I didn't read the report, but I'm skeptical.


A 2.75% change is nothing. It can change by that amount every day.

The truth is that in a thinly-traded market, the price mostly goes up and down with no good explanation -- just random timing of trades.

You have been fooled by the mainstream financial press. Typically, the price changes and then the media has to say something. They come up with some seemingly plausible reason for the move and report it as fact.

The truth is that the news media's primary goal is to confirm your biases so that you continue to read their articles and generate ad revenue for them.

Don't be stupid and expect everyone to just accept what you write.

If there is a cartel that consists of "CERTAIN" people, please list those "CERTAIN" people and provide the evidence that you have that shows that those "CERTAIN" people are working "in a perfect synchronization to pull coordinated attacks to attain the goal of price-suppression".

Otherwise, your are just spouting nonsense and there is no reason to believe anything that you say.

It must be manipulation simply because you don't know why the price is dropping? That's ridiculous.  

There are several online precious metal stores, such as APMEX and JM Bullion, that accept Bitcoin for payment.

The block reward is paid by a transaction in the block that is found (called the "coinbase" transaction), so it is immediate and permanent (unless the block is orphaned). The payment is made to an address supplied by the pool. Quitting mining after the block is published has no effect on anything.

Decentralization will destroy much of national sovereignty, and Bitcoin subverts a primary factor of control by a government over its people.


Becoming a rally point is one thing, but populism becomes dangerous when its power is then delegated to the rallying point.

This should explain everything: What is margin trading?


The most important point is this: a newbie should avoid margin trading. It is very risky, and you are likely to lose everything.

It is easy to explain how hash rate is affected by price, but not so easy to explain how hash rate might affect price.

I think this is what you are looking for: Mining Bitcoin with Pencil and Paper

This video is fun to watch too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3dqhixzGVo

The double hash is simply a hash of a hash of the data. It provides extra security in certain cases.

You don't need to know the details of the SHA-256 algorithm in order to use it. In fact, it is probably better that you not know it because if you know it, you might be tempted to implement it and make a mistake.

In the U.S., gains from selling gold are taxed at a higher rate than gains on other kinds of assets.

Suppose your cost of mining is $6000 per bitcoin and the price of a bitcoins drops to $5000. Are you going to mine 1 BTC for $6000 or are you going to buy 1.2 BTC for $6000? A smart person would stop mining and buy the 1.2 BTC.

That is a commonly stated misconception.

First, miners must sell most of their bitcoins, even at a loss, to pay for their operational costs: power, cooling, rent, labor, etc.

Second, when it comes to holding bitcoins, miners are no different than anyone else. They may or may not sell the bitcoins they hold at a loss.

Finally, miners are only a tiny part of the market. Miners sell only 1800 BTC of the 600,000 BTC traded every day. Their behavior has almost no effect on the price.

The reality is that if it costs a miner more to mine the bitcoins than to buy them, a rational miner will simply stop mining.

A generic block chain doesn't need to use a cryptocurrency because it is just a distributed database. Also, a cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin is implemented using a block chain, so the question kind of doesn't make sense.

Regardless, I think this is the answer you are looking for: A decentralized database that records exchanges of value, such as a public cryptocurrency block chain, requires the representation of the value to exist entirely in the block chain in order to ensure its integrity. If the representation were to exist outside of the block chain, then it would not be possible to guarantee that the block chain matches reality.

Because of the decentralized nature of most cryptocurrencies, I don't see how a cryptocurrency-related firm could be considered to be an "issuer". Maybe it is an inaccuracy of the translation or an additional law-specific meaning of the word (similar to how a bitcoin trader is considered to be a money "transmitter" in the U.S.).

The article said there were $103 million in "trading" losses, but that $85 million of that were unrealized, which means only $18 million were actually due to trading, and $85 million were due to losses in the value of the bitcoins they hold. Those unrealized losses are real -- they directly affect the value of the company, but they are not a surprise and not necessarily an indication of poor management. Anyone who has held bitcoins since the beginning of the year has had similar results.

You showed the difficulties in diversifying between different coins, but you didn't explain why it is "bad". Done correctly, diversification is never bad.

If you want to diversify, you must choose non-correlated assets. Non-correlated coins do exist. Just look at the article's 2017 chart. BCH was not correlated with BTC, so diversifying into BCH was a good choice. This year, however, you will need to find other coins.

The article seems to say that you want a negative correlation in your investments. That is wrong. You want a correlation that is close to 0. A negative correlation may reduce risk, but it also reduces return. For example, the correlation between buying and short selling a single asset is -1. If you did both at the same time, your risk would be 0, but then your return would also be 0 (ignoring fees).

Apparently, everyone doesn't know. Only 75% said it was risky.

I feel sorry for the other 25%. Because of their ignorance, they are going to end up with nothing, regardless of what happens to Bitcoin.

It is probably ok. Read this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1964959.0