It's a good start, but in order to make it more of an adoption booster, it would be great if Samsung devices natively can spend Bitcoin through the SamsungPay gateway, which instantly means +1 million of merchants added where you can spend Bitcoin. What we need is more brick and mortar stores accepting Bitcoin, and this will definitely make Samsung gain some dominance in this industry.

I wasn't bullish at all when it comes to the B symbol integration in Google's keyboard, but this is what I consider fundamentally good news. It will however not do anything other than slowly bring in adoption, if people expect moon then they will be very disappointed with how the short term market doesn't move on these developments.

Bitcoin is definitely capable of doing that. In fact, if you used your Bolivars to buy Bitcoin around the $20,000 level, you would have preserved more of your value even with the ~80% correction than simply holding Bolivars. Just think about it, an asset that corrected massively still didn't lose as much of its value than a fiat currency in the same period of time. It's that bad.

Farm animals and canned food have proven to be great store of value 'assets' too in Venezuela, and so there are more things that suddenly became valuable.

It depends. It's very important to replace spent Bitcoins, so as long as you do that, you won't miss out on future rises. It's not the most convenient solution, but hey, it works, and I do the same unless it concerns very small amounts. Everything above $100 I buy back, especially at current levels. I'm not going to allow my Bitcoin stack to shrink at this stage.

Short term speaking definitely TA, long term speaking definitely FA. The thing with the crypto market in the short term is that it doesn't care about the fundamentals. If you think that Bitcoin's excellent fundamentals will prevent lower lows, you're wrong. People falsely assumed that last year, and you can see by looking at the current prices that they couldn't be more wrong thinking so.

The trend is your friend. If you continued being overly bullish during an obvious bear trend, you have done nothing but lose money trading it or paper value holding it.

I don't think McAfee is a respected member. Seriously, what has he done for Bitcoin? Absolutely nothing. The only thing he did during the bull run was shill ICO's where people lost thousands of dollars in the process. In other words, he contributed to a hype that shouldn't be contributed to, and he motivated people to invest in something other than Bitcoin.

I really wouldn't mind seeing McAfee sell all his coins and exit this space for ever. Less people will lose money if he does.

Roger's own words are; if there are two services doing the exact same thing, but one is cheaper to use, people will use the cheaper service. I usually don't agree with Roger Ver, but he's definitely right on that one.

Lightning has basically no TPS limit. The more nodes and funded channels there are, the more transaction throughput there is. Ultimately, there is no reason why a globally utilized Lightning Network can't do 100,000TPS. If we look a bit further, there are only a few days (usually the holidays) in a year you actually need insanely high TPS, where the rest of the year 10% of that peak capacity is more than enough to serve day to day usage.

It could be $100 or $10,000 as long as you keep your transaction activity as consistent as possible. This doesn't mean you only have to deal with the exact amounts, just don't give them a reason to flag your transactions.

In the end, as long as you can provide the evidence they want from you there isn't anything they can take from you. It's just an inconvenient and potentially time consuming event in that case.

Nigeria's local volumes going down could mean that the situation there is slightly improving and that people are moving towards centralized spot exchanges because it offers more convenience and is cheaper too.

Generally, due to hostile governments people shift to local markets, and when you don't have to worry about your government anymore, or much less, then what's the point of using a cumbersome way of buying/selling Bitcoin? I'm certain that there are a couple of fairly large exchanges there none of us has even heard of.

Something inside me 'knows' it's going to $100,000 one day. It also said something in the form of patience.

CME futures expire today 04:00PM forum time, so we might be up for something. It really looks like the price wants to go up from where we are right now, and CME might give Bitcoin that extra push. CME's volume is twice that of Coinbase Pro, so for people thinking they don't have any importance here, think again.

Precious metals serve no purpose as day to day currency, so there isn't much to lose for them in this specific case.

Fiat has a stable unit value and 99.9% adoption/acceptance, which Bitcoin will need decades for to match, if ever. In the end, people like choice, regardless of how good a certain form of money is, and we have enough historical evidence that there hasn't ever been one single form of fiat, neither one single financial service.

More competition leads to better products and services, that's what we have seen. If it wasn't the financial system messing up, Bitcoin probably wouldn't exist and decentralization wouldn't be a selling feature. Who needs decentralization when no one is censoring your transactions, or freeze your balance? People need to be reminded of why Bitcoin exists, and that continuously.

