This article was posted several days before the current crash started. May 7th to be exact.
Pretty good timing to merely be a "guess".

People are quick to dismiss anything they don't like as FUD or not worth reading, even when the author is speaking the truth.

Big institutional investors *are* offloading BTC in masses currently.
Not that I personally mind, like many here I do see big dips as good buy opportunities.

The author of the article is also not anti-BTC, they have dedicated a graph to BTC in the article saying BTC is doing well and will experience a slight price correction downwards.
Which it currently is.

I have nothing against him, and I think without his visionary skills we aren't going to have Mars colonization or manned Mars flights during this lifetime.
He has done great things to improve private spaceflight, and has greatly raised the standards for electric vehicles for civilian use (Tesla).

The people with intense hatred against him seem to be short term gamblers from third world countries who can't deal with Bitcoin price dips.
People who will absolutely not hold long term under any circumstance. Who buy into Bitcoin hoping for instant magic profits.

Sure, it's an unpopular opinion to have around here, just my 2 honest cents so this doesn't become an echo chamber of hatred.

I think the hatred towards him is hilarious and over the top.
Blame all the brainless lemmings instead who follow his Twitter religiously and base their purchases on his joke and hype tweets.

I do contest some of his claims about Bitcoin not being environment-friendly;
Many of the huge miners are utilizing hydroelectric power in Russia and China. That is as clean-energy as it gets.

For Bitcoin to become fully politically acceptable, as many big mining corporations as possible need to follow that example and also only use hydro, solar or wind power.
Many already do though.

That's good to hear. My latest purchases were some at $49000 on a big dip on March 2nd.
The investment is down short term since today BTC is 43k, but then again, I don't sell at all. I only buy on big dips, then hold permanently.

The current situation looks to be heading towards a big dip. I have about $1200 ready to spend, but I'm not buying any yet.

I'm counting on the price going a little lower. I wouldn't buy yet, but people's mileage may vary.

So far, my strategy of only buying has worked well, but I'm sure active traders who also sell during dips, then buy back in, could get more profit. I don't have the nerve or expertise for that.

Keep in mind there are also miners who are mining with stolen electricity or hardware, and they can continue to sell and pump coins on the market as much as they want to since mining costs nothing to them.

There isn't even a theoretical floor to how low it can go.
Miners say the floor is the cost of ASICS + electricity to create 1 bitcoin on average, but once again, these people fail to realize there are also illegitimate miners whose fixed and running costs are $0. They will sell BTC even if it falls to $500.

Personally, I am buying more coins if it dips below 40,000 USD. I'm not good at timing dips, but I'm comfortable buying at that level, at this point in time.
I would not buy right now seeing how turbulent the market is.

I only hold it as a passive asset like gold. That's it. I don't even pretend to use it for daily transactions or as a money replacement.

I have not sold a single bitcoin since 2016. I only hold or buy more on big dips.

Do I think this has been a good strategy so far? Sure, but I don't mind if people sell their holdings during dips.
That can be a smart way to get back in cheaper.

I've witnessed so many dips and rises I don't bother to look at the chart anymore.
Whenever I have a spare $300-500 fiat, I buy btc with it (unless it is on a very sharp rise; I only buy when the price has been stable for a few weeks).

I used to mine, back when multi-GPU mining was still somewhat profitable and I was much younger, but I never made much money doing so because the electricity bills were quite high, and I had to sell coins to pay the bills.
I also used to sell BTC via Western Union on this forum on my main account to people in third world countries, but I'm unable to recover the password. I doubt I'm going to ever do that again.

All the profit I've made from BTC has been from holding rather than mining. I don't think I'm ever going to mine another bitcoin again, let alone buy an ASIC.
Small scale mining is also stressful, heats up the house, hardware crashes randomly, parts fail, no thanks. I'll let those giant mining corps deal with those stresses.

Difficulty might take much longer to drop than you think. Why?

Because there are miners who are also mining at nearly zero cost or for free, by exploiting free electricity (stealing) or other methods such as infecting machines with GPU's to mine for them (also $0 cost).

Network difficulty *will* drop if the price falls so low mining honestly at current rates is no longer profitable, but like said in this topic already that could take months because not everyone even has any costs.

There are also other factors to consider: There are also miners with stolen hardware *and* free energy (stolen or otherwise).
So these people can mine no matter what and keep dumping more coins on the market no matter the price.

It's still up by 450% since last May. Can someone here on the forum point to established old Fortune 500 stocks that have risen 450% in the last year?
Hype stocks like Tesla don't count.

Maybe people have the memory of a goldfish and don't remember in May 2020, a bitcoin was $9000-$10000.
For there to be a true "crash" the price would have to go down to $6000, $5000 and lower.

I am betting the panicking people are gamblers who have bought into BTC in the last few weeks or months and have no idea what is going on.

I wouldn't say he presented it as "bad". He brought up some valid points, like a single power outage in a remote part of China causing a mining corporation to go offline. Which caused 35% of the total Bitcoin network hashrate to drop.

This is far from the decentralized original idea of Bitcoin. He has a valid concern.
A few gigantic ASIC miners have hogged up the vast majority of the total network hashrate. Small individual miners, mining in pools, are now maybe ~5% of the total global hashrate.

It doesn't need to be a bear market for the price to fall down sharply, just as it doesn't need to be a stock market crash for a single stock to drop 20% in a couple days.

All it takes is a few institutional investors dumping a large portion of their holdings onto the market, which will naturally drive the price lower.
It doesn't mean the fundamentals of the investment vehicle have changed in any way.

Large investors can push the price all the way down below 10k if they really, desperately want to get rid of their bitcoin, even if it isn't profitable for miners to sell at this level.
After the investors are done dumping, the price naturally corrects to a level where miners get to pay off their electricity bills and ASIC investments.

If you are into Bitcoin for the long haul, why bother looking at daily fluctuations?

_______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ ________
Signature: Not here to beg with casino links. Only here to discuss the Bitcoin blockchain.

Why is nobody commenting on his actual tweet though?

One single energy failure somewhere in China causing a nearby mining company to shut down for days, causing a 35% drop in hashrate does mean Bitcoin is far from decentralized.

A gigantic amount of coins are being mined by that single company. Therefore a big amount of the network hashing power is controlled by a single chinese commercial entity.
Assuming it is not a pool, it is a huge, colossal ASIC farm.

The benefit of decentralization is that the hash rate is controlled by so many entities no single one can execute a successful 50% attack on the network.
How is it decentralized if two huge mining corporations can band together and attack the network if they wanted to?