01 - Abiky Thanks for the raffle!  |
|
|
|
Being richer and have more money in pocket are not helpful if he does not intend to save USDD and TRON. Do Kwon made a bad decision to choose one and leave another die and what he chose is simply a serious mistake. If he chose $LUNA, he should save it rather than kill both tokens. Terra Foundation Guard used their reserved to save UST and failed. In the end, they lost most of money and can not save anything.
Justin Sun from beginning of the USDD de-peg crisis chose a good way to handle it. Spend money and try to handle the crisis. At least now we can see USDD gradually reclaims its peg. It is supported by general market too. Personally I still feel unsafe with algorithm stable coin, not only USDD. We don't know how bad the market will be and company can not make over collaterization forever. It has limited capital in pocket.
Justin Sun better play his cards right for the good of the crypto/Blockchain industry. Otherwise, another collapse like Terra/LUNA will further diminish investors' confidence into cryptocurrencies as reliable, long-term investments. You can bet prices will further decline if something like that happened now. Last time I've checked, USDD's peg was restored so I guess Justin proved me wrong. Still, USDD is a risky algorithmic stablecoin so I'd proceed with caution just in case. With regulators paying close attention to crypto's latest developments, we might see investor protections further down the road. Who knows if USDD becomes the first algorithmic stablecoin to hold its peg for generations? Just my thoughts  |
|
|
|
Gas prices will go up as soon as the ETH network has a reason to spam transactions, as was the case in DeFi summer 2020 and the NFT hype of 2021, but for now the demand for blockchain space will remain extremely low, then the fees will also go down to low values accordingly. It would be utopian if the gas fees were always like that regardless of the market trend, but this problem is unlikely to disappear in the current form of the ETH network and as soon as the altcoin spring or a new hype starts, the commissions will skyrocket again.
I'm afraid gas fees won't stay low forever, due to the network's limited scaling problems. Once the bull market returns, people will be using ETH like crazy resulting in higher gas fees per transaction. We only have two options: either we wait until gas fees decline, or simply use a Layer-Two scaling solution like Arbitrum or Optimism. ETH 2.0 will improve things, but only for a short amount of time. What matters is not the gas fees, but rather the network's security and reliability. Decentralization must be prioritized for Ethereum to last for generations. As long as it stays that way, we should have nothing to worry about. Just my opinion  |
|
|
|
As sad as this may sound most people are financially illiterate, despite their finances being so important that they dedicate a great deal of their time to try to earn money, they do not want to stop and think about the moves they need to do to improve their financial situation, so even if CBDCs and cryptocurrencies are completely different most people will believe whatever they are told, something which will hinder the adoption and the development of cryptocurrencies in general.
You can bet that governments will do everything in their power to discredit the use of cryptocurrencies once CBDCs are launched for public use. After all, they don't want to lose control over the economy. A CBDC will give governments and central banks more power as everything will be widely accessible in a distributed ledger they control. We cannot say the same about paper money which is anonymous by design (sort of). Some people will still use traditional cryptocurrencies because they don't want to give away their privacy. But the rest will use CBDCs to avoid getting left behind in the dust. I wouldn't worry about government-issued digital currencies as long as decentralization wins in the long run. Who knows if CBDCs live alongside crypto for generations? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Haters gonna hate.
Admittedly, Bitcoin goes through severe corrections from time to time. Fiat also falls every now and then. The only difference is that for the rest of the time Bitcoin is slowly rising while fiat is continuously falling. The haters can't deny that. If we zoom out, we're seeing Bitcoin's line going upward and fiat's going downward. That's something nobody can deny.
Bitcoin's critics are free to nitpick. We've been observing that all the time. They're particularly very noisy when the market is bearish. For the rest of the time, they're wallowing in regret.
