Of course equities usually fit into the way that people diversify their assets, and you had mentioned that you had a form of 401k .. which would allow you to have some exposure to equities and bonds through that too... depending on how diversified that you might have that, but there are ONLY 5 fund categories in that one anyhow..

Surely, silver, gold and other commodities is a kind of a category in which bitcoin might not completely be able to completely replace their physicality. so there could be some limited use cases in having some exposure to them.. perhaps?


I am not resting assured from those two videos, so in that regard, I have my doubts that shamir backups are a slam dunk as better than multi-sig.. including that multi-sig allows for not having to bring all the keys together at the same place (even though surely Antonopolis had pointed out one of the dangers to have the  public keys for all three but maybe only needing the private keys for two)

It seems that one of the dangers that bitebits was wanting to lesson is the potential problems of being reliant on one manufacturer, but sure, if you end up overcomplicating your matters, then you become your own danger to yourself.

Hard to get excited about stacking the shitcoin also known as silver, but hey if you have ways to get it and ways to sell it that are comfortable to you, then you are likely one or two steps ahead of a lot of "us" mostly non-commodity holding normies.. and not even conceding the stacking of silver to be a good idea (even if you might be able to figure out the sourcing and/or the ways to liquidate).


Yeah.. I watched that from another time that you had posted it... it is quite good in a kind of nerdy way, as you seem to be suggesting, and I also forwarded it to some folks in real life.. and then also I posted it once or twice in other places on the forum without remembering exactly that you had been the one that posted it previously.


I don't really disagree with what you are saying here overall AlcoHoDL - however, there is a bit of a difference between entering a passphrase that leads to a previously used location versus one that leads to a bunch of empty wallets (that thereby presumptively would have to be created since the route had not previously been attempted).

In other words, if you enter in passphrase that leads to empty wallets, Trezor will provide a message:

"This hidden wallet is empty.  To make sure you are in the correct hidden wallet, please type the passphrase again."

And it thereby allows you to enter the passphrase again to confirm or to just exit out.

There is another box that you can check that says: "I understand passphrases cannot be retrieved."

On the other hand, if you enter a valid passphrase that has value contained therein, it will not give any message or prompt, but just open up to the wallet and the balances of the various accounts therein will be shown.

---

By the way, reading through some of this triggered me into looking into the decoy pin feature, and I surely do not see how to set up a decoy pin.  I did not even know such a feature existed on Trezor even though I heard that some other devices (such as cold card) has such a feature.. and they also have the brick me pin.. and I don't really like the idea of a brick me pin, but I do like the idea of erasing all the data... but I still cannot find how to enable such a feature on the Trezor..

Ok.. I just found it, and it appears that you have to use a "terminal window" in order to set it up, which seems a bit confusing to me.. and goes to show that some of us (including yours truly) are spoiled by GUI interfaces.

https://trezor.io/learn/a/create-wipe-code-to-erase-device


My use of the trezor seems to go in streaks.. and there could be several weeks that I am using it, but then not using it for months or even years.. and maybe these kinds of activities can vary - including that we might want to actually test out our device and system at least once a year and perhaps more often..   I have some recent business activities that are likely going to cause me to have to start to access the trezor more often, but surely I can see guys going more than a year without even touching their device.. which then could go to questions about whether we for sure know if our trezor is missing.. hahahahaha.. depending on how secure we might be in terms of placing it next to the TV remote or next to our computer, or in the bedroom between the mattresses or in a safety deposit box in the next city over or in our parents cellar safe or in another country that we visit once every two years.. hahahahaha


Don't forget the dangers of hypnotism.. or gosh are there truth syrums that someone could put into your drink. and maybe you really don't want to know certain things without having to consult with some kind of way to put some pieces together.. but if you enter your pin or passphrase (or even your 12/24 words) enough, it might get committed to your short term and even long term memory.. is that a good thing or not?.. I do know that the longer I take to access some of my information, it can sometimes seem very complicated, even though I had previously thought (a couple years earlier) that I had created a pretty straight forward system.. but then does it really work..

