The recent chart looks a lot like a bubble that has popped - we had a failed retry of $40k, some sideways action, dip below $30k and now there's a very weak attempt to go up again. This is all similar to what happened after the $20,000 was reached in 2017.

On the other hand, it all could also just be a correction on the road to $150k or whatever 6-figure price would be reached. Such corrections also happened in the past bull markets and people though that it was time to dump.

Both buying and selling is very risky at the moment, so whomever makes the right move will make a lot of profit, because a big up or down movement is definitely coming, it's very unlikely that $30k will be stable.

Do those proposed rules say anything about depositing to exchanges and other services that are subject to this regulation? Because as I remember, it was only about withdrawing to your address. But if there will be more rules about KYC and moving coins, than it won't really matter if you withdraw to your wallet first or send directly from pool - financial monitoring will either way want to know the origin of your coins.

There's still a lot of banks in the west that wouldn't mind dealing with Trump. And there's always Russian banks that helped him in the past.


It's not like Trump was disconnected from entire banking industry, so I doubt that proponents of removing cash would see this as an example of why centralized money is bad. Unfortunately, when truly eye-opening events will start to occur, it will already be to late to stop "cashless society".

Preparing for doomsday scenarios is a waste of time, if they will happen, most of us will be dead and there's not much you can do. If you live in a region with political instability, aggressive neighbours or high chance of natural disasters, that's when you should have some preparations for leaving the house. Bitcoin is actually more useful than gold here, because it's easier to transport, but putting all your savings in Bitcoin is really risky.

Even if you're not using your phone, it's still a bad idea to use it as a wallet for coins that are meant for long-term storage rather than daily spending. A phone is a device that can always be connected to networks, it runs on some proprietary software, unless you have rooted it and installed an alternative OS, it could have some malware or backdoors. Having a hardware wallet and multiple backups of your private keys or seed stored in different places is more than enough, just make sure that the wallet was generated offline and never touched an environment that is connected to the Internet.

It's like they say - there's no such thing as negative publicity, all publicity is good publicity. This is certainly true for CWS , and every time he gets publicity some new unfortunate person gets sucked into his cult. I think the fact that bitcoincore.org removed the whitepaper is already a huge win for him, some people would view it as a proof that he might be Satoshi and CWS himself would probably try to use it as such in the future.

Would have been better if all these companies instead pledged funds for any legal fees for smaller sites, like the mentioned bitcoincore.org in case CWS would be able to bring them to court, which I highly doubt he can.

The US hasn't been privacy-friendly for a long-long time. There's a high chance that this law will be passed in some form, but there has been quite a backlash against this law, so this will likely be taken into consideration, and I hope the new regulators will realize that it's just impossible to do KYC on self-hosted wallets, this rule will achieve nothing. The US seems to at least somewhat care about the opinion of business, so maybe the law won't actually pass, or at least will pass in a weakened form.

This is cool, but I don't think anyone should base any sort of decisions on the fact that there are such asteroids. We're hundreds of years, if not thousands, from making such things economically viable, so just like the end of Bitcoin's block rewards, this will only concern future generations. In theory this is a good argument for Bitcoin, but on practice you should think about the present and close future first and foremost.

This already happened in 2017-2018 - after crypto crashed, you could buy flagship GPUs like GTX 1080 for the price of 1070 or even less. The current GPU prices are also driven by other factors, like Trump's tariffs, global shortage of components, scalping, increased costs of shipping, but miner's demand is of course the biggest factor right now. So even if you take it out of equation, it still would be impossible to find cards as MSRP.

Remember when there was that whole SegWit2x drama and exchanges were seriously considering that 2x will replace Bitcoin, despite the fact that it had only one developer, lmao. We have tons of evidence combined in all the years that exchanges only care about short term profit, they don't do anything to help the network or even their customers, as evidenced by their slow progress towards adopting segwit.

51% attack is done by mining on top of some earlier block, which means that all transaction after that block become unconfirmed, and another transaction that spends the same inputs could be confirmed instead. In worst case, the coins that you have received in a block that was reversed will never appear in your wallet again. As its name suggests, 51% attack is done by having more than 51% of network hashrate, because it allows you to create a longer chain, or chain with more combined hashpower, which forces nodes to switch to it as per protocol rules.

