Many countries did the same at some point. Russia did it when they were working on their digital ruble. Usually countries that are afraid of their fiat currency becoming unstable block or limit bitcoin payments. It's not something you should be concerned about because if they wanted to stop people from buying bitcoin they'd ban it completely, but they only want it not to be accepted in stores as a form of payment, which is stupid and counterproductive. It shows the country is afraid of something, maybe facing some internal problems and is trying to enforce more use of government-issued money. People will still use crypto despite such ban and they will exchange it for fiat. They don't need payments to be enabled.

Of course Bitcoin would be less stable if Satoshi was suddenly revealed and alive. If he was found to be dead for years, that wouldn't be the case, but alive Satoshi would bring some uncertainty to Bitcoin because he could be used by various people and governments to put a label on Bitcoin. It would be enough to put some child porn at his house and boom, you have a cryptocurrency made by a pedophile. You could throw in some drugs and you have money of a junkie made so that other junkies could buy drugs online. It's easy to put an idea in a bad light by shaming the author.

I used to like McGregor back when he wasn't trying to prove that he can box. He was not only great talker but a great walker (and hitter). Both fights with Diaz and the way these two talked to each other - pure gold. Now I feel like the old confident McGregor is gone. He also changed his way of fighting and for the worse. He's less active, slower, less cocky.
That said, I'd like him to win and beat Jake. This guy is nasty, both Paul brothers are, can't stand them. Actually, he shouldn't take the fight. It's not worth it, I'd focus on UFC not on a sport you're not 100% sure you want to be in.

That's a good saying indeed, although a rhinoceros can be shot if he roams around too much in the places where he's not welcome.


Do you really believe this war is about Donetsk and Luhansk?
Even Putin isn't clear about that. First it was about Crimea, then those separatist republics, then about nazis, then about Ukraine joining NATO, now it's about demilitarization.
Do these "people" want Ukraine to become defenseless vassal state of Russia?

One more thing, if it's all about what the people want, maybe one day "the people" will want you to live in their country and speak their language and if you don't, you'll get denazified.

I have nothing against them as long as they don't try to throw their way of life in my face.
I'm not interested in what they're doing in their bedrooms and we can leave it at that. If my daughter happens to be a lesbian I'll be disappointed for sure, but I won't cut my ties with her or anything. It's actually better if she's a happy lesbian than live in abusive relationship with some asshole.


You're mixing the BLM movement here, which differs from lgbt by a lot, although employs the same tactics: to intimidate the public so that they'll be scared of a possible racial/ gay argument.
You don't agree with me - you're racist or a xxx phobe where x can be anything really. Nowadays the police are afraid to shot at black burglars and employers are afraid of letting go gay employees.
If all arguments fail there's always that last one left as a backup, right?

So it's been a part of Ukraine for 100 years and you feel like it's not enough?
The map of Europe has been changing by a lot every 100 years. Who's there to decide to which state we should go back to? The borders are established for a reason and I thought WW2 would teach people a bit about the pain that imperialism can bring.

Why don't we restore the Ottoman Empire in the state from 1850? Why don't we restore the Austrian Empire from the same year? Or maybe let's go a 100 years back where territory of Belarus was a part of Poland? Lithuanians would also want their kingdom back.

The problem of Putin is that he's literary a bastard with no father who wants to show the world how tough he is because his whole life he was beaten first by his father in law, then by his uncle and finally by other kids. Now he wants to beat some Ukrainian women and children into submission.

It would mean much more if you stopped using Russian products and services. If anybody prints this petition and brings it to Putin he'll wipe his ass with it. Seriously, he gives orders to kill people every day, only a bullet or prison might stop this man. Petitions work in democracies. Russia is not a democracy. Putin wanted to change the constitution so he could become a president again and he did. Putin wanted to add some more fake votes to assure his win and he did. He wanted to attack Ukraine and he did, he didn't make a poll among common Russians to know if they agree or not 

I agree. Many people say that it's a scam and although I can't prove it, it makes no sense to bet on these. If there was no league due to a pandemic or something and simulated matches were the only thing left out there maybe it would be worth looking into, but you have so many leagues, so many matches, so many different sports to bet on, there's really no point in taking a risk betting on fake matches with simulated outcomes.

It's like you had a real girlfriend waiting for you at home but you'd choose to watch porn on your phone instead. Pretty pointless, right?

I know many people who were raised in Eastern Europe and got well paying jobs in the West and never even had to leave their town. They are all working in IT and most of them are self taught. Mostly back end devs, but also support specialists and so on. Many Western companies hire in Eastern EU because it's cheaper for them and there's even more skilled people there. Now imagine that you live in Eastern EU where everything is much cheaper and you get a Western EU pay, while working from home.

I don't know what level of being rich you're talking about. If by rich you mean that somebody is flying a private jet then maybe you're right, but if you're talking about living in a new house with a big garden, having 2 cars one for daily driving and one for fun, being able to travel, then it's achievable in any EU country. You just need to be good at something other people aren't. For instance, I have a friend whose mother is a doctor doing all those beauty treatments like BTX and she earns a lot. They have apartments all around Europe (Germany, Italy, Austria).

It won't change much for Russia. When there's a seller, there's always a buyer. If not at this price, there will be at a lower one. Some countries will buy Russian Gas. For instance, Orban said he's not going to stop trading with Russia because Hungary cannot afford it.
Many countries have voted to stop trading with Russia but they have contracts until the end of this year, so they will keep buying until 2023. I doubt the war will last that long. It will either end with Russia falling back after getting assurance from Ukraine that it won't join NATO (which it is already ready to give), or escalate to a war with the EU and NATO. This isn't too improbable because almost 50% Russians support the invasion of Ukraine and blame the EU for sanctions. Most supply chains from the EU to Ukraine go through Polish border. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin shot a few missiles towards the border which would be a direct attack that NATO might not let slide.