By the way, I have a little bit of a story, and I am not sure how much I should tell, but I had a situation in which I needed the seed phrase that was supposed to be in three parts and I was missing one of the parts (for reasons), and so I knew that I had two back ups of the three parts, and so I called up a life-long friend, and he surely is not very technical and even though talked with him about bitcoin several times, his eyes glaze over while he is looking at how complicated his flip phone is or that he is trying to get his remote on his TV to work.. (he doesn't have internet).. but anyhow.. I called him up, and I asked him if he could go to the location in which one of the pieces was located, and I would give him the code to get in, and then I would give him instructions about how to get to it while we were on the phone live, and he said o..k.. and he would call me when he was at the location.  It took about 5-10 minutes just to get to locating the place where the words were, and I told him that it would probably be 8 words, and he told me that it is only 4 words.. and then I remembered that it was a 12 word split up instead of a 24 word split.. and so when he read me the 4 words, he mentioned that one of the words was "xxcxxxxx", and I said that does not even sound like a real word, and he read it several times and told me that is what it says.  I said o.k... so I wrote down the 4 words, and I told him that I would let him know if I had any problems in terms of getting access to the wallet that I was wanting to get, but I would have to do it in a few hours.

So when I put together all 12 words, and I typed in the "xxcxxxx"  by the time I got to the second letter, there was already a suggestion that had the word to be "xxrxxxx".. so my friend could have had sworn that the word the one with the "c" and neither of us even thought about the word with the "r".. so sometimes simple mistakes can be figured out, but some kinds of more complicated mistakes might be a lot more difficult to resolve.

Oh.. and by the way,. the whole time my friend was telling me that he was not even going to try to remember anything that I was telling him.. a kind of courtesy message to say that he was recognizing and appreciating that I was sharing private financial information with him.. but part of the reason that I picked him to do it was that I already considered him to be someone who I could trust with that information and even more information than he might be comfortable knowing about.


ditto

Could be.


could be


I am having trouble with your expectations regarding what the Appeals court is going to be doing in its guidance.


They already told the SEC that it has failed to provide any kind of a reason and so therefore the Appeals court has told the SEC and the world that the SEC's failure to provide an any kind of a reason that is not arbitrary/capricious is insufficient.

Why would the guideline tell the SEC what a good reason might be?  That makes no sense.

Generally speaking the precedence that comes from the Chevron case, I believe, is that agencies have a wide range of reasonableness and courts are not going to second guess them as long as they provide a reason and any reason that does not devolve into arbitrary/capricious or otherwise in violation of various public policy norms.. Now that the court has proclaimed that the SEC had already acted arbitrary/capricious, the SEC has to come up with some kind of a reason that makes sense in the context of things rather than making it seem that they are just making shit up.. and why would the court give them guidance in regards to how to do their job in terms of thse kinds of matters, does not make a lot of sense to me.

Chevron remains the standard but the SEC already got themselves into a bit of a pickle by what the court had already ruled their behavior to be, which is arbitrary/capricious and really lacking any kind of a reasonableness .. and the court would not even need to agree with the SECs reasons as long as they can come up with something that makes some kind of sense and does not devolve into again being arbitrary, capricious or in violation of some other public policy norms.

Your overall point about the possible stalling tactics of the SEC to use the muddiness of trying to figure out what to do might be enough of a reason to grant Blackrock (and maybe others) before Grayscale, even though that could end up getting them into trouble if it appears that delay Greyscale is a kind of retaliation rather than also having some kind of rational basis that makes some kind of sense in the whole scheme of things.


Yes, it seems reasonable that the SEC could have some doubts in regards to a lot of the outstanding and ongoing litigation around DCG... and they likely need to attempt to take that into account in one direction or another, which could cause some uncertainties in terms of approving Grayscale.. .. so surely there remains ongoing uncertainties regarding how the SEC might end up playing these various matters in light of a variety of deadlines... and they likely already have some ideas where they want to go.. but then various court rulings do have to be taken into account and sometimes even some of the new applications that relate to Ethereum products (not wanting to necessarily consider that the shitcoins are any kind of a major factor even though, we cannot always know how the SEC might relate these various products, litigations and applications in order to justify what it is that they are doing, what they are saying they are doing and/or planning to do)

I appreciate your providing how your perspective has changed and even your practices have changed, but it seems that you also are not very hedged in terms of how much value that you might be keeping in various fiat systems.. which may or may not be very practical for most people to consider something like keeping all of their value in bitcoin... even though the most common error is in the other direction, which is the overwhelming majority of the world's population, seemingly more than 99% either do not have any bitcoin, or they have piddly bitcoin allocations... and so that's the way of the world and those who are overly allocated in bitcoin are likely going to prosper quite well into the future, so long as they do not end up recking themselves by overly allocating in such a way that they do not adequately account for their various fiat expenses and/or that there could be overwhelming periods of time in which bitcoin price goes sideways or even down and so hopefully you don't end up becoming one of those people who end up not being sufficiently hedged for either BTC price direction.

