To me, that sounds too rigid... .. and like a guess based on selectively choosing retrospective data


For OpSec sake, I hope you did not actually do this..

But hey,.. whatever.

There sometimes can be some creative ways to share passphrases, seedwords and/or parts of these in various places, and then ONLY certain people need to know that they need to be assembled  and the order in which each of the parts might need to be assembled.. ..

like

First:  30th year birthday card  


Second:  bible in the living room
 


third refrigerator magnet

and


Fourth license plate on grandpa's 1976 TransAm


And since those 4 places are vulnerable it may be better to have only 3.. and it probably would be good to have a second set (a backup set)...

and yeah, it ends up getting complicated to have these kinds of things, and for which wallets?  All wallets?... and maybe that is ONLY for 1 wallet.. so what if you have 20 wallets?  and various other secrets (like passwords?). or  does the getting of the one group of passwords give access to everything else.. like a master password.. like bitwarden.. or last pass or something in which we might not want to have all of our passwords.. which would have its own vulnerabilities.



That's a pretty BIG





"If"


You seem to be focusing on substantive numbers jcojci, rather than percentage moves.

I doubt that it is getting any wilder in terms of percentage moves, even though there surely are some matters that can be framed as wild aspects.. such as how much time we are spending below the 200-week moving average...

Reminds me of John Carvahlo's taunting of Roger Ver with the term "Bcash"..

bcash

bcash


bcash




hahahahahaha


Part of the reason why 0.63 BTC will have to be downgraded, at some point.


I still have problems with the need for 37 random characters for the 25th word.. and let's say if someone just has 10-15 somewhat random characters, then how long is it going to take to break into the Trezor?

Remember each time that we log into the device and sometimes we might get disconnected and have to log in again, it can take quite a bit of time to be logging in these 37 random characters each time...

I am not going to say how many digits that I actually use, and  I also am not going to give any hints either... and it is bad enough that I said that I use such a device, in theory.

By the way, we have a long term member in these here parts that swears by that piece of crap, aka Ledger, and surely there are probably quite a few members who may or may not be in the closest about their use (and apparent belief) in the Ledger crap.


Everyone should use the passphrase.. and it should not be considered advanced... and maybe using 37 random characters might be considered advanced.

But I still wonder if a relatively short password might just be considered a less advance version. and is better than no password at all.. so why do we have to have a need to overly complicate matters by suggesting so much complication, when surely it must add quite a bit of difficulty to just have a shorter 25th word in there (or 13th word seems to be more standard) rather than no extra word (passphrase) at all.

In other words, why let the perfect be the enemy of the good?


Oh I see that the 39+ pin is different from the extra word...and that 39 character pin would resolve the other issue regarding a hacker getting ahold of the physical device and breaking into it.. so that still leaves the issue of the 13th or 25th word actually not needing to be very complicated, and a 8-15 character passphrase may well make it quite difficult to get at the wallet because they would first need to know (or suspect) that such a wallet (or extra portal to a wallet) actually exists in connection with the 12 or 24 word seed that was extracted from the device.

I am not even sure if I am just doing me because I am trying to suggest a kind of variance of bitcoin accumulation methods that would depend on the individual situation, and you seem to get so caught up on price predictions, that your technique seems to devolve into gambling if it were applied to everyone.. and yeah you have the luxury of having had been accumulating bitcoin since 2016, so you can wait and still be prepared for Up, while someone without any kind of meaningful BTC accumulation may well need to consider ongoing accumulating of bitcoin rather than waiting around for BTC prices that might not end up happening.. and that results in failure to invest as much as he should have had invested.

I cannot tell anyone when they start to have the luxury of being able to wait, and surely I have not really been employing any kind of strict DCA since early 2017, and maybe I even stopped in early 2016.. It sometimes can be difficult to figure out exactly what any  of us might be doing when we employ a variety of techniques and sometimes trying to figure out whether any new money is coming in or not... which surely I ended up feeling that I had to bring some new money in between about June 2022 and January 2023 based on the then BTC price dips that went way beyond expectations... so in that sense, I suppose that I am contradicting my own statements about not employing DCA since 2017, since I brought new money into my budget in between June 2022 and January 2023 and placed that value into buying on dip slots.. so that might not even be characterized as DCA since it was plugged into dip values even though it was new fiat coming in to support the then shortages of fiat in my bitcoin investment portfolio.


