Probably that. It's very confusing for people because they some times end up sending Bitcoin from an external source (could be an exchange or whatever other service) to a BCH address.

Try to get your funds back from an entity that toxic. I recommend everyone to not use their wallet because it's not only deceiving, they have also proven to scam people by selling Bitcoin which later turned out to be BCH.

If you scam people once, have scammed people recently by illegally pointing hashrate that isn't theirs to another coin to nurse their ego and destabilize the market, they'll definitely scam you again.

I remember having read an article about one of the funds they manage in Europe was one of the largest buyers of Bitcoin after that statement. Not sure whether or not it's true, but it wouldn't surprise me at all.

Overall, he knows how powerful the statements are coming from the CEO of one of the most powerful banks in the world. It's solely him abusing the power that was given to him.

It's another thing that people here are stupid enough to sell when Jamie Dimon coughs. I remember that there was a minor ~10% decline afterwards. We'll see him try to exploit his position more frequently as long as people keep selling.

We'll never get the truth presented to us, but the fact that one of the shadiest exchanges (as you also referred to it) in the industry is coming out as one of the best performers stinks.

I'm glad that I don't use that exchange so there isn't much for me to lose here. I however don't hope that we'll see them pull off another gox type of exit scam, because that would hurt this ecosystem more than anything else.

It's good to see that there is more competition in the stablecoin market, because the more market share USDC and other coins gain over USDT the lower the potential damage is Bitfinex can inflict if they go full nuts.

People get refunded regardless of where the funds have gone. PayPal charges a 3% fee for payments through goods and services, which is partly being used to help users get their funds back.

Mostly PayPal manages to recoup the funds from the sellers, but some times it's a hit they accept taking. It's almost like collateral damage for them. The buyer is king, that's PayPal's way of doing business.

Buyers don't pay these fees directly, but in most cases the 3% fees are baked into the price of whatever item you end up buying.

I think there is some artificial difficulty adjusting going on as well. Getting the difficulty down by withdrawing a large portion of hashrate long enough is clearly visible right now.

You'll see that after the next -9% difficulty drop tomorrow that miners will turn on way more hashrate than they withdrew previously, all to scoop up more coins. Is this a form of manipulation? Kinda, but we can't do anything about it.

Miners aren't doing anything without filling up their own pockets so it's not really surprising. The only downside is that this manipulation slows down the block times, which affects everyone using the network.

I think so too. It would actually shock me if exchanges didn't have their own 'market making' bots trade against their users with all the precious information from the main exchange itself.

BitMEX is doing the same thing aside from them stating that they don't trade against their users with insider information. I find it very hard to believe that they don't do so, but hey, evidence or it didn't happen....

I can't wait for most of the current exchanges to be replaced by exchanges respecting all the laws within the jurisdiction they operate in. That's progress this market needs.

You are asking for input that no one here can provide. It's all up to you to take that risk, because even if we all largely agree that x asset will be doing fine during difficult times, it may still dump just as hard as the rest of the assets.

It wouldn't surprise me if we end up going through a time where assets dumps simultaneously and there is no safe haven at all. There is not much you can do to weapon yourself against that.

My personal hedge is strictly Bitcoin. I accept it completely if it ends up doing the opposite of what I expect it to do during difficult economic times. Maybe that real estate can be added to that later on, but who knows.

It may seem like it's better, but it's not in reality. I mean, it's great for actual use to pick up during stable time frames, but as soon as the volatility and the volumes decline, the market seems to frustrate most of its participants.

Don't forget that most people are here for crypto's wild roller coaster ride, and not to see boring sideways action for months straight. What happens then is re-testing of main support levels which we eventually will break.

As long as the price keeps going up, regardless of how slow the market moves up, it's good. I think we may be down for that after we have finally found a bottom, or maybe we have already found the bottom. Time will tell.

Being known as exchange doesn't mean much nowadays. I'm not a fan of McAfee, but he's totally right about his fight against shitcoin exchanges, where he spent most of his time hammering down on HitBTC.

I honestly don't know how people still use that exchange after their horrible reputation. From the very beginning they selectively scammed people out of their funds by freezing accounts without a single reason.

They ask people 1001 different questions and documents that time on time again are being marked as insufficient till the moment people give up and abandon that exchange with their funds still inside.

It will happen when no one expects it to happen, which goes up for what happened last year as well. $20,000 would be something for 2020-2022 if you asked people when they expected it to happen.

Overall, I think that reaching $100,000 isn't that much of a problem--the problem is consolidating above it. Bitcoin has proven to struggle with every new high and I don't expect much to change in the future (if ever at all).

My only thing with Bitcoin maximalists is that everything outside Bitcoin is by definition shit. Sure, most coins are indeed shit and have no chance to survive, but a small number of coins do have that usability.

I think Monero is a coin with decent potential. It may be a niche product, but still, it's working. In the same way that applies to Ethereum.

