DCA, of course, is a good buying strategy. It makes you forget about timing the market. It is, after all, a difficult thing to be accurate about.

However, we should be realistic with DCA as well. DCA could have a different face, an ugly one more or less. Buying little amounts every once in a short while also means you're accumulating UTXOs. Buying $10 or $20 worth of Bitcoin weekly or bi-weekly could mean you'll have 40 UTXOs or 20 UTXOs, respectively, in just 10 months. That's going to be a heavy transaction once you spend it. You need to monitor the mempool and consolidate them once the transaction fees are low.

Would there be a way to make a claim without going through full verification? I don't think so. After all, how could they verify that you indeed own the funds that you're claiming? So whether it's through Grant Thornton or through Cogito, there will be verification. And both of them, I agree, are negligent. And incompetent as well. But if you really want to get back your stuck funds, I guess Grant Thornton is the legit way. Cogito seems a fraud.

My complaint is that they're repeatedly asking for verification despite passing it already. The entire process is not moving forward anyway.

I cannot remember how much exactly was a bottle of Coke back in 2021. I can hardly remember any price changes in the past 3 years as well, but it is indeed a good thing to take into consideration inflation when it comes to attaching the dollar price to Bitcoin. An inflation-adjusted price might give us a different number.

Jameson Lopp once mentioned that Bitcoin's ATH shouldn't be $69,000 because that price was only referring to the USD back in 2021. An inflation-adjusted ATH might be around $79,000. I don't know how he made that computation, however, or whether it's correct or not.

Completely might be an exaggeration. Remember that bank transfers are reversible but Bitcoin transactions aren't. But it won't anymore be on the platform when the buyer requests from his/her bank that the transaction be reversed. That's why you also need to be very careful in choosing who you deal with. To be safe, choose those buyers who have a high number of successful trades, trading partners, and feedback score.

But there are safeguards in these platforms as well. In AgoraDesk, for example, you will have to receive the money first and verify that it is the correct amount before you will release your Bitcoin.

You can also do the trade here if you want and choose those who have high trust ratings.

There are those who have declared that Bitcoin has already broken its ATH. I don't think it has already. I don't know which particular exchange where Bitcoin hit $69,000. It seems there's none.

Anyway, I think this isn't the start of the bull run. This is in the middle of the bull run already. We can't deny that the price has already been very bullish for the past months. This is it.

But the halving is not yet priced in. The effects of the reduction of the reward can't happen before it is even implemented. It will be felt only several months after it is implemented.

I'm seeing an easy $100,000 within the year or early next year.

I also fall into this trap but not always. But I think it's normal and even logical to a certain extent to commit this. Although it is indeed a fallacy to assume that the next roll will be different because the previous series of rolls are the same, it is also next to impossible for all the rolls to be the same.

In a dice game, for example, it is hard to happen that the rolls would all be <50 all throughout your session, so that if there are already 15 consecutive <50 rolls, it is probably wise to bet on >50 on the next roll. Again, it isn't necessarily a logical bet but it is very rare for all the rolls to continue hitting <50 until the end. It will be different at some point.

OP didn't say he/she spent a significant amount from his/her 1 BTC investment. What he/she said is that he/she invested 1 BTC but the last time he/she got access to the account, only 0.038 BTC is left. And so he/she asked them about it. He/she wouldn't have made a query about this if he/she was the one who spent it. It was gone because it was stolen by these scammers.


Large is relative. But to be safe we can just generalize that any service that asks for Bitcoin, large or small, is a scam.

This kind of service appears interesting.


It seems you are also guilty of this yourself. I did the math and it turned out that fee is a little more than 3.53%. I used preev.com's Bitcoin's price in computing your fee rate, by the way.


Terms of Service isn't only about KYC such that if you don't ask for KYC you automatically don't need it anymore. Even legitimate decentralized peer-to-peer services have TOS. TOS is about accountability, rules, conditions, responsibilities, dispute resolution, and so on. It's always better to have a reference pertaining to all this that is agreed upon by both parties.

I think you're just too emotional with your bets. You've made that bet in the first place because you think your team will win.

There were only a handful of times in my entire sports betting experience when I used the cash-out option. I usually go all the way with my bets whether my team appears to be winning or losing. I stick to my predictions. I even bet more and take advantage of the high odds in the middle of the game when my team is behind in score.

Anyway, to each his own. Cashing out is always an option. It's there for bettors to make use of, at least while it is still available. Bookies normally disable that function as soon as the game is about to end or when it is already clear that one team is certain of victory.

You seem to be speaking from an alternate universe.

What's your basis in predicting a financial crash in 2027? And if that happens, how can commercial banks from a hundred different countries be able to buy 100,000 Bitcoin each? As of today's price, a hundred thousand Bitcoin is already $6.3 billion. In 2027, it might already be $15 billion. Can each of them afford that let alone in the middle of a financial crash?

You amused me with your theories and stories. Are you sure Satoshi's offer to Warren still stands until today?

