doesnt exclude: supply and demand, cost theory, objectivity, rationality. It just claims that value is something intrinsically human full of errors, uncertainty, learning, making choices, evaluating things individually. If value wasnt subjective it would just be a constant, but in reality were seeing how volatile everything is.

Can you read? I also never claimed humans are incapable of rationality, but oftentimes they try to rationalize their own subjectivity.


I have a better question for you, is any human capable of perfect rationality forever? If yes, why do we need peer review in academia, why do centralized systems keep failing and being destructive to many people? It’s a fact that no human is capable of perfect rationality in every single issue in the world forever. Otherwise we could just elect one leader and live in a kind of utopia forever, but reality just proves this wrong. Subjectivity will strike any human at some point, because it’s inherent to us.

A human that recognizes their own irrationality and stays humble will reach far higher levels of rationality, than someone who thinks they’re capable of perfect rationality, fight against this, create more and more complex theories, try as hard as you want, but reality will always prove this again and again. The first step is to be rational about your own being, and accepting that we’re subjective and evaluate things accordingly.

Also we should be a little realisitic when judging from the outside, imagine trying the task to fix el salvador.

• You need to convince the actual people in the country to vote for you and become a president
• This country probably had problems in every area with only limited resources to fix them.
• There is no comfortable infrastructure already in place.
• It takes actual ground work to fight poverty, violence, gangs and corruption.
• Not even having had a own currency and limited say in international politics, they were completely irrelevant to outsiders.
• Having like 5 years to make fundamental changes, to problems that existed since much longer, and then trying to get elected again.

Theyre a country with problems that far outreach Bitcoin, profits or some debt. Fixing this is in reality, is not an easy task, theres only so much you can/ are allowed to do. Our soft ass western politicians would fail hard for sure.

Also lets not act like El Salvador is not a sorveign country that needs our permissions to handle changes, i dont hear anyone complaining about the us or other countries when theyre actually wasting money for the biggest bs, and objectively speaking, what did El Salvador do terribly wrong in the situation theyre in? They introduced 1 legal tender law and all of a sudden everyone cares, because its Bitcoin. If they made worse choices no one would care, because no one was actually interested if theyre doing well in the first place.

The sad thing is that apparently Peter Schiff did nothing wrong, and his bank still got shut down, but that is exactly what we were talking about for so long. And yet these people think Bitcoin is just some toy with no real use cases, ignorance costs money and lifetime as were seeing.

Im not sure how to evaluate this situation anymore, we’re reaching psychological phenomena territory. Where someone wants to protect themselves so hard from scams, that they cant see the wood for the trees anymore. And then they actually missed the time where something wasn’t a scam, because they turned blind and unreceptive to any argument/ evidence. Maybe its some form of paranoia. Or maybe this person wants to feel so smart that they could never fall for a scam and then just refuse anything that could potentially scam them, which in turn leads to overprotectiveness and dumb decisions.

It is and i wouldnt blame someone for not getting it or finding it confusing, but this is different from someone who thinks hes dealing with cultists, scammers and fools. And refuses to listen to anything or answer anything that he doesnt like. Doesnt realise that it could also be, that he is simply wrong, and millions of people are not here to take anything from him or creating nice sounding stories to fool people.

Im not claiming everyone can/ will make use exactly like this, but for someone who is interested in how things work, Bitcoin is like a gold mine of knowledge, where you get introduced to many different topics and can see them live in action. It actually introduced me personally to some topics for the first time and challenges me to try to understand them. Even if it disappeared tomorrow it will still be something people that people can learn from. And to me personally knowledge is priceless, i value it more then if some soulless company that pays me 3% in dividends or whatever.  I wouldnt undervalue the education aspect of Bitcoin, no other investment comes close to this depth in my opinion, thats why i highlighted it so strongly. Just to show whats possible, without even having sold anything.

Bitcoin might be the only money that requires people to actually understand it, to see its real utility, Fiat and Gold didnt have this barrier as much. Maybe people are still thrown into cold water, because theyre not used to this. Central authorities used the shortcut of force, so people will just use what they dont understand. If people use a money that they really have to understand, because it will be adopted voluntarily, it could change a lot.