You might not see it as an important element, but it will very likely be when they yet again delay their launch, especially with the bearish sentiment in mind. It's more fuel to the fire....

It might even be an event leading to actual capitulation, because Bakkt not going live means no institutional money entering the market. Don't think VC's and large crypto funds consider that to be a good thing.

Don't underestimate how bad news, regardless of how irrelevant you think it is, can push this market further down. Institutions entering is what the aforementioned entities are waiting for.

It's impossible to exit with a satisfied state of mind. If you sell at $100 and the price pumps further to $150 you'll regret having sold and are likely to buy back in at those higher levels to make sure you don't lose out again.

Trading and investing are psychological events mostly netting nothing but disappointment. The only way for you to be satisfied with what you do is to sell the top and see the price tank hard from that point.

I gave up on trading and short term investing because of that. It's really not worth it. I rather keep accumulating and hodl through every correction and bear market to end with much better results a year or two later.

Please, don't consider prices to be very low right now. I know it may look like they are, but we have seen with the $6000 mark that people kept saying it was very low, and we had a 50% reduction in price not long aftet that.

Crypto prices are never low. They are always well above their potential because that's what people buy into. Only time will tell what is low, but we'll only find out when we have gone back up again.

I have significantly lowered my expectations of the market the moment we tested the $5800 support for the second and third time, because it's not a good sign. Testing the same levels mostly results in them to break, and they did.

BitPay has been pretty active lately with predictions and statements. It's funny how they talk about mass adoption of crypto currencies but do everything they can to not list more coins to their service.

I'm sure most of it has to do with Roger Ver not wanting to admit defeat when it comes to offering low fees, because most altcoins offer low fees and as second advantage way faster confirmation times.

Overall, mass adaption in terms of usage as currency might never even happen. It will take a lot to beat fiat with all its perks, which at the same time continues to improve as well.

Digital gold is what we have already and it won't be taken away.

Considering that during a bear market every bit of bad news will more likely impact the price, it will be interesting to see whether or not Bakkt will be given permission to launch their Bitcoin backed futures.

If not, we might be up for even more blood on the streets. The CFTC might very well consider the current market to not be a healthy environment to launch these products in, all to "protect" investors.

Or they simply don't want any product that's backed with Bitcoin. Based on that, I think it's more likely to see Bakkt yet again delay their launch than to have them launch next month. We'll see what happens, but I'm not optimistic.

Even if that was their motive (which I don't believe), it would mean that they would be dragged down with the fall of the USD since almost everything in the world is pegged to that currency.

Think about it, if one country could pull off something like that, it will end up being a weapon more countries won't shy away from to use against other countries if they don't follow their economical roadmap.

I think China's massive US debt holdings are a decent enough weapon they can use to settle problems where possible in a more 'friendly' manner. People here love conspiracy theories.  

I always use my tap to pay debit card to pay for goods, even if it's just a €1 item. I don't care how the payment gets settled, I just want it to settle in a matter of seconds because that's the most important part of money's usability.

I see more and more stores completely discard physical money because people aren't using it that often anymore. I have even seen vending machines adapt by allowing people to only use their debit card or smartphone to pay.

The negative effect of this is that you exclude a layer of the economy that is still settling transactions with physical money. In other words, progress has its side effects and these side effects aren't easy to work around without guidance.

What do you consider to be a confirmed uptrend? I'm not sure if there is any confirmation to grip on to be honest. Even if the price jumps over $5000 or nearing the $6000 mark it can just as easily fall back down and hit lower lows.

It could very well be that there is a lot more hidden selling pressure in form of altcoin whales having sold to BTC and are now waiting for a good time to dump. Altcoins are still quite expensive currently and could fall way more in my opinion...

It's pretty annoying that we have to go through this, but well, that's how this market apparently works and we have to accept it. People enjoyed the good side of the market last year and are being presented with the consequences of that this year.

We have had plenty of sideways action this year and it didn't translate into anything of bullish nature. People were bored, the market looked like it ran out of steam, and we paid the price for it.

Some even said it was an accumulation phase, but they have been proven wrong by now. Nah, I'm not taking part in that. I'm expecting the market to fall down to $3000 within a couple of days or before the end of 2018.

Testing the 200 weekly moving average twice doesn't show much confidence in the market. Yes, it bounced back up directly, but we have seen the same happen before and it broke anyway.

Testing the same support levels multiple times in a row is a bad sign.

As stated above, if the entities claiming to be satoshi but can't provide the evidence by signing a message from the address the first ever block reward was sent to, you can safely assume that you're dealing with an impersonator.

It's so easy to come to that conclusion yourself, but people somehow still have some degree of believe that anyone stating to be satoshi without signing a message can actually be that...

Satoshi's main job is to stay away from anything related to publicity, because every sign of life from him will make it easier for agencies and whatever else to find him. They would love to have a word or two with him, I'm sure of that.