|
This isn't really a defense against a physical attack - the robbers will simply torture you until you give up and send them your money. If they have a reason to believe that you have coins, they won't back down if you show them some fake wallet.
The real defense is increasing your physical security - having house alarms, watchful neighbors, self-defense weapons, strong locks, armored doors and so on.
|
|
|
|
|
The obvious similarity between the two is that both have limited supply, but the crucial difference is that land has undeniable utility. It could be agricultural or you could build something on it. But Bitcoin's utility is less clear. It is used as a currency or a store of value, but how do you calculate the value of those use cases? So far no one came up with a good model for that, and it makes Bitcoin so different from other assets that can be evaluated by calculating how much money would they make.
|
|
|
|
The problem with that proposition is that all the people that's worshipping Satoshi will just blindly allow and agree on the things that he's going to happen, there will be people that's going to ask questions that will challenge the propositions but his army of blind believers will defend him to the end. I don't think that he's ever going to do that though, it's more than a decade already and I don't think that he'll be able to remember all the stuff that he's done on that and he's going to need a lot of catching up to do with the updates on bitcoin and it would be counterintuitive for Satoshi to do that because he's the richest bitcoin hodler in history and adding an additional to the 21 million total supply is gong to be problematic for him, it's unlikely what Dimon says will be done by Satoshi, he's a greedy asshole that worships money and so that's what he thinks of Satoshi, he's an apathetic asshole that can never put his feet on other people's shoes, he will die as a money hungry asshole.
I doubt that the majority of Bitcoin community will just blindly follow whatever Satoshi offers. This could be true in the early days when he was active and the community was small and there wasn't much knowledge about Bitcoin's technology, but today Bitcoin community already demonstrated that it knows where it stands, when it rejected the SegWit2x fork and all the other big block forks and chose to stick with the Core developers. |
|
|
|
|
Historically, the bull run was in full swing only many months after the halvening, and on the day of the halvening nothing interested happened. Maybe some minor price drop as some traders like to "sell the news", although halvening can hardly be called "news" because it's seen from miles away.
But I'm a believer that sooner or later Bitcoin will stop repeating the old patterns because conditions are changing. In the past the market was small and not many people knew about it, today the largest companies in the world are entering this market, in the past 50 coins were produced every 10 minutes, today t's just a small fraction of that amount and most of the coins have been mined, so miners have less selling pressure and instead the focus is shifted towards traders and long-term investors.
|
|
|
|
|
No transaction be changing the price of BTC, because it would be possible for whales to just manipulate the market for easy profit. They could send large amount to exchanges to cause panic, and buy the dip instead of dumping the coins. Or send coins out of exchanges to pump the price.
We really don't have any information to make decisions when we see large transactions. Could be the act of buying or selling, or could be just moving coins around.
|
|
|
|
|
You are not buying a pair, you are buying an asset and you can exchange it for other asset. And if you don't like the options on your exchange, you can send the coins to some other exchange. Exchanges just display value in certain currencies, so you need to check their settings if it's possible to see the price in the currencies that you are interested. But it's a purely visual function.
|
|
|
|
|
All that statement does is proving that Dimon understands nothing about Bitcoin. Satoshi hasn't been active for over a decade, but even if he returned, he wouldn't be able to make any changes in Bitcoin, he could only propose them. In fact everyone can only propose changes, even Jamie Dimon can, but it's up to us users to decide whether we want them or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Blockchain is not some magical think that makes everything related to data more secure and decentralized. It's an append-only database with blocks of transactions. And you don't need that for voting. Voting needs a good digital identity system, so that votes could not be faked. How you store and count votes is a secondary problem that is much easier to solve.
|
|
|
|
|
No one knows and there has been no new developments in this case, so it's pointless to discuss it. Satoshi is an anonymous individual or even a group of people and there's no strong clues to their identity, and the weak clues like posting schedule or writing style don't mean much. For now assume that we'll never learn Satoshi's true identity.
