I see CBDC very worrying what comes to "traditional" cryptocurrencies. Governments are going to regulate cyrptos to the death and take market share easily.
They don't have to say it, but governments can use for example "airdrop" to make their CBDCs the most held crypto in the country/world with a push of the button... just create "wallets" for everyone based on for example social security numbers, etc., and airdropping a few crypto dollars to every citizen.
In a such scenario, what are the ways for Bitcoin and alts to compete? ...and ultimately there are no rooms to compete because of regulations, you need to be a bank to be allowed to exchange etc cryptos. We're not yet there, but dreams of wide adpotion will eventually turn against the whole crypto community. Let's have fun as long as it's possible, and create cryptos that are REALLY decentralized and impossible to regulate. That's the only way to survive in the long run. Trust me.
Exactly. The launch of CBDCs will put crypto to the test as governments increase regulatory pressure. By encouraging the use of government-issued digital currencies, most people will have no need to turn to crypto as an alternative payment system. A Digital Dollar would be as fast and cheap to use as crypto (probably even better) with added convenience. Only those who care about their privacy or want to escape from the clutches of central banks and governments alike will use crypto for day-to-day payments. One thing for sure is that increasing regulations will only do more harm than good for the mainstream adoption of crypto/Blockchain tech. We should expect constant opposition from governments in order to force people to use CBDCs. Ultimately, it's all about decentralization. As long as decentralization wins, we'll have nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts  |
|
|
|
Of course, there is no 100% guarantee that this will not happen, but I am sure that if major countries block exchanges and cryptocurrency, following the example of China, these exchanges will simply open under new jurisdictions and continue to operate. It is impossible that absolutely the whole world is against cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrencies are a business and it is bound to benefit someone in this world. The crypto industry is mobile. Remember how miners simply changed their location after the ban, the same will happen to exchanges. Yes, the market will be shaken by such bans, but after exchanges reopen in other places, the market will start to recover, just like the hash rate recovered after the Chinese ban. It is impossible to ban cryptocurrency completely.
If governments unanimously rely on a "One World Currency", then it's probable they will ban crypto altogether. But it's very unlikely we'll ever see such a unified currency, since countries can't reach a common agreement. As long as this is the case, it will be impossible to ban crypto for good. Even if they did, crypto will still survive thanks to its decentralized and censorship-resistant design. Centralized exchanges only constitute a small portion of the crypto ecosystem, as the rest is dominated by miners, stakers, and even decentralized exchanges themselves. What matters here is decentralization. With it, crypto will be able to stand the test of time regardless of a government crackdown or ban. Who knows if crypto lives alongside Fiat for generations? Just my opinion  |
|
|
|
Personally think that there is a future for SOL.
Even though yes, it is more centralised than a lot of the other blockchains, its performance when the network is up is undeniably good.
And there are just a lot of new apps that are deploying on the Solana blockchain right now, which is a healthy sign that a blockchain has a strong ecosystem going forward. Certainly worth watching going into 2024 in my opinion.
If Solana is able to mitigate issues along the way, then it will certainly have a bright future. Otherwise, not. Constant network outages will make people look elsewhere. Why do you want a high performance blockchain network when it's completely unreliable for day-to-day payments? Stability and reliability is of utmost importance to businesses and corporations. Without these key traits, the project will lose an ample userbase faster than you can imagine. At least, the project is open source. Hopefully, talented developers will improve the SOL blockchain to move things in the right direction. Who knows what will be of this cryptocurrency 5-10 years from now? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Doesn't really make sense isn't it? US now going back to Venezuela for oil when history tells us that they also imposed sanctions on them years ago because of corrupt leaders and it just shows the dangerous game the US is playing in either side. And now they gave warning to India for buying oil from Russia because Russia is giving them discounts? why not though is Russia is selling them for cheap now why not India can take advantage of it? double edge sword standard by the US.
The US needs to rethink about economic sanctions' effectiveness against Russia, as the invasion has no signs to come to an end. Dealing with Russia's allies (like buying oil from Venezuela) would make current sanctions meaningless. Other countries might decide to deal with Russia directly for oil, but they could also face sanctions by the US and its allies. The damage on the global economy is already done, so further tightening of economic sanctions will only make matters worse in the long run. There's only one way to stop Russia, and that is using force through military action. As long as the war is only between Ukraine and Russia, we won't be accomplishing anything soon. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
I was bullish on Polygon (Matic) until a few days ago when the blockchain halted due to an error. The devs applied a hotfix but the bridge will be down until a permanent fix is applied. It is problematic for me that such errors in blockchains occur. SourceNo system is perfect. Even those networks who claim to be extremely secure and reliable, can often experience "hiccups" along their journey. It'll be up to developers to mitigate these issues in order to keep the Blockchain as stable as possible. While MATIC was certainly a victim of a network outage, it's still a far better choice than Solana. The project is close to Ethereum by having a similar codebase. Most people are not aware of Polygon's true benefits, so the token itself (MATIC) is having a hard time reaching a higher price/valuation on the market. At least, development is on-going. Who knows what will be of this exciting smart contract platform by the end of the year? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
The thing about EOS and Tron is that they were both once big, but today they are not anymore and they are not doing that great. I am not saying that they will stay this way but it is clear to me that we are looking at two things that could have been great and had immense potential and just screwed it.