The funny thing is that there is no scheme, we saw the markets trading Bitcoin forming naturally, late after the invention. In accordance with economic theories about how money comes into existence and gains it value, that is the remarkable thing. Probably nothing, just an investment scam.

There are, 3300 just happened last block.

https://mempool.space/

Barter is over and were not using cows as money anymore.

So prove it.

So theyre all running and connecting to imagination?

https://bitnodes.io/nodes/live-map/

I forgot that you wrote the requirements for this.

You attempted to bend concepts/ definitions many times now, you lost the right to make any accusations about this.

It has.

You’re saying must and have to, even tho this isn’t a rule that’s written anywhere. Anyone should be able to benefit regardless of how much money they have, and they do by using a fair system. But for the sake of the argument, the person with more Bitcoin will also be able to make more transactions if they want to, so they “benefit” more. And in the real world where it’s always possible to use Bitcoin as money, this person with more Bitcoin can also acquire much more resources.

So math has no practical applications and utility? So how are we communicating right now?

You dont ask questions about a bike on a public forum, on why it can’t fly. Yet youre here questioning why a Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System is mainly used for this purpose, and that it’s a problem and makes it worthless.

Projection.

Sure, but any country got in huge debt during covid. I checked the numbers and he brought the debt to gdp down from 89% in 2020 to 82% now¹.

In theory yeah, but they’re not really trading the Bitcoin, its held in a trust fund accounted for in usd. They need this convert between usd and Bitcoin for Chivo etc. They can’t do trading with this, and it’s not the job of a state. When a country starts adopting they wont care about when theyre entering, because the bigger challenge is getting started with adoption. To me it seems like he actually tries to set up things for the benefit of the country, and not himself. But then again im not his lawyer and am also working with limited information.


[1] https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2022/April/weo-report?c=253,&s=LUR,GGR,GGR_NGDP,GGX,GGX_NGDP,GGXCNL,GGXCNL_NGDP,GGSB,GGSB_NPGDP,GGXONLB,GGXONLB_NGDP,GGXWDG,GGXWDG_NGDP,NGDP_FY,BCA,BCA_NGDPD,&sy=2017&ey=2027&ssm=0&scsm=1&scc=0&ssd=1&ssc=0&sic=0&sort=country&ds=.&br=1

The irony when people who go hard against Bitcoin, are getting rekt by central authorities. Peter Schiff got a reality check and he will probably still not admit that he’s wrong.

(Requires actually owning Bitcoin)

• You can still send and receive Bitcoin even if no one buys them.
• You can cryptographically sign messages.
• You can immortalise not censorable messages on the chain(Julian Assange proved he was alive like this)
• Becoming censorship resitant/ have un-confiscatable assets.

(Makes it more likely if you’ve been into Bitcoin)

• Learning about how to apply cryptography in practice.
• Run a node to learn more about computer science.
• Inspect the code/ processes to learn about how to handle production software well.
• Learning about P2P networks.
• Learning more about software engineering.
• Learning about game theory.
• Learning about economics and human nature.
• Learning how money functions.
• Understand why decentralization matters.
• Recognise the flaws in our current system.
• Meet amazing people who are withstanding the highest hostility possible, to keep freedom alive.
• Learn more about physics/ engineering to make mining more efficient/ utilise it differently.
• Recognize bs even faster

See even if this thing doesnt bring in any profits/ money, the value is infinite for people who use it correctly. This list can for sure grow a lot longer.

Now:

• How can you personally utilise gold without being a goldsmith, if no one accepts it anymore?
• How can you use fiat when no accepts it anymore?

You’re touching the non productive nature of money, without realising this applies to any monetary good, and Bitcoin might not even be bad compared to previous forms of money. The barrier to even understand Bitcoin is high for many people, once you really understand it, you’ll touch so many different fields, because it’s requires this to really get there.