In this case, the hackers have profited by sending coins to exchanges, selling them, withdrawing the money, and then reversing the deposit transaction, so they can sell these coins again. This is known as double spending.

To prevent it, you need to adjust the required confirmation time to network's hashpower. With Bitcoin 1-3 confirmations is enough for most purposes, with smaller altcoins you need to wait thousands or even tens of thousands of confirmations to be truly safe. IMO exchanges will realize that this is not worth the risk and will start delisting shitcoins with low hashpower in the future.

The vaccine news have been priced in for a really long time already, when Pfizer originally announced their vaccine, the stock market reacted positively to it, while Bitcoin wasn't strongly affected, because it already decoupled from traditional markets. Right now there could be some correlation with macroeconomic events, especially coming from the US - for example, the recent correction coincided with strengthening of the US dollar. And fears of inflation have powered this rally to some extent.

No coin is even close to being as profitable as Ethereum, so once Ethereum fully switches to PoS, GPU mining will be in a tough spot and it's a good thing for the society, because GPUs will be going to their primary consumers - gamers, workers and  researcher instead of miners who just create worthless shitcoins.

Yes, PoW mining will still be around, but it will become very marginal, only miners with the cheapest electricity will be able to afford it.

Coins are leaving exchanges for now, but as your chart shows, they will probably return at some point. So, there's no reason to be overly enthusiastic about, it's not like there's some awakening happening in the Bitcoin community where people realize that centralized exchanges are evil and Bitcoin was meant for peer-to-peer transactions only.

And this trend isn't even a good trading indicator, we're 25% down from the ATH while coins continue to move out of exchanges.

You need to understand the difficulty adjustment algorithm. If it takes longer to produce blocks because miners are switching off, the difficulty will drop, which means the profitability will increase. With the lowest possible difficulty it's possible for just one person to mine on their CPU, which is what Satoshi did in early days. If mining becomes unprofitable, then the difficulty will drop until it becomes profitable, simple as that.

This is so dumb, how does a photo with an address proves that you own it? You can take a photo with any address that you want, so if your goal is to withdraw to someone else's address, this regulation is not stopping it. Even signing a message isn't a strong proof, you can ask someone else to sign a message with their address. This law achieves absolutely nothing except for creating annoyance to users of centralized exchanges and more work the exchanges. It won't do anything to prevent money laundering or other illicit activity, and it won't even allow the government to better track Bitcoin transactions.  Whomever came up with this idea must be completely tech illiterate.

Lots of rich Bitcoiners would gladly cover the legal fees if this was taken to the court, but I doubt it would ever go that far, this is just some weak patent trolling that would get dismissed very quickly. Craig already tried to start many lawsuits, and none of them were ruled in his favor. I think the decision to remove the whitepaper from bitcoincore.org was way too quick.

If a coin gets successfully 51% attacked, it probably should no longer exist, because it means that it's not safe to use. Imagine if your bank started randomly reverting transactions - no would use such bank, so why should we keep crypto to lower standards? I think the fact that altcoins that get 51% attacked, even many times in a row, and yet still don't lost a large portion of their value, it means that the market is kinda irrational now and ignores the most basic fundamentals in favor of pure speculation.

Ethereum didn't stop following Bitcoin's price just because it had one independent price movement, it's just that for now Bitcoin is staying on the same level, so we can't observe the price coupling of BTC and ETH. But if Bitcoin would make a big move now, regardless if it's up or down, ETH and all other alts would follow, that's how it always been on this market, because so many volume is happening on ALT/BTC market.

I don't care what Musk or Saylor have to say about Bitcoin, no one can make me change my perception of Bitcoin that I had formed throughout all these years, so it's gotta be a big yawn from me. Beginners shouldn't listen too much to gurus, they should learn from many sources instead.

And I don't get why people think that Elon is an expert on everything, being the richest man in the world does not make him the smartest.