https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/13/blackrock-ceo-larry-fink-calls-bitcoin-an-index-of-money-laundering.html

Someone smart once said, "Be careful what you wish for, because it might come true."

It may sound too harsh, but everything that happens when it comes to CEX is actually the fault of those who use them and think it's the only way they can trade cryptocurrencies. As things have evolved over the last few years, I think CEX is going to be looking for more personal information, and it's going to be far more complicated to have a CEX account than a bank account.

I have never agreed to such conditions of the game, nor will I agree in the future, but if someone has no other choice, in that case they must accept the risk that their data will at some point become available to someone who should never have seen it.

@hugeblack wrote a very good post in which he actually concluded that it is much easier to promote Bitcoin as a decentralized currency in countries where there are serious problems with the financial system, and where the authorities strictly control every aspect of someone's life. If you try to do the same in one of the countries that are economically at a high level and where people live relatively well compared to the countries mentioned, then you will hardly be able to expect that the people who live there will accept Bitcoin as anything other than investment.

Yet it's not an obstacle for anyone to promote Bitcoin as a decentralized cryptocurrency anytime, anywhere - and not just focus on how Bitcoin can be profitable. Unfortunately, most of those who invest in Bitcoin do so solely for profit and have never made even the most ordinary transaction from CEX to non-custodial wallet, let alone that they have paid for some goods or services with Bitcoin.

It is not a fair practice, especially if everyone pays equal taxes regardless of income, and if legislators favor those with the highest incomes to pay even less taxes, which is really absurd. In addition, in my country VAT is one of the highest in the EU (25%), although for some things it is reduced to 13% - and because of this many people go to other countries and buy home supplies and food.


Maybe I generalized, but the east of the EU is much different from the West, and here you literally have to take care of yourself if you want to live a life worthy of man, and no one will ask you if you have to buy bread and milk today or if you will be hungry.

What I'm saying is that the elite (including politicians) are literally mocking those who live hard, and over 400,000 people have moved out of my country over the past 10 years and are now paying taxes elsewhere - what I would call perhaps the best tax avoidance someone can do to a corrupt government.

The reason is actually trivial as it seems from what can be read in the explanation - and it is that BlackRock did not in the opinion of the SEC cite one important piece of information for them. And the fact that the price has dropped a bit just means that there are a lot of stupid people who have no idea what's really going on - the same as the author of the article from which you constructed this post.



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg62483259#msg62483259

I'll tell you that you're definitely not a bad person if you just want to provide yourself and your family with a better standard of living in a way that you won't let those at the top literally rob you because they invent a new tax every day. Some will say that taxes have a purpose and there is no doubt about it, but if you live in a country that is highly corrupt and where you can't do anything without bribing someone, you wonder what all these taxes are and where that money goes.

I'm not saying we should stop paying taxes completely now, but I know some people who pay taxes even on signature campaign earnings because they live in fear that the state will punish them if they find out. What I want to say is that the state doesn't really care how you survive, so let's say the governor of my central bank who has a salary of almost 7000 EUR publicly gives advice to people to buy items on discount since they have a minimum wage of maybe 500-600 EUR.

This is his personal choice, and I know that he is one of the biggest fans of the Croatian national football team, at least as far as those members who are not from Croatia are concerned

I personally see Croatia back at the top and I hope that it will reach at least the semi-finals, although in 1 year a lot can happen that will affect every national team. England has a strong team, but it is still a fact that Croatia beat them in 2018 despite all their arrogance and underestimating the opponent, and England did not show much in Qatar either.

In gambling, of course, this is impossible, but in sports betting you can go very high when it comes to win rate. However, although many will think that it is just about luck, but quality information, self-discipline and a little more money are something that turns the odds on your side.

Gambling should primarily be understood as a form of entertainment, and it is completely pointless to think that there is some big money to be made there. However, I will say that there is an exception, because there are professional poker players who make really good money, but the cards are still something different from slot machines or roulette.

The forum has a search option, and someone who has been on the forum for a long time should use such options if they are interested in something. Besides, Meta is not a board that has any restrictions in the sense that you should not regularly check what is happening on the forum.

Welcome to the lucky winners club, and since your reward is a little late, it looks like you got a little bonus

Who else got BTC?

I wouldn't be so sure about that, because even though the SEC has rejected any such request in the past, companies like BlackRock or Fidelity are a whole other story and can't be ignored so easily. When you say that they can sell at the end of the next cycle, then I guess you mean investors who will actually get the opportunity to buy shares in a fund that will buy BTC for them and keep it safe. I think that some will sell sooner, some later - just as today people trade bitcoin on a daily basis, some are satisfied with 5% profit, others are not satisfied with even 50%.

Most of what you call "cryptospace" isn't necessarily scam in the literal sense of the word, but it's not far from it either. All these meaningless tokens and altcoins on which individuals get rich along with CEXs, and most ordinary people just lose their money are for you something that should still exist? I think some things need to be regulated, because every large-scale crypto scam like FTX or Terra/Luna is reflected directly on Bitcoin.