I mean if they were really good, they would have been in the top 5 right now, because they were loved that much and the future looked that great for them. Nowadays, we see ADA without even having a proper smart contract deal above TRON and that should tell you all you need to know about it. If they keep this up, eventually they both will be out of top 100.
Unfortunately, this is the case with new projects in the crypto/Blockchain space. They become big within their early days, only to fall all they way down the drain years later due to lack of demand. EOS was once hailed to be "Ethereum's successor", only to become a "ghost town" years later. TRON took the same path as EOS once Justin Sun left the project for good. It's now full of useless tokens and scam "dApps" with no real use cases for everyday people. Of course, the aforementioned blockchain networks have far superior performance than Ethereum. But without any substance to them, people will have no need to leave Ethereum anytime soon. With this, I think Ethereum will remain as the "King of Altcoins" for a long time. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
There's nothing dumb when you hodl, it's simply the best decision in the long term, unless you're a great trader. I read several times articles and they all agree that in the long term hodling is the best move. Congratulations for hodling for almost 10 years now, that's actually impressive!
"Hodling" for the long haul is only for those who can afford doing so. People who need the money right away to survive, won't be capable of doing this. The OP is brave enough to "hodl" Bitcoin for such a long time, even with the temptations to sell at higher market prices. If he keeps up, he might become more wealthy than any of us. It looks like Bitcoin won't stop growing in terms of mainstream adoption, so it probable prices will be a lot higher in the future. We should do the same thing as the OP in order to achieve long-term success. Who knows if you become the next lucky person with an ever-increasing Bitcoin price? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
I think one aspect that causes most countries not to legalize cryptocurrencies is its fluctuating prices and not being sure of a decentralized cryptocurrency system that is considered to be a threat to their current monetary system. Many countries that until now do not have clear provisions to legalize bitcoin. They are still waiting for the development of bitcoin in the long term to legalize bitcoin-like el Salvador.
Exactly. The risk of adopting Bitcoin as legal tender is simply too high to bear. It'll be impossible to keep up with the constant fluctuations in price in order to use Bitcoin the same way as cash. For this and many other reasons, I don't think crypto will replace Fiat 10 years from now. With decentralization, people can truly enjoy financial freedom. While crypto may never replace Fiat, it could certainly become a "force to reckon with". 10 years is a lot of time in the crypto/Blockchain space, so I'd expect a lot of achievements by then. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Yes, it is nonsense when they twist the facts by saying that the centralized fiat financial system is better than the decentralized financial system we have with bitcoin.
The government's fear of a decentralized financial system is based on the possible weak use of their centralized financial system by the public. Many people will switch to better, more efficient, faster and more secure systems like bitcoin. That will be the reason why they are afraid and as a preventive measure, regulation is the way out. Restricting its use as legal tender is more likely to be enforced than completely banning it. The government also knows there are big advantages of cryptocurrencies to increase state revenues.
Anything that goes against what was established by the government in the first place, will see constant opposition in the long run. Crypto threatens the very existence of Fiat (national currencies), so the only way to control it is by regulating it. Of course, this cannot be achieved with complete success due to the way crypto was designed (decentralization + censorship-resistance). But growth will certainly diminish in order to help push the adoption of centralized Fiat as a whole. I think there's no need to worry about regulations since crypto's been battle-tested to stand the test of time. As long as decentralization prevails, nothing else matters. Who knows if crypto lives alongside Fiat for generations? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Without a doubt we are going to see the day in which most countries will have their own digital currency, but it does not really matter, as long as they keep creating their currencies under the same economic principles then we are going to keep seeing huge inflation and economic crises that only get worse and worse, so even if governments increase the oppression against bitcoin, it will still remain as an alternative to their fiat system, as there will always be people like us that can see beyond their lies and if possible will avoid to use those digital currencies as much as we can.