You would buy if you don't have any bitcoin and you would also buy if you have a lot of extra fiat, and there might be other reasons that you figure that you cannot gamble on the BTC price going down so you might choose to spend part of your budget now and save the other part just in case the BTC prices crash.


So you are saying that there is a chance that markets will not crash?  That would be another reason to buy some BTC now rather than waiting.


There is also nothing wrong with doing both.  DCA'ing and saving some dry powder for dips.

You might be right Mr. Right, but it seems to be problematic to merely describe a low coiner in terms of the amount of experience that s/he has with bitcoin rather than the more obvious description that a low coiner would be someone who does not have very many coins as compared to how many s/he should have based on his/her own financial situation.

For example if someone has a $100k investment portfolio, and ONLY has less than 1% in bitcoin, then that would seem to be a low coiner, and maybe even some of us might argue having 1% to 5% into bitcoin would also be a low coiner, but at least that person might have allocated low, but still at least they got off of zero and they got over a 1% allocation in bitcoin.

There are so many people, institutions and governments who are either completely without bitcoin and/or below a 1% allocation, and I would prefer to focus on them first.. and using some kind of a quantifiable measurement that relates to how many coins that they have instead of just how experienced they are in bitcoin, even though you are likely correct that there is a pretty high correlation that shows the more time that anyone spends studying bitcoin, the more likely he is going to act and the more likely that he acts in relation to bitcoin, the more likely he is going to transition out of low coiner status.


I would never want to suggest that anyone invest more than they can afford in terms of their own cashflow and expenses considerations, so those examples of $1 per day or $10 per week are fine if that is all that someone can afford, and surely I used to make those same kinds of suggestions prior to March 2020, and after March 2020, I started to default by suggesting $100 per week rather than $10 per week because it seems that some people need to be more aggressive in their thoughts about bitcoin, especially if they already know that they can afford $100 per week, and those investing $100 per week starting in March 2020, are likely going to have difficulties ever catching up to those who started with $10 per week 4 years earlier (let's say March 2016), but still I was thinking that the devaluation of the dollar and also some of the price bounces (and strength of bitcoin's investment thesis after March 2020, justified upping the starting recommendation to $100 per week while also with the caveat that there is a recognition that doing as best as you can might well have an end result that might ONLY be $10 per week for some people.

Another thing I recognize and appreciate is that no one should be picking out numbers based on another person's recommendation, even though I am likely going to continue to start out with $100 per week rather than $10 per week but people should recognize that $100 per week is likely aimed at a western audience.. and if your income is not in the $30k or more per year ballpark, then you may well be needing to adjust down those numbers... because another way to think about it would be investing between 1% and 25% of your income into bitcoin, and you are ONLY going to be able to invest at the higher ends of that range if you really have your shit together, otherwise you should be picking more realistic and sustainable numbers for yourself, and someone who makes $26k per year might be able to $100 per week which is 20% of his her annual salary ($500 per week), but someone who ONLY makes $13k per year may well be going overboard with $100 per week, because that would constitute 40% of his/her salary, so s/he may have to go through a lot of gymnastics to allow for 40% to work in a way that is sustainable.. including questioning whether s/he already had set up some kind of an emergency fund or maybe some of that money getting taken out for investing goes to bitcoin and the other part goes towards making sure that the emergency fund is solid.

I have already told you that I have no obligation to provide examples or to complete your assignments, when largely I had been rebutting you rather than arguing any of my own case... and largely you have been making various arguments regarding how bitcoin is not valuable or helpful to people, institutions and/or governments, which the on the ground facts seem to already rebutt you without my even having to say anything - even though it still can be helpful to point out the various times when you are out of touch, which seems to be quite a bit of the time.

In order to understand bitcoin as already being a success, there is no need to point out any particular country, since the fact of the matter continues to be that bitcoin is becoming more and more liquid around the world on a regular basis and serving as an alternative way to hold value and to transmit value, including transitioning between currencies.

