This could potentially bring Libra into the market, and things would look good for cryptocurrencies as the government starts to show interest in accepting and not banning cyrptocurrencies in total. However, the bill is still a proposed one and chances are there would be opposition that would counter/oppose this due to concerns in privacy of Facebook. Still though, a good sign of adoption but too much regulation would also hurt the market.

Reply to OP - A lot of things might have happened when that time comes. Consider that as time passes by, several advamcements in technology and energy generation would have been discovered. Mining rigs and its components might get cheaper, energy cost might go down if things would follow the good path, and fees alone might be able to make mining still sustainable as an income.

It might be a factor, but it's not the main reason. Personally, I think manipulators are going with the news to strengthen the effect of their manipulation FOMO. With the news coming out, they took advantage to bring the prices down and people would think that the news is responsible for that, even though it's not. I expected these manipulation dumps to happen months before the halving near December.

It is considered lost already because no matter what you do, you won't figure out its private key, that would be the only way to use it or get it out of that address. Therefore, it's already considered 'lost' since like a lost item, it's almost irretrievable and cannot be used to enter the circulation again, pretty much like a void they are stuck in.

Reply to OP - I quite agree on the numbers and the possibility of such amounts 'lost' in Bitcoin is possible. One downside of the security the blockchain provides, it comes with a hefty responsibility of keeping your private keys.

This is what I've also been telling. The two are not the same, so when the Chinese government announced their support on blockchain, I didn't really expect bitcoin to have positive pressure on the prices. The president still wants to, and aims to, replace Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies by making their own cryptocurrency. They must have realized that they're missing out on something that has potential to grow and could replace current monetary systems.

Being a holder just means he is speculating too and believes also that Bitcoin could be the future mode of payment, or he's one of the whales and gets personal profit from bitcoin's bubbles.

However, it's still unlikely that Paypal would adopt bitcoin, still though there's still a chance that they would. I'm also pretty sure that this company has a board of directors that must accept that proposition before full implementation.

On the positive side, having this shift in financial methodologies is good since we could lessen the need of paper and natural resources, which would bring ecological impact especially on the forests. However, proof-of-work is quite energy inefficient and thus the need for alternate validation techniques is necessary to lower the energy consumption to power up these cryptocurrencies.

I agree to the OP and this is what I have also been thinking regarding this Google's 'Quantum Supremacy'. Besides that, I don't think Google would outright do it in fradulent attacks. It's much worse if they lose investors and customers that what would they get from stealing cryptocurrencies. Also, quatum-proof algorithms are already undergoing research by some experts in universities that would utilize quantum computer's capability against them to provide more secure framework all-in-all.

There are already attempts, as you have stated, that governments try to ban or censor cryptocurrencies and blockchain-related activities, with the latter being less suppressed than the former. And even though they would implement a ban on it, people would surely still find ways to obtain cryptocurrencies, it's just that it would operate just like a black market of sorts. They could never totally ban cryptocurrencies, not today where alternatives are easy to access to restrictions such as using Virtual Private Networks and such.

Nothing. I expect nothing but further dumps if it would happen. Christmas season is the time where people need to buy gifts and they might withdraw some of their holdings that may have negative pressure on the prices. If however that would not happen, I still do expect dumps by manipulators in anticipation of the next bitcoin halving. So your real "Christmas" might be months after the halving.

It could pay off but the risks are higher on altcoins. Taking risks is good, however too much risks make something foolish, such as investing in an altcoin you know is a shitcoin and does really nothing. You could however, make them as speculative investment and just wait for the most profit in your buy/sell orders, but once it goes weak, it would most likely to crash to death.

I agree to the article's statement saying that Facebook actually wants your personal data. Your likes and interests, you financial decisions, the things you buy, and everything you do in their platform, feeds their system and makes a profile out of you that may even know you more than you do. Which is why there are a lot of privacy concerns with Facebook, but despite all of these, people are still stuck in using their platform mainly because, it's popular, and/or people does not care about their data privacy.

As long as we want to, Bitcoin as of now can't handle being the reserve currency. Issues with scalability are still not resolved. The Bitcoin Network Core should improve its performance in terms of speed of transactions. Another thing is that its value is not backed by any real liquid asset, though US dollar is too, but the Government is sure to have gold reserves in case emergency economical crisis arises.

I actually have known these wierd stuff being sold by these particular Twitch streamer, but I didn't know Bitcoin is supported. However, your statement saying that you can buy a lot of wierd stuff using Bitcoin, is what I'm also already aware of from sellers using deepweb ti transact illegal stuff, even make them do illegal, wierd acts for wierd people there. Bitcoin started there, where things get bad for Bitcoin's imagery, but I'm glad that this time, these news are oppressed and replaced by different sectors adopting to blockchain.

At this point in time, I still cannot say that Bitcoin is a better form of investment than gold, and especially real estate. For me though, real estate is by far the best since the population grows over time, and land spaces are getting scarce more and more each year. It's not the best in terms of time it gets to have profit, and it's difficult liquidity, but in terms of long-term investment, it's much safer than relying kn Bitcoin's speculative factor.

If he has one and you had one, then I don't really see anything that would discourage you to pay with BTC. However, it's quite unlikely for a jobless man to have a Bitcoin wallet. Although it's pretty easy, a man like that would have little to no literacy to such modernized things. And if he does have one, then he pretty much have knowledge on how to earn in cryptocurrencies.

I do hold a few dollars worth of Bitcoin. Price volatility doesn't bother me as much because I'm aiming for long-term gains, and still quite positive about Bitcoin's halving. Those who have hold when 2017 are really not that wise because you must not buy on highs but rather on lows. But it's understandable since we're all just speculating while trading/holding and mistakes do happen quite a lot.

There are no true private transactions in the blockchain. All transactions could be traced back to where it came from. The anonimity comes from unidentifiable bitcoin addresses of whom might have used them. KYC could disrupt the anonimity provided, and combined with tracable transactions, could spill your identity. Your best bet is to use different addresses/key pairs per transaction.

It will all depend whether people there would trust Bitcoin more than USD. If people trusts BTC more, then chances are they are gonna hold their Bitcoins and could potentially bring prices upward. On the contrary, if they would not trust BTC due to its volatility, then it's more probably that they'll immediately go with USD because it's generally more stable and they wouldn't worry about losing too much.

Unless you're investing on a quite newly minted coin that has lots of potential, I don't think 2x profit is guaranteed and is even far from possible to achieve if what you're looking into buying is those already established and has lasted quite enough. Although it is still possible if their price would bubble, but you need lots of attention to buy in at the right time. Other than that, your only choice is to risk your extra funds at the more speculative sector of shitcoins, buy in at low, and before the bubble bursts, sell all your holdings.