Utilization is how you use your income. I guess this is the most basic part of financial literacy. It is how you maximize what you have. As far as my observation is concerned, this is where a lot of my countrymen are weak. They don't seem to have a sense of priority. Most often, wants are perceived as needs.

In fairness, there are those who successfully diversified their income. They have more than one source. At the end of the day, however, they still don't have money. Why? The reason most often is that wants are perceived or treated as needs. And while their income is rising and augmented by side hustles, their wants are also rising faster.

You can check that on mempool.space (not memepool, by the way) itself, but remember that it's just a rough estimate. Transaction fees themselves are volatile. One minute a high priority transaction only has to pay 15 sat/vB, the next minute it has to pay 35 sat/vB. It is possible that your 10 sat/vB transaction could be lower priority at the moment only to be dropped later on.

Depending on your wallet, the estimated time of confirmation for your transaction is also shown according to how much you pay for the transaction fees. But, again, these estimates aren't accurate.

Bitclub Network is a scam. It was a scam before when it was shut down by the authorities; it is a scam now that they have revived their operations. It couldn't be trusted before; it can't be trusted now.

You should just stay away from it and advise everybody else to do the same, especially your family and friends who could have also gotten into this scam.

Say goodbye to your 1 BTC and learn your lessons. If you give in to that $100 reactivation fee, then you haven't learned your lessons yet. Do not pay. 1 BTC is enough loss; don't make it bigger.

Finally, avoid multi-level marketing schemes or MLMs. 99% of them are Ponzi.

Hodlers will always be rewarded in the end. But it isn't easy to develop diamond hands, precisely the kind of hands that hodlers need. If somebody bought Bitcoin at $65,000 in 2021, he/she needed no less than strong conviction, perseverance, deep understanding of Bitcoin, belief in it, and so on and so forth to be able to keep hodling through the years and in the face of extreme corrections and bear seasons.

It isn't psychologically and emotionally easy for somebody to have bought at the ATH in 2021 and be able to stick to hodling despite the price continuously falling down, even reaching as low as $15,000. But once you survived and get over it, things would be a lot easier. You'd even grow indifferent to bear markets. You'd learn not to mind them anymore, not to give a damn about those short-term price fluctuations.

I'm with you on this. I also disagree with them or this particular sentiment. Whether the cryptocurrency market is clean or dirty isn't the point. I guess we just have to bear with it. But Bitcoin will remain to be a cryptocurrency. We can't just pull Bitcoin out of that category simply because the market has already gone muddy with all the shitcoins and scams and centralizations.

It's ironic that a lot on social media who proclaim Bitcoin, not crypto or Bitcoin isn't crypto are themselves using and even promoting centralized platforms.

First off, the 21 million Bitcoin is enough to finance world war III and other wars and the rest of the world's business.

Do you think the US, and any country for that matter, would allow themselves to become just sitting ducks just because their currency is losing value? Even Venezuela has maintained a pretty strong armed forces despite their currency becoming less valuable than a toilet paper.

Bitcoin doesn't really compete with the USD. It isn't trying to topple it down. It's just an alternative, especially when it comes to online transactions.

Bitcoin is already shining. Whether the USD remains powerful or not doesn't matter. Bitcoin has its unique features that no other currency can offer. It will always excel.

Of course, it can be brought to the courts of law. As far as my country's laws are concerned as regards this matter, I think the children of the deceased don't have to personally pay for their father's gambling debts. It isn't their personal responsibility.

However, since the father left things of value when he died-- properties, money, and so on-- the debt could be taken from them. The children, as legal heirs, will, of course, divide among them what their father has left them. This can be done only after the debt is settled.

10 emails for the past 10 days? Doesn't it seem too much and annoying already?


This isn't an excuse, though. It is a shame for KuCoin to proudly claim they have 24/7 support and yet they can't resolve seemingly simple issues for many days. Not only are they most likely understaffed, what they probably have are also overworked, clueless, and underpaid outsourced workers from god knows which part of the globe.

They've already responded to you so this might be a waiting game now.

Also, as far as I know, savings can't be considered source of asset.

In contrast to the opinions above, I think insurance is necessary, that is, if you are running a centralized service or a custodial platform. People shouldn't just deposit their funds and trust the platform. Surely, it isn't enough to be told that their funds are SAFU, that their services are reliable and trustworthy, that the security of their users' funds are a priority. The history of crypto is replete with exit scams, hacks, rug pulls, bankruptcy, and the like. Insurance would be of great help.

I don't know how a smart contract-based insurance could be made fair and secure, but I doubt a community-powered insurance pool is a wise choice. I prefer collaborating with independent insurance providers that have long and solid track records.

Unfortunately, that's the convenient way and people love convenience. As a matter of fact, that seems to be their priority. If privacy and safety come with a hassle while trusting a third party is convenient, they would readily choose the latter.

Also, many people who are into Bitcoin, even knowledgeable ones, haven't actually gone into the Bitcoin rabbit hole. Their participation is superficial. That's why they easily recommend the likes of Coinbase and Binance and other custodial wallets that are popular. They're clueless. The danger is that some of them are influential and people would follow them.