Fuck off with your "last word" lecturing to imply that there might have had been some kind of need for merit source members in the WO thread to take some kind of action to tailor and/or improve their smerit sending practices in the WO thread in accordance with your baloney fantasy standards... and your bullshit implications that your thread had any kind of substantive/meaningful (or even desirable) effect in the direction of the WO in regards to your quasi-delusional wannabe a merit czar ideas of "troll problems" in the WO thread.^**

**I would have said the same thing within that other thread, but you locked the thread after you set forth your fantasy-landia self-absorbed morality assertions.

Did you try clicking on the pic?

From this discussion, I think that I am starting to understand some of the ideas more also, and truely if you hafve to use a 37 or 39+ character pin, then holy fucking shit, you are not going to be using that wallet very often because Trezor frequently requires you to enter in the pin when you are doing various transactions and to confirm transactions.. and maybe it is just to wake up after a few minutes of inactivity and maybe some of those settings could be tweaked in order to not require the 37-39+ character pin every single time.. ..

I don't know the exact answer, even though I know what I do, and from time to time, I also tweak what I do order to try out new things.. and surely we can do what vapourminer suggested which then allows for various seed phrases to be entered each time we are going to use the trezor and maybe if we have a few days of trezor work we conduct a variety of transactions prior to deleting the seed from the device.. which does seem like a bit of extra work, too.. but maybe not a bad compromise..

I think that I had mentioned in another thread that I had some border crossing experiences in which I would not have the seed on my trezor but a different seed, so I am not totally opposed to the practice of carrying a trezor with either a dummy seed or no seed.. but then at some point, i had started to feel less comfortable with that particular seed, so I ended up switching seeds (creating a new wallet).

Another thing is that through the years, many of us might have old wallets and we may or may not be able to access them anymore, but there still could be questions about the extent of their value and even concerns that maybe some value could end up getting sent to them or maybe some historical fork could be extracted...so I am not even sure how to keep track of old wallets and old addresses, even though I have read some posts on the topic too.. with some members entering old wallet addresses into a bitcoin tracker (or watcher) and those seem a bit potentially dangerous practices too.. to be discovered to be watching certain bitcoin wallets/addresses might create inferences that you either own them or had owned them at one time... and then to have them in one place to be connected could be problematic too.. and some of us have probably already made some of those kinds of mistakes in terms of how we are managing our addresses.

I am not upset.. and yes, no problem if you want to bow out.. because surely each of us decide the extent to which to participate, to respond or not... and sometimes the posts get repetitious and other times they start to deviate too much from the thread's topic... and sometimes threads get locked or someone rage quits... I cannot say what might happen, but I don't see any kind of tragedy, yet, even though both DrBeer and I seem to be starting to repeat ourselves on some of these points... which largely might end up allowing for the natural death of the continuation regarding these threads of discussion.


Great point.. I was pretty sure that I had remembered making such a point.. .so yeah. .thank's for doing the "looking it up" work for me... You proving yourself to be a great little helper DrBeer.     


Don't stop.  I was just getting to know you.

You can't stop now.


Yes, and good luck with your no coiner (or is it low coiner?) status.  You are likely going to need it, and no one here, including yours truly, is saying that you have to be some kind of bitcoin lover and to allocate high amounts to bitcoin in order to potentially prosper, but turning a blind eye to bitcoin or arguing that people should not get involved at all seems to be where you are coming from with your ongoing nonsensical belaboring of dumb and non-fact backed up points.

So think about position size of 1% to 25% into bitcoin, and if you are on the bearish side, then stay on the lower ends of that.. such as 1%... you don't need to take more bullish stances in order to still be able to prosper quite well... and between about 2014 until 2020, I was largely suggesting the initial investment range to be in the 1% to 10% territory, but the investment thesis for bitcoin has gotten quite a bit stronger since March 2020 which justifies the movement up to 1% to 25% and also the movement up from $10 per week to $100 per week, yet at the same time, each of us needs to figure out his/her own particulars in order to figure out the right amount of balance in terms if we choose to be aggressive in our bitcoin investment without devolving into a territory of overly aggressive in such a way that we end up recking our lil selfies, which also seems to be part of the example of the guy that I had provided earlier for him to be buying 0.33 BTC at $15k and then to be selling that same 0.33 BTC at around $6k.. which surely was a demonstration that he had been over investing into bitcoin in such a way that he had not prepared himself financially and/or psychologically for the price movements that ended up being contrary to the direction of what he had expected.