So one aspect of bitcoin is its ability to be transacted right now, and another aspect is to hold bitcoin and to consider the extent to which your purchasing power may or may not be increased in the future, which it not guaranteed, even though we can see that historically bitcoin's purchasing power has continued to increase, so the guy who sold his 0.333 bitcoin to me at around $6k in mid 2018 and only got around a bit more than $2k for it, would have been able to receive right around $8,650 today as I type, but he chose not to hold the bitcoin until now and he chose to sell it in mid 2018 at a personal loss.  His choice.  I had no obligation to say anything to him, and I might have said more than I needed to in terms of trying to suggest that he does not sell his BTC to me at a loss... but he was insistent, and he is in the best position to know what he wants to do, even though he admitted that he was receiving less than half the value from the coins as what he had bought them from me right around 6 months earlier.  He seemed fairly embarrassed by the whole situation, and maybe part of the reason is that I already knew him from the earlier transaction, and if he knew of some other place that he could have sold his bitcoin on the same terms, he might have gone to the other location in order to save himself from some of the embarrassment that he seemed to have had been experiencing when he sold the coins to me at a personal loss to him.

Whether bitcoin value comes from the utility of using it for transmissions of value or from storing it or from some other kinds of use case, there seems to ongoingly increases in the value in bitcoin based on many use cases that people find, including just holding it. 

Surely there are some currencies that are more liquid than bitcoin on a world wide basis, and it seems that the dollar is the most liquid of currencies, but some folks seem to not want to transact in dollars or to hold dollars, and so bitcoin serves as one of the other options for those people. and even institutions and governments are making similar kinds of choices to hold bitcoin rather than dollars or to figure out some kind of balancing regarding how much of each of those currencies/assets that they would prefer to hold, and even if they don't know what is Gresham's law, many of people are likely motivated by Gresham's law principles in terms of choosing which kinds of currencies(assets) to spend first and which currencies/assets to hold for longer term periods.

Regarding the extent to which bitcoin helps any economy, those kinds of answers go back to fairness in regards to distribution of currencies and bitcoin's ability to provide a counter-example regarding it's limited supply - which ultimately creates better incentives over the money printing dynamic of fiat systems that both undermines the holders of the currency that is being printed out of thin air and the printed out of thin air money also ends up getting distributed in ways that advantage those who are closest to the money printer as compared to those who are further out being more disadvantaged because their money devalues through inflation,

...and so bitcoin does not have that kind of money printing corruption, and so its built-in fairness likely helps all economies by improving the incentives and not taking value away from people who hold onto their currencies.  As more and more people realize bitcoin as being the soundest of monies, then it seems quite likely that bitcoin will end up expanding various economies because it is a more fair money, and so bitcoin seems to do these kinds of fairness creation things overall.. and maybe we will see results in El Salvador first, since El Salvador seems to be attempting to be a beacon of Bitcoin adoption, even though there are enclaves all around the world that seem to be attempting to imitate aspects of El Salvador's bitcoin adoption. and attempting to be more permissive regarding bitcoin and perhaps increasing ways in which bitcoin is being used in circular economy kinds of ways.   

I must be in the wrong thread... like a lost little puppy..

and having the questions:

What is crypto?  Does it somehow relate to this here topic?

I certainly subscribe to the theory that your body slows in recovery time with age, and also cannot tolerate certain kinds of abuses that it was able to tolerate when younger... and some of those behaviors that we did as a younger person might end up killing us as an older person, so in that sense, I would take with a grain of salt about the idea that "whatever doesn't kill you, will make you stronger".. since that is likely a younger man's phenomena..

...even though it is probably that our bodies do likely need some stressors to become stronger even though at some point we are not as able to even tolerate various stressors, so we have to make the stressors weaker in order to become stronger and we might not even be able to get up to close to the levels of our previous tolerances.. and even now there are some things that I just am not able to do, and I am not prepared to train 24/7 in order to try to get up to being able to do certain things that I could do in my 20s, and my training might not end up getting me to those levels anyhow, so then I just ended up wasting my time on goals that I am not able to achieve while neglecting some other areas of my life that are also important.

