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.

2010 is quite old unless that site still operates despite all these years, all those bitcoins are probably lost. There is little to no chance that the website is still up, however you could always try. In the event that you found out it is still open, your best bet is to try and make use of the forget password option. Other websites also offer feature to find lost account's username in case you already forgot your username, however that's highly unlikely.

That price is quite feasible to believe than other predictions, although we're still not sure. Another thing to note is that the bubble won't happen immediately after the halving, but rather several months after it happened. As of now, the price steadily hovers around 8k$ and even though it might experience dumps, I'm not that worried and still anticipate for the guaranteed price uptrend.

Though in my personal opinion, other than Bitcoin, altcoins really does not offer anything, except for those top altcoins, others are just shitcoins to me. So there's not really that great of a market to attract for them. Bitcoin on the other hand, has already proven itself and people quite know that they're different and maybe reconsider/learn Bitcoin as an alternative to these prevailing payment systems by centralized companies that collects your financial data and sell it to third party conpanies.

People like those will never learn and are either do not want to, or they're just trolling here in the forum. If you're knowledgable enough, you'll know in yourself a real threat or real catalyst that might dictate the prices, on contrary to those which really does not mean anything. And you'll also know that no matter what technical analysis you do, you can't and won't predict the price trend.

Don't expect anyone to send Bitcoins to a random people like you who just pops up into the forum, with a newbie account, asking for some Bitcoin. Also, I can't quite understand your statement regarding China imposing inflation upon RMB. If that is true, then it means that your purchasing power to Bitcoin would be lessen, and thus when you go into exchanges with an inflated RMB to but some BTC, you'll get less. I don't know if I'm just mistakingly interpreting that statement or you're just trolling here.

I would go for a diversified portfolio, but baised towards Bitcoin. I would only allot small percentage of my funds to altcoins and not just any altcoin that is too speculative, but only those who serves true purpose such as XRP and ETH. Other than then, mostly all of them are shitcoins and cannot expect more into them. Then I'd go for Bitcoin especially when the price dips and I don't expect it to go lower anymore.

This is why I remain determined in my mindset, that all other altcoins in the market are shit coins except for those who already prove themselves, those who are top listed such as ETH, XRP and other altcoins that prove to be worthy and valuable. The market's incredibly huge amount of altcoins are just making the market look like it's full of coins that are too weak and serves only as a bait to ignorant crypto-investors.

It is a general rule of thumb that you must not put all you've got in one specific investment. Distribution of funds is one key rule in investing your assets. Investing in cryptocurrency is risky in itself already, and going all-in is much more risky.

One strategy I use is, only invest part of your money that you're ready to lose. This strategy reduces emotional stress, and setting your mindset that what you're investing is something only extra to you.

All of us here are just speculating and from what most of us observed here, halving is really one of the catalyst to the past bubbles. We just can't predict when that bubblr would burst, but definitely it would cause price pumps. This would only be true if bitcoin's market demand would not diminish and sustain its current levels, because if not, then halving might have only little to no effect in the prices.

I quite agree on OPs statement. Even though the platform is really made to be decentralized, there would always be a point that it becomes centralized. For instance, mining pools are centralized in the sense that mining rigs work together under a single mining pool to get block rewards, then only it would be distributed in the true decentralized network of nodes.

But one thing came into my mind. Think about torrents, the famous file sharing protocol that uses P2P connections to find fragments of files over the network. Isn't it truly decentralized?

At this point in time, total ban is near impossible to implement. Its decentralized nature works like the internet does, it already established a mesh of interconnected nodes that power up the network, and censorship is too difficult now to conduct. Government can just accept cyrptocurrencies now and the only thing they could do to stop people from using it is doing a national internet ban, which is impossible and would certainly break their economy.

Even though it's not likely to happen, it is still indeed possible. However, I don't think such attack would be conducted, as early as of now. Even if it is possible, the amount that they would possibly get from another bull run would be larger, and the possibilites are endless, rather than one-time profit that won't last that long.

However, I became quote interested on the link you posted. Collaborative proof-of-work seems to be a solution on removing pools which somehow creates a centralized system themselves. If the distribution made by mining pools nowadays could be integrated on the blockchain, then it could remove monopolies in mining and possibly increase the control to the people rather than smaller groups of individuals that control these pools.

Banking systems work, but they do abuse their power sometimes. This is clearly one of the reasons why these systems appear unappealing to the people. Even though you get insurance and such, these micro-steps that makes it a harder process and shows people that banks want to profit on people in unjustifiable manner. We just need more adoption to make Bitcoin more convenient to use in the future.

They had it supposed to be banned, but they lifted their urrent stand against cryptocurrency and apparently, they had decided to join the market by planning to release their own blockchain-powered cryptocurrency, and removing the ban on other cryptocurrencies. I think they wanted to ban it because they want to have control over everything, and watch their population activity even in financial space, by having only one centralized system by them and does not want any decentralized system that gives people total financial freedom.

The SIM swapping attack is one well-organized attack by thieves. It's quite hard to counter, but you could tighten up security by limiting the information you disclose on the internet, and track all your publicly open data such as those sensitive and basic information like addresses and phone numbers. The mobile network provider also has some responsibility over the theft since they should not allow sim swap whenever the person himself is not in their office, conducting the actual process.

As of the current timeframe, my country's stand on cryptocurrency is somewhat neutral. I don't see a lot of news to cryptocurrencies, whether it be negative or positive. Few online payment companies continues to support transactions through Bitcoin without oppression by the government. Even though scams do exist, it's almost not happening here, or as far as I only know. I do hear some television shows mention cryptocurrency, but that's just it. Which all of it makes me quite happy, but further adoption is better.

China is known for one of the leading countries in the digital world. Just the sheer amount of electronics in their marketplace speaks for their dominance. Back to your question, they might use it to fund their protest, collect donations and payments from various sources though BTC to preserve anonimity and not be blocked by central banks before the fund even gets to them. Then they could contact suppliers of what items they need, transact through BTC and have their items delivered.

I quite agree on his statement. If central banks initiated their own cryptocurrencies, I don't see any difference to their current system of currency. They're both under the same, centralized idea and system of one institution. The only thing I see beneficial to this move is the removal of the need to physical paper money, but other vulnerabilities might appear such as digital attacks (phishing, etc.) and malware-infected devices that would be used to transact these digital currencies. Decentralized cryptocurrencies are still much sensible to use and implement.