People here are spoiled with their short term profits, especially after what happened last year. There is no such a thing as 'it takes too long' because there isn't anything else that provides the same level of returns.

Bitcoin's price only needs a couple of months to either double or triple in value, so the only thing people need to do is to be on board before it happens. It could take a year or two, but the rewards are massive, which you seem to acknowledge as well.

Most of the people who joined last year don't know that we had years of 'boring' market activity before the bull run finally started. Let them get used to this side of the market, because these bear cycles are healthy for every market.

Is that a problem of the state or the demand there not being worth digging into? If it was worthwhile, I'm sure there would be a whole lot more licenses being obtained by crypto related entities.

New York has always been a tough and expensive state to apply for licenses, not just for crypto related entities. The difference is that the demand is the main factor deciding how many of them will be granted a license.

If you know for sure that there isn't much to gain there, why would you even bother applying for a license? It doesn't surprise me at all that there are only 12 licenses handed out, it's not the state to be blamed.

Even if it was "wasted" energy, it only affects the miners since they are the ones that end up paying the bill, not some funny journalists who are only out to talk down on Bitcoin to generate ad revenue.

If miners weren't demanding so much energy, the energy suppliers would generate less revenue, and the state would generate less tax income. There are no losers if it doesn't affect local people, which it doesn't in most cases.

We'll keep seeing these articles continue to pop up throughout the coming years with how the network keeps growing. It's an endless source of content for news outlets, just like the price is.

I'm not saying that we need anything more. I was just pointing at how it's not just the mining aspect that's centralized if you look at it like that, and why it doesn't necessarily translates into something negative.

There is always an aspect of Bitcoin and basically any other decentralized currency that you can point at as being centralized, or an aspect that the original creator would have liked to be different if he/she was still in charge.

If you look at Bitcoin as a whole, it's decentralized enough to protect that what we value the most, and that's the only thing that matters.

The mass is giving it value, because they know that their fiat currencies are usable as money everywhere, and not just in some lucky places like crypto currencies, meaning, we have a very long journey of acceptance to go through.

Fiat's main perk is that you don't have to bother looking at its value on a daily basis to know what you can buy with it. I know, some fiat currencies suck hard in that regard, but the more stable ones definitely do their job well.

What happens with fiat when we suddenly realize that we can't spend or exchange it anymore? It becomes worthless. It's not backed by anything that would allow it to maintain somewhat of a base value. Fiat value is in our minds.

I honestly think that the blockchain is quite overhyped, especially when you take into consideration that most of what the blockchain is said to solve can be solved with smart database solutions already. I'm not even exaggerating.

The blockchain is the most useful and groundbreaking when applied in decentralized form, because its immutable nature is the main killer application, not being more efficient.

The only thing I hope for is that when banks start to adopt the blockchain, they will allow their clients to enjoy better service at lower cost. I however have a feeling they'll keep that to themselves and still charge insane amounts in fees.

Probably, but would he be just as sad about how we're working with one single implementation? Because that's the reality of the day. Bitcoin Core accounts for +98% of what Bitcoin currently represents.

That's a form of centralization too, and I'm not really sure if he would consider that to be bad factor. People, regardless of who they are, will accept things more easily if it benefits them directly.

In other words, my toy being centralized around me is good, my toy being centralized around you is bad. We have to compromise on decentralization somewhere, and in this case it keeps the various sides well balanced.

I got what I want and you got what you want. Fair deal.

The thing isn't really about it being a scam or not, but more so that if they have the time to browse through the forum, which they obviously do, why can't they allocate more time to a better customer support experience?

I get it that they are trying to settle public complaints as soon as possible because of its potential impact, but if they offered better, more efficient customer support, people wouldn't need to complain publicly.

I see it happen with non crypto businesses as well. I had to go public with a complaint about my TV plan before they helped me solve my problem, and that while I was trying to get it solved for nearly 3 whole weeks.

3 weeks of contact did nothing. 1 post in their forum was enough to get a DM from a moderator that fixed the problem right away. Funny aspect of it was how they kindly asked me to delete my post. How sweet.

By the time we're really seeing the figures you are pointing at, the composition of the market won't be the same as it is right now, and for that reason I expect the market to no longer crash as hard as it did in the last years.

Pension funds and other legal parties are taking long term positions in that what they think has fundamental value, and they will provide enough support to protect that what they own in Bitcoin by that time.

It's very similar to the stock market actually. While people here talk about the stock market to go through a massive correction, the dips are bought up with insane volumes, which is what smart money always does.

When people need money they don't look at anything related to the fundamentals or why Bitcoin is better money than fiat. Bills and most goods are still paid in fiat, which is why OGs will keep selling.

Another thing is that not everyone cares Bitcoin like we here do. I'm sure that most investors are pretty neutral and just look to ride the market as it comes. They will sell without feeling anything other than relief.

I actually would prefer OGs to be unloading some of their coins, because that makes sure their coins are bought up at much higher levels, and it results in a better form of wealth distribution.