There is no reason for me to delete the post since even my post clarified the text and since you were providing topic relevant information.. and I don't even have any problem with you citing text from the article in your post.. it just was not made clear regarding that the text was coming from the article rather than from you, and even my above description clarifies that you had only authored the first sentence of that post and the other parts of the text in the post came from the article..

I am not even blaming you for anything beyond being sloppy... even though it could have had been misread by some readers. which was why I said anything at all.

There are a few ways to attempt to do this.  Let's say that you have something like $100 every week that you can use for BTC buys (DCA).

One way would be to just set your buy orders at the beginning of the week in order to hope to use up the whole $100 by then end of the week (and yeah maybe if you have time and interest, you can manually monitor the filling of your buy orders so you set half of the orders in the beginning of the week and the other half towards the second half of the week), and if your prices are not met by the end of the week, just market buy with whatever is remaining at your personally imposed deadline time.


Nothing wrong with market buys - except usually the percentage of the fees might be a bit higher... and if you feel that you have a whole week to spend it, and you could accomplish the same thing somewhat automatically, then why rush it?  Sure the price might not dip all week, but the odds for that are not necessarily greater than 50%.. and you might even be able to read how extreme that you might want to be with your limited orders while knowing that you have market ordering as a back up plan if all of your efforts fail after the passage of a whole week (or whatever might be the time frames that you impose on yourself for each of your buy orders).


Those sound like newbie kinds of mistakes (and emotions), so the more that you practice, you should be able to temper down some of those kinds of tendencies, even though sometimes it can take several years of practice before you can really lessen your emotions. and I am not going to deny that sometimes I have some issues with this as well.. not very often in recent times, but sometimes there can be some frustrations when some kind of an order is placed and it gets within pennies of filling and goes up, does not come back down, and seems like it is never going to come back down to those levels (at least within the timeline that I had self-imposedly set for that order to fill)...

So let's say for example, I have right around 0.63 BTC (which is around $16k worth of bitcoin), and I see that my neighbor has a nice trailer that is for sale, and he wants .063 BTC for it, and if I pay in cash, he going to want $2k, and so I decide to pay him in BTC... so then I am like: "fuck, that's 10% of my total bitcoin supply, I better buy back that BTC within less than 24 hours because I cannot be fucking around with 10% of my total BTC holdings on purchases if I do not replace the purchases in a fairly expedited kind of a way."

So in essence, I have a bit of an urgent replace scenario that I have put myself into it because I choose to spend BTC rather than dollars, but I also believe that it was good to spend my BTC becuase he was giving me right around a 20% discount.  So I could try to set some limited buy orders just below the spot price, but even if I just buy back right away, I likely am ONLY going to be paying around 0.3% or so for fees, so it still is cheaper for me than the 20% discount that I got

..and sure of course, we might need to consider the extent to which there are tax consequences too, but my point is that there can be situations in which our own conduct in light of how much of our stash we are using could cause greater or lesser levels of urgency in terms of replacing any BTC that we might have had spent.


Thanks for adding some further details regarding the usability of the Trezor one, and surely the Trezor one is about 1/3 the price of the Trezor Model T  (depending on when you get it) and the Trezor one can do a lot of the same things as the Trezor Model T... just a smaller screen and dealing with buttons rather than touch screen. 

I know that sometimes some of these features seem complicated and confusing, but when you actually go through the process, you may well become "Wow'ed" regarding how easy some of the features are, including that a passphrase does not have to be set up from the very beginning, and so you can add new passphrases as you go in order to generate new portals into new wallets. .and you can even open several (or all) of the wallets at the same time (separate passphrases), and they will show on the trezor as "hidden wallet 1," "hidden wallet 2,"  "standard wallet," etc... so you can even transfer funds between standard wallet and hidden wallet 1, and you will need to pay onchain fees for any of those kinds of transfers, but sometimes there are reasons to move your own funds from one location to another location.

Holy fuck, delfastTions.  why don't you put quotes around your text rather than my having to figure out whether you are quoting or not and which parts are quoted.  Sure I looked at the article and I saw that everything except your first like is quoted from the article, but your post surely does not make that clear without my having to double check by looking at the actual article...   That's sloppy and lazy at best and unethical (and against forum rules) if some folks might reasonably end up inferring that some or all of those words are yours rather than from the linked article.