Haters just want to discredit Bitcoin by spreading misinformation and false propaganda across every medium possible. Only smart people will take their time do their own research to realize that BTC is more than just an investment. It's a revolution that's bound to make our lives change for the better. I'd say Bitcoin is better than Fiat because it empowers people to be their own bank. There are no risks of getting your funds frozen or seized by a third party (mainly banks and/or governments). Not to mention, the cryptocurrency itself is the antithesis of inflation. The many benefits BTC provides has encouraged some countries to adopt it as their own. El Salvador was the forerunner in this movement, followed by the Central African Republic. Other countries should do the same in order to protect themselves from a collapsing Fiat system. I'm pretty sure that once BTC rebounds back in price, El Salvador will turn from a developing country to a developed one. Who knows if we're one step closer towards "hyperbitcoinization" than we've thought? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Certainly, inflation and global recession will have a significant impact on Bitcoin and the crypto market in general, so according to my opinion, Bitcoin will temporarily drop, perhaps to below $14,000 as a result of being affected by the global economic situation, and then the second stage comes when people begin to realize that they are losing their money as a result of inflation and that Bitcoin is better ” store of value. Therefore, they will buy bitcoin a lot to preserve the value of their money from being affected by inflation, then we will see the bitcoin rise again to new peaks and unprecedented levels, the opportunity is available at the present time to buy more bitcoin at each drop and then hold.
The global economy is in a very bad state now, so most people will have no choice but to sell their BTC in order to satisfy their needs. Only those who can afford to lose money, will buy BTC no matter what. You can bet that once the recession is over, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will rise back to their former glory. Maybe BTC market prices will rebound all the way to $75k and above? No one knows what will happen as crypto is widely unpredictable. I'm not worried about BTC seeing another bloodbath in price, as long as it works as intended. Fiat is going to collapse anyways, so relying on Bitcoin as a currency instead of an investment is the way to go. Who knows if the world transitions from the Fiat standard to the Bitcoin standard in the not-so-distant future? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
If I'm trading BTC for XMR (or vice versa), I almost always just use Bisq, or very occasionally someone on this forum. What platforms (with reasonable liquidity) exist for making trustless BTC to XMR swaps?
You can also trade BTC for XMR via cross-chain atomic swaps. There's no need to use a separate platform like Bisq to trade coins. Everything is done directly in a P2P manner. You simply send your BTC to the protocol and receive XMR to your address almost instantly. I've tried it and it works like a charm. However, the technology is quite experimental (as far as I'm aware) so it's not recommended for exchanging large amounts between blockchains. I've been a little paranoid about my privacy lately, so I use a combination of TOR + VPN and XMR to keep my transactions as private as possible. There are a lot of centralized exchanges requiring KYC these days, so it's best to be prepared for the worst. As much as they try to justify it is somehow being a good thing, I'm pretty sure the Wasabi team know fine well they aren't doing the right thing whatsoever by cooperating with blockchain analysis. It's just that they care about lining their own pockets much more than they care about privacy, their users, or doing the right thing.
That's the problem. When there's money involved, developers often sacrifice Blockchain's core values (which are privacy and decentralization) in order to fill their pockets with money. You can bet that if developers opposed government's requirements, crypto wouldn't have been as widely adopted worldwide as it is right now. It's all about making governments happy in order to keep crypto afloat. At least, we're not stuck with a single privacy solution. As long as everything remains open sourced and decentralized, people will always have a choice to preserve their privacy in the crypto/Blockchain space. I would choose ChipMixer over Wasabi 100% of the time, since Wasabi spy on their users, cooperate with blockchain analysis, and are anti-privacy and anti-bitcoin.
Isn't ChipMixer a centralized mixing service? It is hosted on a centralized server, so I'd assume that is the case. Maybe I'm wrong?  |
|
|
|
Payment on your accounts Payment successfully received. Thanks again, guys! You rock! |
|
|
|
10 - Abiky Thank you! |
|
|
|
Staking is for anyone that have too much money and they don't really need them so they could grow their money instead.