I don't want to be a hypocrite because earlier I had mentioned a need to attempt to tailor our answers to what OP is asking and what might be some suggestions that are sufficiently related to what OP is asking without necessarily imposing new hypotheticals onto the situation - however, at the same time, these are public threads, and we are not necessarily going to ONLY go towards answering the OP, but also attempting to address like situations, and largely I gave my examples to attempt to rebut your claim that a loss of anything is too much, and I am trying to suggest that it is not the case, and maybe also to assert that we do not even know enough about OP.. even though he did let us know that he has already figured his own budget amount to be somewhere in the territory of $14 to $20 per week or maybe just $50 in a month which would be less than $14 per week.

But since we are in a public thread, we likely need not be completely constrained to the narrow circumstances of OP. because even OPs circumstances could start out to be like one thing, but many of us know that even cashflows and expenses can change and even views of bitcoin that thereafter end up contributing to changes in  terms of how much OP might become available towards bitcoin purchases and how much he has saved, which then might bring him outside of the parameters that he had initially described to be relevant to his then situation.

I think that in subsequent posts, OP also said that he had some reluctancies towards some of the P2P suggestions, but that he would be willing to look into the matter to see if he might find some that he considers to be suitable for his situation... I personally find some of the P2P to be complicated, but again, I have not really used them, except for the ones that result in face to face cash transactions. .. which may well be quite satisfying if we can get passed some of the potential security concerns in terms of figuring out where to meet.. which sometimes it can be helpful to have reputational systems for that when meeting strangers.. and then if there are local meet ups that can be good, but some people might be nervous (or scared) to get involved in local meetups, too.

Sure, there likely needs to be some motivation for learning and/or taking some steps to set up a wallet or to learn about how to use a bitcoin wallet if there happens to be "free bitcoin" inside, and maybe the recipient of the gift is not going to pay attention until the amount gets to be over a certain amount or they perceive some kind of value that they can get from the gift (the bitcoin) that they perceive to outweigh the costs upon them to have to learn or to have to listen to a parent who is "lecturing at" them.

Maybe the giver teaches the bitcoin recipient that the recipient has a duty to pass on and to hold the family legacy, and maybe that could be an incentive for some recipients to want to learn and to take on such responsibility.  Sometimes it is not clear how to inspire someone who might otherwise not be inspired or feel some kind of a need to learn.

How are you thinking that bitcoin fits (or would fit) into his life?






Anyone?






Anyone?

These are not easy questions, and of course, no one should want to either be reckless, lazy and/or failing to think through situations, but people can also get reckt or to miss out on a variety of opportunities, or paying too much in fees, or to be spending too much time on certain non-productive activities and worries by being overly cautious and unwilling to take various risks.

sometimes there are advantages towards having some money on exchanges and the whole system of bitcoin (and sure shitcoins too) come from price discovery and liquidation avenues being established on exchanges... so many guys here are lecturing about not keeping value on exchanges as if it were the ONLY thing going on, and sure on an individual level, you may well be motivated to maximize your own protections, but you also need to balance how much you might consider to be too much to be willing to lose and not putting yourself in a position that you are overly jittery.

And yeah, $500 has a different feeling to it for depending on your savings (investment portfolio) stash and your income so is different for:

1) someone who does not have any other savings and has an income that ONLY allows for $10 - $30 savings per week,

2)  someone who does not have any other savings and has an income that allows for $400 - $800 savings per week,

3) someone who has $10k in savings, and has an income that ONLY allows for $10 - $30 savings per week,

4) someone who has $10k in savings, and has an income that allows for $400 - $800 savings per week,  

5) someone who has $100k in savings, and has an income that ONLY allows for $10 - $30 savings per week,

6) someone who has $100k in savings, and has an income that allows for $400 - $800 savings per week,  

7) someone who has more than $1 million in savings, and has an income that ONLY allows for $10 - $30 savings per week,

8 ) someone who has more than $1 million in savings, and has an income that allows for $400 - $800 savings per week,