You seem to be referring to position size @coupable rather than not doing it, even though your conclusion is that CAR should not do it rather than figuring out a way to employ a small position size that might be 1% rather than 5% to 25% for a more healthy economy / country / government... and maybe they are in a position that even 1% might be too high, I am not going to proclaim to know their specifics, even though I know that a lot of countries have pretty screwed up economics and varying levels of irresponsibilities in terms of how far they place themselves into debt in comparison to the amount of income that they are able to produce in the country including being able to tax such income if the enterprises are not directly government owned....

There is nothing wrong with being aggressive and even over aggessive in terms of your buying bitcoin, but you should not be so aggressive and/or overly aggressive that at any time you would be forced to sell bitcoin at a loss or even when bitcoin is at down prices.  Your having to sell bitcoin at a loss is likely a sign that you had not properly planned and prepared, and the default, prior to even getting to selling would be to stop buying, and then the fall back on that would be to HODL. .until your cashflow sufficiently returns, which means funding whatever expenses that you had from other funding sources, and the fact that you are saying that you had to sell, means that you likely were not even in a position to buy as many BTC as you had bought and you did not have an adequate and sufficient emergency fund and other adequate and sufficient funds to draw from (including varying cashflows and/or debt).


taking risks should not mean engaging in gambling tactics that involve potentially putting you in a position in which you are going to have to sell your bitcoin if the price drops lower than you had expected... that is not called risk management, but instead it is called dumb.


Even a DCA strategy requires appropriate sizing in terms of being aggressive and even being overly aggressive, but not so aggressive that we end up having to sell at a loss rather than just holding to zero, if need be.

Overall, I don't have any problem with your strategy erep, but it still seems to be a strategy that would have better chances of working well for someone who has already built a decent BTC stash, and so if you are either a no coiner or a low coiner who is still in the earliest of stages of building a BTC portfolio, it may well take several years, before there is any value in waiting to buy on dips rather than just buying regularly at any price (aka DCA).

Another thing is that OP seems to be talking about $50 to $100 per month, so it is not a whole hell of a lot to work with, and depending upon how high of an annual salary s/he has, it could take well over 10 years, at such rate, to even get to a point of having a year's worth of salary invested into bitcoin.. of course, depending on what is the overall income and if it might be less than $6k to $8k per year, then it should not take 10 years to reach 1 year's salary invested into bitcoin.

I agree with two of your points which are:
1)  you and your ideas are fairy tales and dreams.
and
2) cryptocurrencies (not talking about bitcoin) are speculative to such an extent that the vast majority of them are some form of scam in terms of printing money and/or affinity scams upon bitcooin trying to seem like or to be like bitcoin.

Your point about bitcoin not being able to fix countries is lame, and surely improvements to any situation is likely a product of multiple things going on, and bitcoin would not be the ONLY thing that is going on but within a package of other things in which it may or may not be able to take credit for its "on the margin" kinds of contributions in any situation, whether personal investment, institutions and/or governments.  It is easier to look at the situations of individuals, so if you attempt to apply bitcoin systems to institutions and/or governments, then more complexities come into place, but a lot of the same individual are still going to apply to the more complex systems of institutions and governments, but there are just more things going on with institutions and governments as compared with individuals.


For sure, I am not trying to stop you or anyone else from making their points, including if they are disagreeable and wrong, and in my own case, even though sometimes I might direct my response towards you and or towards DrBeer, I am not necessarily intending my comment to be personal... but instead directed towards the substance.

There are some posters who do seem more disingenuine than others, so in that regard, we cannot necessarily presume that every member is either acting in good faith arguments or even trying to be genuine.  So sometimes the seeming personal attacks might end up going towards the angle that some posters will repeat nonsense over and over and over, and perhaps we give them the benefit of the doubt a few times, but after a while a pattern might be noticed in which it can be seen that they are really not setting forth genuine facts, logic and/or conclusions... but instead purposefully spreading counter points for the mere sake of muddying and/or confusing the discussion.

By the way, some of the worst and disingenuine of forum trolls / shills and/or disingenuine posters sometimes will make valid points, and sure it can be questionable (or a matter of discretion) the extent to which there is any value in attempting to respond to them or to clarify some of their misinformation/disinformation.