It definitely isn't carrying the same chance of return of investment like trading but it's quite safe investment alternative in case you just want to leave your money and let it grow.
Also, usually anyone that stakes have massive capital so they got higher return of investment, it's just matter of how much capital you have in getting greater ROI.
Exactly. Staking is more suitable for whales who have a lot of money to waste. But it's not for the average Joe like you and me. If you have the capital to stake long-term I'd say go for it. Unlike banks, PoS coins give higher returns per year. That entirely depends on the stake rates and current market price of the coin you're investing into. I see many altcoins abandoning PoW in favor of PoS, so it's possible more people will get into the game with the hopes of getting rich quick. As long as you don't put all of your life savings into staking, you'll have nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Oh it will definitely "boom" again. I just doubt it will have the same "boom" as the first time, now that most people know how worthless NFTs actually are. Why would anyone pay for something that they supposedly own, yet copyright laws do not back it up? I think most people who bought NFTs were just hoping to sell it for a higher price to some poor fool who had no idea what they were doing but had a lot of money.
Newbies will continue to be duped by the NFT craze, hopefully it will die out soon.
NFTs won't disappear just because there's so much money invested in them. Of course, 90% of NFTs are just garbage. But there are some good ones that are quite worth the investment. I'm pretty sure regulators will weigh in once NFTs become extremely popular. With legislation, the whole space will bring confidence to serious investors looking to obtain a good return of investment. There are some prominent companies in the game, so it should only be a matter of time before NFTs gain traction once more. I'd say the hype is temporarily over because of the bear market. Just wait until prices go back up again to see people getting interested into NFTs again. Who knows what real use cases this new trend will bring to us in the next 10 years? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Yeah I have 2 of these, - Sample/Polymer Test - A01 000000 - Regular (non-test) - A01 000049 The other 4 I have are all marked with the "fixed" Ethereum strip (2 Test, 2 regular (serials 58 & 74). That said, I have no idea how many exist either, so thanks for asking! Cheers! I guess these Polymerbit notes were a limited edition run. They're extremely rare as far as I can tell. We'd be lucky if we hold onto our notes until BTC hits $1m. Mine is in mint condition as I've never taken it out of the protective plastic sleeve. I'm not sure whenever to load it with ETH or just leave it as is. I've heard that PCGS graded some Polymerbit notes in the past, so I think I'll give them a shot. Ive seen them sell for upwards of $200 in BTC
Hope that helps.
thanks!
Not bad. I bet you can get more bang for your buck by selling it on eBay. I've seen sellers selling BTC collectibles there at a higher premium than what you see here. If I do that, I will take the extra cash to buy more Bitcoin. Maybe I'll get lucky when BTC hits $1m? While we don't have the full number of notes produced; they were definitely under 100 pcs.
Awesome!  |
|
|
|
There is nothing certain in life besides death and taxes, but if last time we managed to see bitcoin at almost $70k then it's very likely that we could see for the first time in history the 6-digit number. It'll be interesting to see if many people will sell just before the $100k, kind of what happened in 2017 with the $10 but then it kept pumping. That was very unexpected.
Bitcoin has always rebounded after a severe bear market. This time is no different than 2013 or 2018 where BTC went downhill in an instant. If you're smart, you'd buy Bitcoin at a discount before it goes back up again. I have a feeling BTC will never touch $20k again, just like it never touched $1k back then. Just wait until the next BTC halving and you'll see everything will be shining again. Who knows if buying and "hodling" BTC and some prominent alts will lead you towards untold riches in the future? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Most traders do not have too much of a choice, those which day trade with a small amount of capital cannot really afford to send their coins out of the exchange and then back to it after each day of work as this will increase substantially the fees they have to pay, so they have to leave their coins at the exchange and assume all the risks that come from leaving their coins at the exchange, so while holding our coins in an address which is exclusively under our control is the optimal solution there are circumstances which do not allow it.