I agree with what you’re saying, but if we had 2 groups of average people, one group just does short term trading, and the other group does a little short term trading with a focus on long term strategy, which group would perform better trough out changing scenarios? That’s why i think the second approach is better, no matter how good of a trader you are. No human can consistently perform at the highest level, so it’s important to create some securities that are independent of your own individual performance. This doesn’t mean people can’t trade in the short term anymore, but making things more reliable. The rational approach would be to choose both, or just the long term approach for people who are not into trading.

There’s just too many factors in the short term: worldwide market with millions of participants, different volumes based on exchanges,  so many different financial instruments(etfs, cfd, futures options, spot), considering inflation, interest rates, conversion rates between different currencies, it wont go up as high as other investments when the economy recovers, gold mining, commodity demand, huge influence from big institutions, short term news, gold discoveries, politics, custodian risk.

Somehow you need to translate all of this information into how the price will rise or fall in the next minutes/ hours/ days. If this task is impossible to solve in code, where you can express math freely, so how should technical analysis solve it?

And then the question is, can all this effort beat the market, where you just need to save into an index or something that gives you like 7-8% on average in the long term? If not, its not rational and you did worse, even tho a lot of time was spent.

And the other question is, can it outperform Bitcoin? And even if you don’t trust Bitcoin, there’s ways to diversify investments, Stocks pay yearly dividends etc. There’s so many strategies that can be built, that can outperform the short term approach, with much less risk and work required.

Only a minority will succeed in the short term, so I’ll never recommend it, if there’s not already a strong long term strategy in place, and short term trading is done with a few % of his overall investment portfolio as an addition. Idk any successful trader that just had a short term strategy and not both.

It’s actually funny that they chose academic trolls like alex de vries to participate in this. A guy who gets paid to publish anti Bitcoin papers since 2018 and did nothing else since then, because he probably wouldn’t have any relevance without it.

I read trough some of his bs and he already comes to the conclusion that any energy Bitcoin uses, is wasted, before even doing any research, or looking into the whys. He even still quotes papers that have already been debunked long ago¹, just because it fits his narrative and creates panic. He has competing conflict of interests, because he runs some weird low quality “news” website², that’s only goal is to “expose new digital trends”.

This guy made it a living to talk negatively about Bitcoin and gets paid for it, if he would stop his career would be over. That’s the kind of people we’re dealing with. It seems like they just scrapped together some people with any kind of title to push some propaganda into the population that makes it seem more legit. Its a first sign of desperation, their baseless talks wont change anything, no matter how hard they’ll try.

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0321-8
[2] https://digiconomist.net/

You still didnt answer the questions, stop dodging it. I didnt ask you if i refuted something or if you like the arguments.

Maybe you dont understand what relative supply means or what Bitcoin is trying to do. Its not putting numbers in a box and then trying to convince people to get it, because theyre scarce. History is always on the side of innovators, fools like you always thought they outsmarted everyone and then lost. The problem is you dont even the understand basics of how the world around you works, or purposely try to not accept it. It makes you look like some primary schooler trying to educate the world, but refusing to take any inputs from others/ reality.

Also youre avoiding answering questions again, is debate too demanding for you?

Im glad i wasnt your teacher, this person definitely deserves some compensation for the brain damage you must have caused.

So how is it different from money? How many times did you produce jewellery out of gold yet yourself? How many times did you wipe your ass with fiat yet? The answer is 0 in 99% of cases and we both know it.

K so send everyone here in the forum a Bitcoin, were waiting. If you cant, then its just empty disproven talk.

Idk if he realized yet that loans and debt are a concept that can be done on Bitcoin too. You just wont be able to create infinite money by giving out loans, like banks are doing now. Meaning the individual wont suffer from the gambling politicians/banks are doing, when they had nothing to do with it in the first place.

This is the most hilarious thing ive read from you in a long time. Scarcity means the supply relative to other goods. You cant get more than 21 million Bitcoin no matter how hard you will try, or how many numbers exist. It cant get more scarce than this.

This is like thinking land on earth isnt scarce too, because theres trillions of other planets that have land too.

K i have a simple question for you, what is the task of money? Why didnt we keep doing barter?