I am not even proclaiming that I am always right, either.. I have had plenty of times that I have been wrong entirely or I end up being wrong in some of the understanding of the facts, logic and/or coming to bad conclusions and/or maybe prematurely attacking another member or using denigrating and/or patronizing tones when it might not be warranted.

So some of us are more human than others, and sometimes it can even be difficult to admit mistakes and sometimes it might not even be necessary to admit mistakes, just move onto the next topic... and let the back and forth comments stand for what they are... and let the reader figure out on which side they lean.

By the way, another difficult area is level of knowledge and/or abilities to express oneself well in English, and it can be quite difficult to know if some member might be adding value or not, but it seems that any time that any of us is bringing in some of our own experiences into the conversation, it can be a lot harder for me to suggest that you have not contributed some value, even if I might come to differing conclusions in regards to how I interpret the personal experiences that you end up describing.


Ok. that seems to be a mostly fair list.


Ok.  some people are more advantaged than others, but anyone can benefit from bitcoin.. and I could give less than two shits in regards to talking about crypto and the various nonsense that it related to that.. even though surely we should realize that CAR's approach was not very bitcoin focused, as compared with El Salvador that has been trying to stay more bitcoin focused.. at least so far and the last more than two years that El Salvador has been pushing pro-bitcoin ideas (and by the way, today is the two year anniversary of El Salvador's implementation of its bitcoin legal tender law).

Anyhow, back to the point about how individuals' might use bitcoin, yes they might need to learn some skills, and surely one of the skills is already in their interest and abilities which is learning their own personal finances and balancing their own personal finances and their psychological and financial interests.. so every individual is capable of working these kinds of learnings into their approaches to their lives, whether they choose to do it or not and whether they are successful or not have a lot of factors, but if any government gives opportunities in which they are not going to prosecute you for learning about bitcoin and using bitcoin, then it seems to me that your individual options are increased, which should be considered a good thing.

So there is the individual level of learning about and adopting some bitcoin practices, and governments sometimes might not act within the interests of their people, so governments are going to vary in terms of their own ways of representing the interest of their people and they will frequently have a certain amount of power to act within the interest of their people whether they employ good tactics and/or judgement or not and whether they act in good faith or not.


Bitcoin is available for everyone, so each person can decide his/her strategy, approach and way of investing into it, if s/he chooses to invest into it. 

For sure, there are no guarantees, and there are people who find ways to lose money, even with an asset like bitcoin that so far in its history has tended to go up... and yeah, there are no guarantees that it will continue to go up, but bitcoin does continue to seem to be one of the best (if not the best) of asymmetric bets that are currently wide-spreadedly available.

I doubt that Saylor gives any shits about whether or not "crypto" pumps, and he mostly does not talk about crypto, but instead he seems to already know that the tail does not wag the dog, so why consider or frame what's happening or might happen in those kinds of dumb, vague and loosey-goosey terms.

By the way, Saylor seems to recognize and appreciate that crypto is largely an affinity scam against bitcoin, and he has largely made those kinds of statements, including pointing them out to be inferior product, pointing out that bitcoin is far and above anything else in the space in terms of a pristine asset and even acknowledging that a lot of people get distracted into the various snake oil and/or vapor ware of the non-bitcoin products.


You are pointing out such outlier kinds of scenarios fillippone.. and sure your overall point is still valid.

I will still quibble a bit and assert that Saylor has not sold any bitcoin so far, and the one time that anyone can point out to his selling (at the end of 2022, right?) has to do with a situation in which he bought more than he sold, so hardly even a sale in the whole scheme of things.

You might be correct that overall, there might be times in which he sells some bitcoin, inspite of his saying that he is never selling... and there could be times in which he is forced to sell because some 3rd party rug pulls him or some kind of a governmental persecution (forcing of the matter)... but still? 

Your overall point is that whether he sells or not should not matter too much about how anyone chooses to invest in bitcoin or not, even though there could be times in which Saylor ends up becoming bitter and rage-quitting or engaging in some kind of purposeful manipulation of the BTC price because he can, and he does not seem like that kind of a guy, but surely anyone is capable of getting caught too much into their own egos and engaging in seemingly erratic and/or self-serving/self-destructive behaviors based on known or perhaps yet unknown factors.