For me, this is not a sign that China is changing its attitude towards Bitcoin, but only that one bank is trying to profit by offering one service that actually has no direct connection with investing in cryptocurrencies, because after all it is a futures ETF. On the other hand, BlackRock is trying something completely different, and there is a very big difference if you want to compare the US and China in terms of cryptocurrencies.


Why do you mix blockchain as a technology and cryptocurrencies that use it? What does it matter that China may want to be a leader in blockchain technologies? Does this have any impact on Bitcoin or any of the top altcoins, will CEX across China open up and will crypto mining become legal again?

Although the news is really from 2020, I have to admit that this is the first time I've heard of this expression, and it really sounds amazing that someone could think of something like that. It's really a shame that so many people still have confidence in someone who has such crazy ideas, even though I would even call them dangerous.

It's unbelievable to me that we have to construct sentences like this because some people try to combine things that just can't go with each other by any logic. I'm just wondering what kind of new nonsense will appear tomorrow or the day after, because there are more and more people we can't trust, even though they keep trying to convince us that there's nothing controversial about it.

---

As for the removal, I think it might be too harsh, because in that case someone might say that we should remove Ledger, which in my opinion is a much bigger problem, and is also one of the recommendations. I agree with some that a warning might be more appropriate.

Everyone has the right to think about what they want, so why not set yourself a goal if it motivates you to be eager to acquire new knowledge and to share the same knowledge with others. I'm not in a 5k merit club yet, but I'm not far from it either, although some will say it's much easier to get to that goal when you get 1000 merits. Of course, it should not be forgotten that many were members of the forum years before there was a merit system, so they would probably have much more merit than they have today.


If your goal is just to participate in the best sig campaigns, then you will certainly be burdened with progress and reaching a better rank, but the truth is that you will achieve it much harder if you do it under pressure thinking that you have to get xx or xxx merits every month.


I personally didn't set such goals because of the things I've already written, and I just don't worry too much about numbers. Any merit for your post may mean that someone appreciates what you wrote, although it should not be forgotten that some posts that are worthy of merit simply go unnoticed or are on boards where there is no merit source.

I don't agree with the U.S. closing the door, just trying to put an end to some things that should have been regulated a long time ago, unless you think that all that scam associated with altcoins/DeFi should continue even though people lose hundreds of millions of dollars every year? On the other hand, I ask you again, how can futures BTC ETF in HK be a sign that China is opening up to cryptocurrencies?


So what difference does it make that their president mentioned blockchain a few years ago? It's something that doesn't have to have anything to do with any cryptocurrency, least of all decentralized like Bitcoin. China will only accept what it can fully control, and if you believe in any other outcome you are hardly mistaken.

That's right, I really don't see the point in the fact that every time MS makes a new purchase we have a few new threads. In addition, it should be pointed out that @fillippone well noted that MS could find itself in an awkward situation if the SEC approves an ETF which we talk about a lot these days.

I don't think that previous events were crucial for price correction, because if we start from the end of 2017 then it is easy to conclude that the bubble simply had to burst after many investors completely misunderstood what futures contracts are and how they will affect the price of BTC - and the same thing happened at the peak of 2021.

As for Bakkt, that story has been pumped for months as something big, when in fact the pandemic was already knocking on the door even though mere mortals didn't know it. In addition, the 50% drop occurred only in March when a pandemic was declared, but then a lot of bad things happened and Bitcoin was no exception.

The story around BlackRock and Fidelity (Grayscale) can have positive effects, especially if the SEC accepts their request and this acceptance is closely correlated with halving. If we take into account the time limit within which the SEC has to make a final decision (240 days) then this brings us to January 2024, just a little more than 2 months before halving.

Given that BR&F are big players and companies with over $10 trillion under management, and that it is a spot ETF, I believe that a positive decision would have a significant impact on the price of BTC. The real question is whether the average investor understands what this is really about or thinks it's just a repeat of another old story with a failed BTC ETFs.

You and your brother should talk about such things privately, not in the presence of children, because realistically such discussions are not something that should burden children. It's not just a matter of filling your child's head with things he's too young for, but also about your child being exposed to safety risks because he can talk about these things to someone who has malicious intentions.


I would agree that his father is right, and that he should make a decision on how to raise his son - because the inconvenience he feels at school is a direct result of getting information that should not have come to him at all. If it has already come to the point that he feels frustrated because someone is saying something about something in a way that he does not like, then it is time to teach him a lesson about how everyone is entitled to their opinion, and accordingly such an opinion should be ignored.

The world is full of people who think Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme and an internet scam, and as far as I'm concerned they can think that for the rest of their lives. It just goes to show that they're not intelligent enough to process all publicly available information .

You're grasping at straws that really don't make sense to grasp on since your main thesis is that China is becoming more crypto friendly than the US. And the fact is that what is happening in HK has nothing to do with Bitcoin or the Chinese position towards it.


I don't know why you think you need to teach me about the difference between spot and futures ETF, and I tell you in my previous post that futures BTC ETF has been around for years in the US, and your Uncle Gary has nothing against it. You and many think that the SEC is fighting Bitcoin, when in fact all this fight is directed against shitcoins, and then what are you even talking about when comparing China and the US in the context of cryptocurrencies?