|
|
|
|
3. Divergence between price and network activityThis suggests that there is a distinction between the two indicators, and that their movements are opposed. For instance, asset prices rise but network activity falls. The movement's direction is different because we can only state that the token's movement is healthy if the price value rises and network activity rises as well. it is increasing for a reason, and that reason is that the project is in high demand. In crypto, we can see network activity in onchain statistics, such as transaction volume and active wallets. The development of new wallets is increasing, which suggests that there are more users coming in or keeping tokens. The network cost is rising, as is the hashrate for proof-of-work coins such as Bitcoin, and the staking metrics for proof-of-consensus networks are rising as more individuals stake tokens. However, if there is little network activity and the price rises, it does not rise, and there is not much happening in the onchain activity, indicating a divergence in the price movement in the network activity. Then you should probably consider taking a profit now, because the price pump that occurs for the token you own could be caused by market makers or hundreds of individuals. And, sooner or later, the price will come down. Hope this will give help additional knowledge to everyone  Network activity is not a good indicator because it's not economic activity, it's just speculators or it could even be fake activity created by the devs. If fees are close to zero, it costs nothing to spam transactions. People should be really asking whether the coin is used in real world for real applications and not just trading it on exchanges, because the answer is always "no", and useless coins will always fall to zero in the long run. |
|
|
|
24yo female: "i have $0k but i have my cheap out of fashion shoes and a smelly used dress i shouldnt wear again"
24yo male: "still hoarding crypto, i could buy 4 rolexes and still have money left"
If that crypto is just a bag of altcoins and he didn't sell during the bull market, it doesn't matter that he had a huge unrealized gain, because the bear market will wipe out all those gains for good and the coins will never recover. And many crypto investors, especially beginners, do in fact hoard hyped altcoins instead of BTC, because they expect quick profits and BTC seems too slow for them. |
|
|
|
|
In 2017 he didn't know how to profit off Bitcoin so he criticized it so that investors would avoid it and instead buy his product. That changed when he found a way to make money with Bitcoin in a safe way - instead of buying it, he sells a service for investing in it. Like they say - during gold rush, sell shovels.
Maybe other haters like Jamie Dimon will find ways to participate in this ecosystem, maybe they won't - why does it matter? You shouldn't depend on their opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not only an investment but also a currency. It has liquidity, meaning you can easily buy or sell it on the market, so it's not a problem if you pay with it - you can always compensate by buying more BTC with fiat. And in fact it's good to pay with BTC, because it gives BTC more value as it increases its adoption.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is always full of surprises so the rally might actually start earlier than expected. If I wanted to enter this market, I would just make a lump sum investment today and take profits deep into the bull market. Maybe there will be a correction soon and there will be a better price to enter, but the price might as well pump and the opportunity to buy the cheapest pre-bull run coins will be gone.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin failed as a currency because it can't process a lot of transactions per second and the precise is too volatile for economic planning. But instead Bitcoin thrived as an investment, and already on this forum most users are interested in its price growing rather than using it as a currency. The anti-fiat and anti-bank rhetoric is mostly just empty talk for hyping up the market.
|
|
|
|
From blockchain-based games to earning BTC while conquering virtual worlds, the possibilities are endless. 🌐💰
The possibilities might be endless but the reality is that blockchain games have tiny playerbases and most of them are just poor people trying to make money, which is not a profitable model. And it has been pretty clear that the gaming community is not intrested in crypto - look at online reactions on reddit or twitter when some company tried to add NFTs to their games - it was always met with overwhelming negativity. |
|
|
|
It's just YouTube, but today I ran across a video that mentioned a bitcoin HODL tax.
In order to stop bitcoin, authorities would have to shut down the internet which is impossible. So I predict that their next move is to launch enormous taxes to discourage people from owning bitcoin, and prevent mass adoption as competition for their corrupted CBDC's that still have to be launched.
In order to stop Bitcoin they could simply close all the centralized exchanges and order banks to freeze Bitcoin-related transactions. But instead they just approved Bitcoin ETFs. Where's the logic in that? They hate Bitcoin so hard that they will allow institutions to get involved with it? Or maybe, just maybe, they don't really care about Bitcoin, and CBDC is just a thing a few low-rank people from the government talk about to make it seem like they do some progress. |
|
|
|
My trust in Bitcoin grew exponentially when I knew the price history of Bitcoin.
Besides other things, history is one main thing used in technical analysis. You can't analyze a market if you don't know the history of that market. History helps you determine how that market behaves at different points in time.
Technical analysis is just extrapolating data and looking for patterns without understanding why the price moves. Which is quite bad, because market conditions change, so these extrapolations often fail. People can find success in trading stocks or commodities if they have a good sense of the forces that move those markets, if they have deep analytical skills. But it's hard to apply the same to Bitcoin because of how purely speculative this market is. The price goes up and down not because something with Bitcoin changes but just because some traders decided to buy or sell big. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin can drop to zero if it will die - meaning everyone would stop using it, or it would become unusable. But it's more likely that Bitcoin would just lose over 99% of its value if people would lose interest in it, or some major flaws would become uncovered. Because it's actually quite hard to lose all value, even beanie babies still have some value, but it's nothing compared to their peak.
So saying that Bitcoin can go to zero is not a good critique, but saying that it's fundamentals are not clearly understood and the future is not certain is a far better critique.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is a currency and currencies are supposed to have an exchange rate. It can slightly differ between different exchanges, but only slightly. Although I remember seeing some exchange services that offered the price wildly below the market, like 30% lower, but I don't know who would even use them - probably some newbies who just stumbled upon them on google without doing proper research. But most people who are selling BTC will be looking for the most optimal price, so the price in general will always converge between different exchanges.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