I had also suggested some contemporary themes (or issues that are currently in the news), and so we likely know that some of the themes are no longer as relevant and/or there is also not really that much importance that the same kinds of themes are asked to later responders as compared with earlier responders..

so in that sense, consistency of the questions might not matter very much with the "of the day" themes, even though there could be some value in terms of some of the basic questions being similar since it might well not matter very much to change the wording of some of the basic questions like, when did you first get into BTC (and how - who, what, where, when) and when did you first hear about the forum and how.. and some of the other questions may or may not vary over time, so some of the extent to variance may well have to do with OPs preferences (or changes in his own ideas) or accounting for some of the changes in what members of the forum are talking about.. so for example, there had been times when the terms Defi and ICO might be used more but then more contemporary themes might be ordinals/inscriptions or talking sidechains, or lightning network and/or stable coins, and sure some of the themes overlap and the concept of Defi or ICO might still cover the concept, but with the passage of time there likely are better ways to phrase questions...

and so for example, this is not my thread, so even if I make some suggestions, I am not even going to try to take it over or try to direct it, because I already know that OP is way more receptive to some shitcoin themes than I am, and he is surely free to emphasize the points that tie to his own interests or what he might believe is of interest to forum members or some combination of these... and yeah, I like the idea of pre-question questionnaires and/or even follow-ups, even though some forum members had been interacting with some of the responders in order to attempt to get clarification on some of the responses that the responders. and sure even though follow up from questions does seem to be more of a job of the OP, there also does not seem to be anything wrong with taking advantage of the crowd-sourcing nature of the forum.. even though other members might not necessarily be as good at following up or even be incentivized to necessarily explore topics in a way that might also be a bit of the responsibility of OP (but yeah, who exactly is responsible for the questions and/or the follow-up could be a bit of a loose parameter in a thread like this that is on a forum rather than a more traditional kind of an interview structure that might be more purposefully controlled by   one interviewer).

I am not opposed to holding some value on exchanges (or with third parties.  In some cases it might be practical while you are learning how to be your own bank), maybe up to a few thousand dollars, and surely for each person the threshold will be different in terms of at what point you are going to want to bring some (or all) of that value off of the exchanges.. and surely you should want to try to learn about some private ways to hold your coins.. so it gives you options to have your coins in private wallets in which no one can stop you from being able to spend them and other potential powers that you might have from having your own keys that may or may not be readily apparent or even something that everyone seeks for themselves, but on the other hand, there is always a threat of either rug pull or various kinds of locking up of your funds when 3rd parties hold your keys.

There are likely several different ways to hold your bitcoin, and Trezor is pretty good.. either the Trezor one (which is cheaper) or the more expensive Trezor Model T and you want to make sure you get it from an authorized source (or authorized reseller) and with trezor it seems better to use the extra word too and also maybe to have some decoy value that you keep on the regular section that does not have the extra word... and of course, it is up to you how you might organize the various accounts on the trezor and get used to it...

Passport and Coldcard are likely good too. but a bit more sophisticated as compared with the Trezor, and there are other members who like Electrum, Spectrum and Sparrow, but I have not really used them... and there are other wallets and forum threads on the topic, and there are some members who like paper wallets, but I am not really accustomed to them, either...

You can also use Bluewallet, but I am a bit weary of keeping too much value on your phone... and maybe Phoenix and Breez are good lightning network wallets, and maybe guys have other recommendations, and there are forum threads on a lot of these topics that could get in depth and just require you to figure out what kinds of tradeoffs that you might be wanting to make to ensure that you have your coins privately and that they are sufficiently safe from getting taken including being careful not to create systems that are so complicated that you end up locking yourself out of your own coins, since there are responsibilities in being your own bank that can sometimes not be exactly straight-forward in terms of learning or even realizing if you might be putting your coins in jeopardy.   

Seems to me that you missed my earlier mostly semantics post on the topic.