That is true. But with atomic swaps and hybrid exchanges (decentralized/centralized) this no longer becomes an issue. Traders can still get access to their keys/seeds and enjoy high-performance order execution + low fees like they do with any ordinary centralized exchange. A good example of this is the hybrid exchange called Waves which has the performance of a traditional centralized exchange, but the decentralization of Blockchain tech (giving you access to private keys/seeds). It's the best of both worlds, if you ask me. People just need to be thoroughly educated in order to prevent them from storing all of their crypto assets in a centralized exchange that doesn't give them control of their own keys. As long as most people have access to their keys, the number of hacks/scams/theft will be reduced to a minimum. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Bitconnect saw its stud days too and then crashed as well. It was promoted like anything specially among low income countries and became a very popular topic of discussion among the common users in the casino trollboxes too. Then there are these social media friend circles where such coins become circle jerk topics and then all buy it like anything.
Eventually they will all lose and the same cycle will repeat after a few years in another name and in another form. The winner is the person running these scams and not the investors. Chit funds and HYIPs/Ponzis exist in real life while LUNA exists in the internet. No difference between them at all.
Regulation will not stop such projects from being popular. If someone willingly wants to get scammed without doing research on the project they are investing in, why will the government force them to stop?
That's certainly true, mate. Regulations won't stop scams from happening, but they will minimize their effect in the crypto/Blockchain industry. The more legislation we have towards crypto assets, the better it'll be for crypto/Blockchain tech's mainstream adoption. Remember that regulations bring investors' confidence into the crypto market. Without them, how do you think they'll pour money into unprotected crypto investments? Unfortunately, Bitconnect, Terra/LUNA, and several other scams have scared away investors from the crypto/Blockchain space. But that doesn't mean it's the end of the world. Things will only get better over time as regulations are enforced. As long as individuals and governments work together, crypto won't be going anywhere soon. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Not to be a hater but Justin Sun is really a pro ponzi scheme artist. The introduction of USDD is timely aftet the downfall of UST meaning he just want to show off that with this move, he can overruled the fear by other investors on what happened on its fate. But literally challenged the system for what? People fomoing and mostly USDD supply probably is on his disposal.
It will take some time before it happened to tron, but if Justin will be careless like Do Kwon, its not impossible especially there are lots of whale hate Justin Sun.
Justin Sun always shills his projects in order to get what he wants. He doesn't care about decentralization as long as his pockets are filled with money. Just like he destroyed the Steem project by manipulating the network's witnesses (validators) for his own personal benefit. USDD and UST are exactly the same thing with different names. If investors are careless, they could lose it all in an instant if USDD goes all the way down the drain. I would steer clear from any algorithmic stablecoin as they're prone to failure. Only collaterized and regulated stablecoins like USDC and BUSD have a future. Tether claims to be regulated, but its quite shady in its disclosure of USD holdings. Fortunately, regulators will be weighting into the stablecoin industry to minimize scams/frauds as much as possible. Who knows if this becomes the time for the cleansing of the crypto market? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
What is the problem here? I'm quite sure El Salvador didn't buy Bitcoin expecting that it doubles its USD value overnight. Nayib Bukele must have been aware right from the get-go that Bitcoin isn't like some shitcoins that could artificially by pumped and dumped in order to make gains. Nayib Bukele must have known better.
But why do you guys look at some falling paper value? Although I'm not sure this is how a country handles its finances, if I were a president and there's some fiat money idly lying around gradually devalued and it's in the middle of a bear market, I'd also be proudly proposing they be used to buy Bitcoin instead.
Exactly. El Salvador's President knew what we was going to get into. Otherwise, we wouldn't had invested into Bitcoin in the first place. Bitcoin's been shown from time to time that it always goes up after a long-standing bear market. This is the moment to buy more Bitcoin, not to panic. Only long-term "hodlers" will see the benefits in the future once everything goes back up again. Haters will always criticize you, but you'll be the one laughing at the end as Fiat collapses due to inflation. Who knows if other countries "mimic" El Salvador's decision to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender in the long run? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
88 - Abiky Thanks, krogoth! |
|
|
|
bitcoin haters are countries.