Do I need to go on with more examples to make my point?    Your feelings about the potential loss of $500 is going to feel different depending on the size of your savings and also the size of your discretionary income

And sometimes money is being made (or options are increasing) by using those third-party services, not that I am suggesting that there is a need to trade BTC or to get involved in shitcoins, but just that there could be some advantages by having money on third parties, especially if someone has a cushion and still might be considering ways in which s/he is not thinking in terms of all or nothing in regards to whether to use a 3rd party service but instead considering how much exposure do they consider to be acceptable in comparisons to a variety of other goals that they might have that might even place some value in having money (value) in various places... and I am not even referring to getting involved in shitcoins.. but there could even be some value to keep money in places that are known not to make money (such as keeping some money in fiat) and even to lose money, merely because it is good to have options of ways to be able to spend that money... or even to be able to invest if some opportunities were to potentially come.

Well, we know that holding for the long term is really what matters, so it is not always clear how much management would be necessary at the core, but some of the problems (and maybe challenges) come from having a cashflow that is coming in and the fact that we did not necessarily have a lump sum (or credit that we want to use on bitcoin) that was available to us at earlier dates, so as the money is coming in, we have to decide how are we going to spend it... including that maybe we have $100 to $800 per month that is extra that we can spend on bitcoin, and maybe it largely ends up being less than $100 per week, but at the same time, every once in a while, maybe once or twice per year, we get some kind of an extra lump sum payment of several thousand dollars that maybe we can consider towards investing all of it into bitcoin as a lump sum, or we might want to strategize with it... even though financially it might not be exactly clear if we might be better off just lump summing right way...

and the same is likely true with maintaining our BTC portfolio once we might have reached our accumulation goals, and then we are largely maintaining, but at the same times we are teetering between wanting to accumulate more and wanting to cash some out.

In reading through this thread, some similar kinds of ideas passed through my head in terms of considering how much value comes from making some of the subcategorizations of the various kinds of shitcoins and the various kinds of ways to scam people in various kinds of ways that largely amount to various kinds of affinity scams on bitcoin that either make comparisons or contrasts to bitcoin, whereby bitcoin is adding most of the value - while at the same time, the various shitcoins sometimes can end up serving as real world laboratories in order that if they do happen to come up with something that might work in bitcoin and provide value in bitcoin, then it could be added into bitcoin at the base layer or at a second or third layer.

So does the difference between Coin and Token really matter in the whole scheme of things, maybe not in terms of BIGGER picture ideas, but sometimes in terms of the devils of implementing some kind of a potential non-scam feature, then how the feature functions and the extent to which it actually had been tested could make some differences to know whether it was on a token or a coin and to thereby consider the various incentives that might have played out on a scam project versus if it were to be attempted to be added to bitcoin where the incentives might already be different, and then will the scam token or coin or feature have some positive or negative affects on bitcoin and would it be able to add value.. or make money for whoever is able to implement it on bitcoin and to be able to tie it to bitcoin rather than to some having it connected to some project that has questionable underlying base layer features.

If you think about it, $500 is not really that much to be holding on an exchange that has been around for a decently long time and there really are not any strong signs that they are going to rug pull anyone, even though they have been under quite a bit of pressure in the past year or so and even more so since November/December 2022... which likely shows that there were just people who were pissed off about the obvious scam of FTX going down and somehow wanting to make a connection to Binance and to blame Binance/CZ and a bunch of just nonsense spin because American regulators and financial institutions feel that they cannot control Binance/CZ as much as they would like.

Anyway back to the point about $500 not really being very much, even though it could take OP 6 months to a year to get up to $500 in his account, and surely the first year or so, there may be some desire to move some of the accumulated BTC off of Binance, but after a year or two, the percentage of his overall BTC holdings will become smaller and smaller and after a few years, maybe $500 worth of BTC purchases that are sitting on Binance might only be less than 20% of OPs overall BTC holdings size... .. and sure no one wants to lose 20% of their BTC holdings, and so there still is a kind of balancing in term of the practicality of the withdrawal fees.. and it likely feels much more manageable to be paying 1% to 5% on withdrawal fees rather than 10% to 20% on withdrawal fees... which could just cause disincentives to be spending so much on withdrawal fees so it is worth some risk of holding with third parties just to reduce the withdrawal fees to more acceptable levels, while trying to stay practical and without necessarily getting too greedy about the amount of reduction that would be prudent and reasonable.

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.