Or.. maybe the message would include some specific assignments:  "you have been grounded for a week, which also means that you need to stop eating all those cookies and milk in order that maybe you might grow some hair on your balls, you need to eat steak and broccoli for the next week... .which might help you to "grow the fuck up".. and start shaving too.. even if its just that peach fuzz on your face.". hahahahahaha

You do not have to wait, and you do not need to get permission in order to answer the interview questions.. and post your post in this thread.

I personally think some of the questions suck (or are a bit outdated) and recently we have been getting pretty shitty answers to the questions, so I am not sure how helpful it is even to read through the answers anymore, since what are the one liner answers that do not really say very much except.. I like bitcoin and perhaps this or that shitcoin and I got into bitcoin because my friend told me (and without many specifics in regards to whatever the various one-liners even means in terms of maybe showing some personal details that might be relatable and/or interesting.. like going on a date with a low charasmatic partner who cannot even carry his/her end of the conversation).

I cannot recall seeing any Saylor predictions that are overly optimistic, and I doubt that he is really predicting anything that is much different from what other bitcoiners had been saying prior to Saylor's mid-2020 coming onto the bitcoin scene.

In other words, he seems to be a famous person who is very articulate who is saying a lot of the same things that other bitcoiners had already been saying, and I am not even denying that he is likely much more articulate than a large number of previous bitcoiners  who also do not seem to as easily get a large platform as Saylor.

If you recall, Saylor was a pretty damned newbie bitcoiner in August 2020, and he was already getting on all kinds of podcasts and even nation-wide (and international) news outlets from the start - and Saylor even took on a spokesperson's role in regards to bitcoin so he could show us that he was learning along the way, but from the start, Saylor was a pretty quick study in terms of being able to articulate information that was already out there and even coming up with his own analogies and bringing his own smartness into the mix.. and sure maybe he ended up bringing some new ways of looking at bitcoin.. but it is still like he has any more power or ability to see the future than anyone else, except sure there is likely a bit of a magnifying effect to have a number of people working with him (and for him) from the start, and including his choices to put on conferences and to tailor various bitcoin educational materials.

A lot of the early discussions of MSTR's/Saylor's involvement in bitcoin can be seen in fillippone's other thread on the topic.


Well, he was already shown to be a bit wrong in terms of some of the varying ways that he was stocking up on bitcoin, which kind of shows that even rich (and smart people) are not immune from having to go through bitcoin cycles and perhaps even suffer from the manipulation of other (even bigger players) and/or to fail to see certain kinds of overleveraging coming into the bitcoin space and/or tied to the bitcoin space.. so in some sense likely getting caught off guard from the severity of some of the so far 2022 bitcoin price corrections that might even be continuing to hold bitcoin prices down further and for longer than they really should be held down.  

Maybe I am playing off of some of the criticisms that Saylor receives for not really predicting anything that is outside of what many of us already know about bitcoin cycles, which is that they are pretty powerful, and not exactly guaranteed, but fools are likely going to continue to miss out on bitcoin because they either fail/refuse to buy any BTC or to buy enough or they end  up selling too many BTC too soon.

Many of us should appreciate that there is a lot of power with the likelihood of being directionally correct with bitcoin historically and likely the ongoing likelihood of continuing to be directionally correct without really exactly being able to guarantee any kind of exact timeline.. and merely if bitcoin is continuing to appreciate at least higher than the dollar is losing its value then it is doing its job, and there is additional icing on the cake if bitcoin ends up also beating other real property assets.. because of bitcoin's being a kind of real property that is way more moveable, and surely that is something that Saylor continues to repeat, and there really is no way that he can be wrong about his description of what bitcoin is, but at the same time, doesn't necessarily mean that he is going to get any kind of the timing correct.. or that he can take credit if he ends up being correct..

.....even though many of us who have bitcoin and who have continued to have bitcoin are likely getting some level of glee when we see bitcoin prices going up and then we have a kind of "I told you so" feeling going through us, whether or not we choose to gloat about it.. and bitcoin seems to never endingly allow for that kind of gloating every few years (maybe we can call them cycles), but perhaps the other portions of the cycle we look stupid unless we have been in a few cycles then we surely have enough of a price cushion that we can even gloat about how great bitcoin is, even when it is at the deeper ends of its correction periods..