Instead of 1 person hodling thousands of coins, we'll see these coins flow in the pockets of potentially hundreds of hodlers.

I doubt it's a miner. If you follow the order books of most exchanges, you'll see similar trading patterns indicating bot activity trying to gain small bits of coins continuously, and if you do that long enough, the reward is huge.

As franky1 also pointed out, large traders usually don't want to signal they have a significant position in the market, so they take it easy and work on a long term stream of small trades without affecting the market.

I'm sure that once the trader behind the bot(s) thinks the market is getting used to his trading activity, he'll change and work with other amounts. No way it will last a couple of more weeks like this.

Investing more than you can afford is definitely a contributing factor to fear, but it only adds fuel to the fire. People in general are bad losers, especially if the price does the opposite of what they assumed it would do.

Fear kicks in whenever people lose confidence, which is when they are on the losing side of a trade, regardless of it being your family savings or some pocket money. People at all cost want to try avoid losing.

Don't forget that the smaller the amounts are that people trade or invest with, the higher the risks are they expose themselves to, all because of how people aim to profit big, which is why leverage platforms have gained so much popularity.

We're all rookies in a way. Even those who have been here since the very beginning and know what bust and boom cycles are only talk big afterwards. They have no clue about what's going to happen beforehand.

That's why I'm not bothering much with what's going to happen in the coming months. I'm prepared to buy the market to its bottom, which is why I always make sure I have enough fiat aside.

People constantly worrying about the price going down have most likely gone all in and can't do anything other than hoping for a quick recovery. Crypto is an empty industry thriving on boom cycles, have patience......

They are very close..... Till the moment it becomes clear that the SEC isn't interested in allowing an ETF to come through, which they very clearly have been signalling for a whole now, in my opinion.

Another thing is that we should be happy that there won't be an ETF any time soon, because launching anything in a bear market (which easily could drag on for another year) is almost guaranteed to become a flop.

Coinbase's index fund is the perfect example of that. Institutions might be looking for a way in, but they will do it in a way it won't be affecting the market, which is through private deals away from any platform.

Banks will adapt to Bitcoin as well. Exchanges currently scoop up so much in fee income, that the largest exchanges generate more profits than some large legacy banks, which is something they for sure want a piece of.

Banks have the best possible chances to accomplish that with how they can allow people to instantly buy crypto out of their own pool of resources, while with exchanges people have to wire money first, which takes days.

No way banks aren't already in the background working on this. They are businesses out to increase their revenue and profits, and what else than the booming crypto market will allow them to capture that exposure?

Guys, you are all responding to a thread created in 2011.

It depends on your definition of trading. If you're referring to day trading, 5% is a lot per trade (too much in my opinion). If you're referring to buy low sell high, a slower form of trading, that's a pretty decent exit target.

When I was still trading I took profits whenever I felt it was a good time to do so. In some cases it means only 2% in profits and some cases +10%, but I just wanted to avoid having to exit with a loss so I took out whatever I could.

Many 1-5% gains make a huge gain after a year or so. If you force yourself to stick to that 5% rule at all cost, it could and likely will work against you frequently, so take out whatever you make. Better safe than sorry.

Less block rewards isn't necessarily less selling pressure on the market with how the price keeps increasing.

If you look at the ratios based on fiat, which is what actually matters here, 12.5BTC block rewards at current levels means more selling pressure than 25BTC at $1000, and this can be taken back to 50BTC rewards easily.

The price has always compensated the 50% reduction in block rewards throughout the years, and that by orders of magnitude. We're at a point at which miners are forced to sit on their coins, meaning that there is too much supply.

Sure, they could be unloading some of their coins to OTC market makers (which I think is already happening), but that's definitely not enough to consistently have a buyer for every single coin they mine.

SegWit itself isn't doing much, so it all comes down to how we are going to see LN gain ground here. I'm just being realistic. People think that because right now the fees are low SegWit is doing its work, but there is more to it.

You know why the fees are much lower now?

* transaction batching
* smarter clients not recommending users to go with fees that don't make sense
* less network activity

Segwit is on the very bottom, and has been taking a dip in terms of what percentage of the transactions are utilizing SegWit. And you said it well, next couple of years. Do you think a 1MB block is enough to keep people satisfied till then?

As long as we don't face a bullish cycle resulting in months of severe network congestion it's not an issue, but what if it does happen? The fees will sky rocket again, which is why I don't hope to see a bull run.

Bank or not, I rather stick to the traditional banks than to use a newbie in the space only out to further extort their users. People value service at low cost, which isn't something EQI can provide.

It's waiting for the traditional banks to add support for people to buy and sell crypto from within their online banking portal. I am of believe that we'll see the first legacy bank doing that pop up before the end of 2019.

I'm not saying it's good or bad with how that's against what people here believe in, but it will happen anyway with how much there is to gain in fee income during active market phases.