This issue has been widely heard and has become a global issue. according to them the impact on the environment is broadly from bitcoin mining into 2 parts (electronic waste, energy consumption) the impact that is often debated is the problem of excessive energy use and this has become illegal in some countries for miners.
There have been many campaigns that have been launched badly for bitcoin by state bureaucracies around the world to create FUDs.
the only problem is that bitcoins are out of their control
That's certainly true, mate. Most countries hate Bitcoin simply because it proves to be an alternative to the existing financial system powered by Fiat. They think Bitcoin will undermine their economies, leaving them behind in the dust. Countries may be complaining about Bitcoin's "harm" to the environment today, but tomorrow they will be complaining about Bitcoin's ability to be used for money laundering and tax evasion (which we all know that's not usually the case). Governments will always come up with an excuse in order to get what they want. As long as Bitcoin is put to the ground, nothing else matters. I'd have to say it's been 13 years since BTC's inception, yet governments have been unable to shut it down completely (meaning the pioneer cryptocurrency is truly unstoppable). Who knows if Bitcoin remains as the only PoW cryptocurrency will the rest of the other coins turn to PoS? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
It should be pointed out that Wasabi stopped being reputable or even safe some time ago when they decided to cooperate with anti-privacy firms such as blockchain analysis companies to report all their users activities and also start censoring transactions. You can read about it all in the last pages of this topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5286821.0That sucks. I know they think they're doing the right thing by cooperating with governments but giving away sensitive financial information would make Bitcoin no different than traditional banking. The third party must be removed from the system for things to work out as intended. How would people obtain true privacy if there's a middleman in between? We need as much non-custodial (decentralized) privacy solutions as possible to help fulfill Bitcoin's original purpose. Anyhow, thanks for bringing this up. It's really appreciated. If you are looking for non-custodial solutions to obfuscate bitcoin transactions, consider Bitcoin-Monero atomic swaps [1]. Atomic swaps are basically a decentralized method to exchange coins between different blockchains without participants' necessity to rely on or trust a third party. When you swap your bitcoin for Monero, you break the link between past and future transactions, because what happens inside the monero blockchain remains untraceable and unknown to an outside observer or chain analysis company. Once you no longer feel the need for anonymity provided by the monero blockchain, you swap your monero back to bitcoin. It is arguably a perfect approach to mixing coins because it is impossible to figure out what happens between your initial and final bitcoin transactions. Another solution would be using on-chain mixing algorithms such as the recently proposed DMix, a.k.a. decentralized mixer for unlinkability [2]. Abstract—We present a protocol that lets participants operate a decentralized mixer to exchange coins in the Bitcoin blockchain. DMix does not need the election of any leader and respects both the unlinkability and the atomicity properties, so that there is no possibility to correlate addresses or lose funds using the protocol. We leverage the MuSig aggregate signatures. This aggregation scheme is based on the Schnorr signature scheme, a recent proposal for a ECDSA alternative, the current Bitcoin signature scheme. We also present an analysis of the method and mitigation of attacks.
[1] https://www.getmonero.org/2021/08/20/atomic-swaps.html[2] https://twitter.com/nobsbitcoin/status/1528701408341540865I think this is by far the best solution to "anonymize" Bitcoin without any third parties. You've given me the answer right here with XMR-BTC atomic swaps. Sometime ago, I've heard that the new technology (atomic swaps) is experimental. If that's still the case, then it wouldn't be ideal to exchange large amounts of BTC for XMR. Once perfected, atomic swaps will be a true game changer not only for privacy but for trading as well. Monero is quite a hidden gem that's often overlooked by the general public. At least, both XMR and BTC have been going strong after all these years. Who needs centralized mixing services (no offense) when we already have decentralized solutions? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