I'd expand this thought to include coins that are going to be lost (irretrievable) by the time we get to mine the last coin about more than 100 years from now.

If you think about it, we are 12 years into the process and nearing 19m mined bitcoins and in this short time we've managed to lose between 2.8 and 3.8 million coins. This means that if the lower number is correct, people were losing BTC250k a year! At that speed we'd need 40 years to lose half of the total supply of bitcoin, making it impossible to even have a circulating supply in 100 years, when the last coins are to be mined.

I don't expect bitcoin to survive 100 years in its current form, but something will have to be done along the way to make sure it doesn't self destruct. 

Not really.
First of all we had a dead cat bounce in 2018, meaning that price went from around 20k down to 10k (50%) and in about 2 weeks went up again to 17k which was very close to the ATH. Then it dropped again to a strong support of 6kUSD (30% of the ATH)

Now we had a drop from 70k back to 40k, no bounce and another drop to 32k and now we're stuck in this 35-45k (around 40% down from ATH) range for 3 months.

This doesn't look similar to 2018, but I also think it doesn't have to. Who says bull-bear cycles have to look the same every time. If you look at the details they never are.
In 2017 we went up 10x from the previous ATH. In 2017 we only went up 3.5x. A bull cycle so much weaker from the last one is expected to produce a weaker bear market.


Why would it go to 10k? You're trying to look for similarities between previous markets, so be consistent. After reaching a new ATH in a cycle, bitcoin hasn't ever retraced below the ATH of a previous cycle.
When we went from 10k to 20k for the first time, the next bear market did not go back below 1k. After breaking 20k for the second time the lowest that I'd expect it to fall from the ATH of 70k is 20k with a possible wick below. Daily candle wicks are possible to go lower than the fair price because of low liquidity on exchanges.
10k is out of the question unless we get a black swan event like a nuclear catastrophe or a world war.

That's basically why I quit online gaming. There's rarely any online game where you fight other players that will not make you nervous. Even games where you play with others against an AI can be frustrating.

Chess seems to be a harmless game. We often joke about chess player's reflexes (meaning you're extremely slow and calm), but like in every competition, it's easy to lose when you know you're a newbie. You don't put the bar high for yourself. When you become very good, gain followers, some pride in your skill, every defeat hurts.

I don't think they can save the value of a currency by banning the ability to use it as the people want. When you start to do it, people become anxious, they start thinking that now they can't buy foreign currencies or bitcoins and next month there will be something else like a ban for sending money abroad or another seizure like they did in Russia where you get up to 10k EUR of your deposit and the rest is frozen (basically stolen). You start messing around with people's property, it always ends bad for you as the lawmaker.

I'm pretty sure most bitcoin casinos in such case would default and shut down just to remake the site under a new name.
Think about it. You make a new site, start advertising and you get first few clients out of which somebody wins big like 50k in bitcoin and you have no reviews, no reputation to protect, no vip clients or anything. There's not much to lose. You shut down and remake the site. It's going to be much cheaper than 50k.

He wasn't thinking about himself but the future of his project and chose the best possible way. No premine and no spending, which means 0 influence over the coin. Pattern of spending, selling, trading can allow people to trace you, find patterns, know what kind of a person you are, your choices when and how much to sell, what to convert into (maybe fiat, maybe a stable coin, if fiat then which one). Each of Satoshi's move would be misinterpreted by an army of journalists and analysts. The way it is is the best for both bitcoin and Satoshi.

It's not a case for everyone. If you obtained your bitcoins for free, for instance through forum giveaways, airdrops, signature campaigns, you won't feel the need to sell when price drops.
Also it may not be as easy for you to sell and buy later because you now have clean coins that aren't in any way connected to your real identity. If you send them to an exchange to trade you will not only take the risk of moving them to a centralized operator but also expose yourself to KYC. Not to mention that selling your coins might be a taxable event.
I agree that it's all about quantity and it doesn't really matter at what price you decide to get your coins. The price only determines how long you'll have to wait before you're in profit. If you by an ATH it could be another 3 years, but if you buy the capitulation it could be minutes.

You can never have too much money. Once you get something there's always new things that you find interesting. People who have a lot of money aren't happy with little things. They start chasing after satisfaction and find out even the most luxurious things can't give it if you don't know how to appreciate them.

When it comes to Tyson, he failed to understand that most things you buy are a liability that require your money and attention to function. A pet of any kind needs food and care, a car needs fuel, cleaning, maintenance, a garden needs to be tended to, when you buy a big house it means you buy a cleaning lady, a gardener, pay bills every month.
Buying these things can drain your account much faster than you think.

Ukraine wants to stay clean, hoping that the world will continue to help them. If they started killing Russian civilians it would look more like they are just as savage as Russians. When things remain as they are and only Russians are proving to be those children-killing savages, there's a chance that more and more Russian citizens will rebel and more soldiers will refuse to fight. It's also much easier to keep the morale high if soldiers know they are fighting thieves, murderers and cowards, not people whose families back in Russia were also murdered by missiles.

If you think like this there's a lot of money to be made because the majority seems to think that Tagoe has slim chance of winning. I don't know him and his style so I can't say much but I'm sure people who know much more than me are taking these bets. At this point it's almost 87% of bets for Garcia, which means he's either greatly outmatched or underestimated.
I feel like this is mainly because of how Garcia is being promoted and that they're matching him with boxers with good record but who are slower than him to give him an upper hand.