Nepal lost the match against South Africa by 1 run. They needed 2 runs from the last two balls, but Ottneil Baartman managed to bowl two dots to gift the game to South Africa. At one point, Nepal were 85/2 after 13.3 overs. At this point, they needed 31 runs to win from 39 balls, with 8 wickets in hand. But this is when Anil Sah got out. And then Aasif Sheikh and Dipendra Singh Airee wasted a lot of balls. In the end, Sompal Kami and Gulsan Jha managed to hit a few boundaries. But by then it was too late.

I don't know why teams such as Pakistan fails to understand the fact that the pitches in this tournament are not that friendly for batting. A target of 119 would mean a cakewalk at the Wankhede or the Eden Gardens. But that is not the case at the Nassau County International Cricket Stadium. They were 57/1 after 10 overs, with Usman Khan and Mohammad Rizwan at the crease. Ideally from this point they should have scored 6-7 runs per over while being cautious. But then Jasprit Bumrah had some other plans.

You were not accepted only because you were too lazy to fill out the application correctly.

I can understand this strategy when you are buying altcoins, they usually do not have any use case and they are sustained by only hype, so better to take ROI when you can can, before the coin dumps and you become a bagholder.

But if it is bitcoin you are hodling, selling everything isn't a wise choice to make, you can sell some of your bitcoins and take profit, or convert all of it to usdt, take what you want as profit, and convert back to bitcoin when the price drops, but i wouldn't advise that you sell all of your bitcoins.

I will suggest that we need to be careful from investing on the new crypto projects coming in, they could place a danger on us if we invest without making adequate research concerning them as many of them may not perform as expected, if we are to invest, we can consider the old and existing ones for our investment in which we have seen how consistent their performance was over time and could be able to make track on.

Actually, in a situation like that, what will your cousin invest when he has no income?

investing is not really about having an alternative income. but those who do should have enough to meet their needs and have more funds to invest.
This means that whatever your income is, when you have some leftover and when you invest it doesn't affect your finances then you feel ready enough to carry out your investment.

but with your cousin's thoughts, that's ridiculous. although he may still have savings that can be invested. but when he doesn't get income to meet his needs, the investment he makes will only fail when he needs money and there is no more money in his pocket.
I know what your cousin thinks, he thinks investing in Bitcoin is a get rich quick scheme.

We have to go with where we are at right now.

he cannot go back to December 2018 and he cannot even go back to December of 2022..

He has to take responsibility for his own actions and outcome regarding whether and how to invest and whether to put it into bitcoin or somewhere else.. Is that difficult? If so, how?

I think that you are still getting at the option of whether a lump sum is even available... so if there is a question whether a lump sum is available, then DCA makes more sense, but if a lump sum is available, then for sure there are more options, but it still might make a certain amount of sense to spread out the lump sum rather than investing right away

and if we go back to the example of someone who has an extra $3k... then there are so many ways to consider the matter, and it would seem short-sighted to completely ignore the availability of the $3k and to just DCA and buy on dips with it, since that would be presuming that the BTC price is either going to remain flat or to dip, so the more practical way of preparing for all price directions would be to use some of that $3k to buy right away, yet it is still a question of how much to use to prepare for up rather than preparing for down or sideways.. and each person has to live with their own decision, since there is not really any one correct answer, even though some answers (or approaches) seem more logical and reasonable than others... but people can still vary in their reason and also we might not completely know all of the reasons (the 9 individual factors) of another person without really knowing the person.

If they are looking for short term profit then they will be disappointed and you are I know that for us to see reasonable profit in bitcoin investment we must invest for the long term and not short term. That's why it's necessary for people coming into bitcoin investment to have the right orientation/mentality. They have to know on time if are coming into bitcoin investment as a trader or hodler.

When it comes to knowing when to use the other two strategies like buying the dip or lump sum, well I will say that the person who is making his first buy in bitcoin can use lump sum buy and follow it up subsequently with DCA, especially if he wants to own a certain level bitcoin in his possession. While knowing when to use the buy the dip strategy is simply when you see the level of dip you have already predetermined or set for yourself before any dip occurs in the market. This will make you not to lose focus or confused on when to enter the market if eventually dip happens. You know nobody has the entire knowledge of the market and when certain variables will play out, so it's important to always get prepared before the eventuality of any market situation. When preparation meet performance, good result is always birthed.

Short-term trading is not easy and not everyone can profit from it. It requires a lot of knowledge, skills and experience, and even experienced people cannot guarantee profits when trading because the market is very unpredictable . What I see is that the majority only prefer long-term , very few people choose trading or both. If you can take advantage of both and profit from both then you are a very good investor, but there is nothing wrong with many people choosing to hold for the long term instead of choosing both . Not to mention , not everyone spends all their time on the market, most have outside jobs so holding for the long term will be a better choice.

There is nothing wrong with engaging in techniques to improve DCA, which truly if someone is new to bitcoin, they might start with a certain weekly amount for their DCA, yet in the meantime, after several weeks, they could be figuring out various aspects of their budget and maybe how to employ their DCA better.  On a personal level, for the first year that I was in bitcoin, I tended to give myself a weekly DCA budget (or allowance), so during the week, I would try to maximize the buying on dips within the week, however, if I had not used all of the weekly allowance by a certain time of the week, I would just buy with the rest of it at that deadline time in each week, since my new weekly allowance would become available at the beginning of the next week... but yeah sometimes going through the process, with the passage of time, I was able to figure out some ways of employing my DCA that worked better for my own circumstances... but also recalculating my situation, that surely went even beyond the first year, since the strategies became different with the passage of time (as you suggested might become the case for anyone going through their BTC accumulation journey) and the fact that I had been accumulating BTC through the previous time and the details of that prior stacking in regards to how much, what was the average costs and considering whether my stacking goals were changing and/or close to being met, helped to inform any changes in my practices.

Pakistan women absolutely got smoked. Of course, I understand that the England women’s team is far better compared to the Pakistani women’s team. But I did not expect the difference to actually be this big. I thought that the Pakistani women would at least be able to have some level of competition against the England team. But that did not happen.

Now let's not forget the fact that Ireland is a full member, while both Scotland and Netherlands are associate members. If Ireland is struggling against the other two teams (with a full strength XI, where only Josh Little is missing), then it is bad news for them. Irish bowling looks out of sorts. I don't know how much change Josh Little is going to make, but the experienced bowlers such as Mark Adair and Barry McCarthy were wayward and expensive against the weak Dutch batting lineup.

I think Pakistani Women International ODI cricket team can't improve because in Pakistani, mostly parents didn't want her daughter to play cricket. They want her daughter in the house where she will serve her husband and family. Pakistani Women International ODI cricket team is not much stronger to play against big teams like England, Australia and India. If Pakistan wants change in cricket history,they should give freedom to the women in Pakistan. In England, Europe and in many other countries, women can practice easily and no one will demotivate her but in Pakistan that is opposite and that's why Pakistani International Women cricket team is unsuccessful in cricket.