What people seem to ignore is how Bitcoin's transactions on-chain didn't exactly go down because of less interest, but the fact services around the globe started to batch them. If you batch transactions, the number of transactions logically declines, but the value that continues to be transferred from one place to another remained the same, and has gotten even a healthy boost lately.

If you take that into consideration, then it's clear that smarter utilization of block space is what lead to lower fees. Schnorr signatures will make sure even more existing block space becomes available for use. I hope it's going to be released this year, but I'm not going to wait for it. If it happens this year, then fine, if not, then it's fine too.

Eventually we'll see the network congestion come back due to the organic growth we go through, and that will motivate services to adopt Segwit and Lightning. Good times are ahead.

It was a welcome wake-up call for me too. I got so comfortable with it last year that I needed to be reminded of what this market is about. Another thing is that I underestimated the severity of having an important support level break, and went long on the way down and got rekt in the process. Initially it sucked, but it taught me an important lesson which I will put to work whenever we go through a similar correction.

What you say doesn't make much sense at all. In most cases, people with sense have two different stashes, one for long term holding purposes and one for short term speculation.

If you're so afraid of holding, you can always choose to leverage short 10% of it and have it retain it's $$ value would the price tank. This is how miners and pretty much every major payment gateway works as well; it's a solid way to preserve value over longer periods of time. It's just a matter of common sense, but with how most people here are blinded by greed, even common sense is too much to ask for.

I think so too. Another factor to take into consideration is that a large part of the support on the buy side gets withdrawn when charts indicate a downtrend. If one or more large accounts try to liquidate their holdings, they have no choice but to take a hit and accept that slippage can't be avoided when using spot exchanges.

In that regard, it's a good thing that more exchanges start to dig into OTC trading. Instead of large accounts dumping the spot market down, they can get matched to an off-exchange buyer and settle the transaction there. The fee the exchange takes is well below that what large accounts would lose anyway due to the crazy slippage.

They can, but I'm not sure if there is much to gain here by doing so. .dev isn't exactly a gTLD to go nuts over.

In some cases these domains can be useful and actually quite powerful (lightning.network being the best utilized crypto related gTLD I know of), but the far majority of these shitty .whatever domains are cluttering the market, and as is the case with altcoins, plenty of hype, very little to no utility.

It's not really adoption, and neither based on statistics at all, because if that would be the case, they would have seen a massive fall in searches for Bitcoin and other crypto currencies.

In the end, adoption comes in form of making it easy for people to receive funds and start with Bitcoin. If Google natively integrates a Bitcoin wallet in android, people will be able to start with Bitcoin without having to download anything. I could for example ask the cab driver with an android device to pull out his phone so I can send a tip in Bitcoin. That will motivate him to look into Bitcoin and from there talk about it with family, friends, colleagues, etc.

Google technically and financially could, but I'm not sure if that's actually a good deal at all. Coinbase has an insane valuation to it that they can't seem to justify with the volumes they generate. On top of that, the services similar to Coinbase are catching up rapidly, so it would make way more sense to buy one of these than Coinbase itself.

It's way more likely that Coinbase is going for an IPO, and I have been thinking they would for over a year now, because it really seems to be one of their main roadmap achievements.

The biggest purchase was 2BTC worth ~€7600.

That can happen even with a few hundred Euros. It's important to keep your transaction activity (value wise) as consistent as possible in order to not have them freeze your funds. If you for example have a transaction activity with values well under €1000 and suddenly you're receiving €10,000, that's reason for Bunq to start asking you silly questions.

Tiggering factors or good news mostly only work when the price is already going up, because people see the price go up, think it's related to x event, and start buying. Currently, even when there is extremely good news, the price won't be reacting to it, and from there people won't buy into the market.

Do you remember the social media ad bans? People believed they were pushing the prices down because the market was in the process of correcting already. Then we had South Korea fud, China fud, India, Goldman Sachs trading desk, etc. People sell or buy based on what the price is doing and ignore Bitcoin when it's stuck between a boring range.

It ain't easy being a joe.

Not sure why people continue to be so salty about this? It's just them riding the crypto hype, so what?

We already knew that Jamie Dimon doesn't shy away from using tricks and lies to accomplish whatever he feels is needed to push their own narrative. It works to trigger the crypto peeps, and as long as that is the case, they will continue to generate more sensation and hype going towards their own silly 'coin'.

Why do you think con artists such as Roger Ver and Crack Wrong continue to trash Bitcoin? It's all related to publicity they wouldn't have leaving Bitcoin alone.