Government-issued digital currencies are inevitable, as banks don't want to lose a piece of the pie. When launched, I think governments will become more aggressive against crypto in order to force people to use their currency. Even in a democratic country like the US, it's possible the government will turn against crypto to help boost the adoption of the Digital Dollar. Crypto will still remain as an alternative to Fiat, but most people will prefer CBDCs because of convenience. How everything will turn out to be in the future is certainly a mystery to all of us. As long as decentralization prevails, nothing else matters. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
I feel like MATIC's infrastructure is a little more mature due to things built on Ethereum being a copy/paste to work on Polygon. That makes it incredibly easy for developers to build as well as for existing organizations to assimilate. Solana requires a bit more specialized attention and new wallets that most users would have to go out of their way to get ahold of. Solana has seen a lot of attention the past year, and I think the big difference between the two is L1 vs L2. So I guess your preference should rely a bit on whether you are wanting to use something brand new or something that is attached to another project. Personally, I like that MATIC is basically Ethereum without the high fee issues.
I concur. MATIC is basically the same as Ethereum, but with improved performance. Solana is a completely different Blockchain with its own consensus algorithm and codebase. It's much faster and cheaper to use than Polygon/MATIC, but it's completely unreliable. People will need to choose between the two depending on their needs. It doesn't matter which Blockchain it is as long as you're able to get the most out of it. Usability comes first above all else. As long as the aforementioned Blockchain networks are useful, nothing else matters. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
The price of Bitcoin can be attributed to several things happening at the moment. Take the war between Ukraine and Russia which has led to highly fluctuating market trends globally. In addition, the bull run seems to be over so market is currently having a general correction as expected. Hopefully we can bounce back pretty hard after June.
There are many factors that can either directly or indirectly affect Bitcoin's price. It could be the current Russia-Ukraine crisis, insider manipulation, or simply FUD by the mainstream media and other entities. What matters here is not the price of a Bitcoin, but rather its usefulness as a censorship-resistant medium of exchange. As long as the pioneer cryptocurrency works as intended, nothing else matters. People just have to learn how to live with Bitcoin's volatility in order to get the most out of it. With how successful Bitcoin's been since day one, I'm certain it'll reach a higher price within the not-so-distant future. We need to be patient in order to achieve great results in the long run. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
The majority of users today prefer low transaction fees and being able to trade multiple currency pairs on one platform and we can convert to fiat quickly. I think this is the reason CEX is still popular.
Decentralized exchanges are still heavily restricted, but if centralized exchanges close completely, then developers will focus on developing and promoting the entire decentralized exchange to in line with market needs.
But the hypothesis that the entire CEX is banned is almost impossible. Instead of the government against, the government will make strict regulations or through CEX the government can control our transactions.
Never say never since governments are capable of doing anything in order to avoid losing power in the long run. Banning centralized exchanges altogether would be the ideal strategy to diminish crypto usage within the country. China did ban centralized exchanges with success, so it's probable other countries will do the same if they feel crypto threatens their economies. Without centralized exchanges, I guess developers will focus more on improving decentralized exchanges' performance. Liquidity for DEXs will surely increase as people pour money like crazy in these platforms. While the total ban of centralized exchanges won't destroy crypto completely, it will certainly have an impact over its mainstream adoption. Market prices will probably go down the drain as most big investors will be afraid to join the crypto/Blockchain space. But Blockchains themselves won't disappear because of their decentralized and censorship-resistant design. Who knows what the future holds for the entire crypto/Blockchain industry? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Username: Abiky Post Count: 9768 (including this one) BTC Address (must be SegWit): 3C73jM8AVhzQVXSpNdddLZwa9ey7qEynoh Signature will be changed immediately if accepted. Thanks!  |
|
|
|
Payments on your accounts.
I'm confirming this past week's payment. Thanks again DogecoinMachine and Crypto.Games team! |
|
|
|
It is still a joke and will be. When the crypto market will get to the maturity those meme coins will start to die slowly because of no real use.
If you thinking of a long term investment in Doge it might not be that profitable but if you are a day trader then you can make money of it like from any other crypto that has a big trading volume.
Dogecoin is still a joke, as even the original creators said so. The inflation mechanism built into DOGE tells us that it should become worthless over time (not the other way around). People are just foolish enough to invest into something that is driven by pure speculation. Who would thought a guy like Elon Musk could make Dogecoin reach new heights? Believe me, Dogecoin is only good for day trading or as a short-term investment. If you're looking for something serious, I'd suggest you look elsewhere. If hype for the "meme" coin continues to decline, I'm afraid we'll be seeing prices below $0.01 again. That wouldn't matter since crypto is all about utility (not the money). Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
My one & only reason for dabbling with alts is to get more bitcoin. I can’t be any clearer or honest than that. There is very low utility & very small future success for most alts but if I can manipulate them to help me gain more bitcoin then easy work.
I think most people who are into altcoins do basically the same thing as you do. They usually "play" with alts to get more Bitcoin in return. After all, there's a wide array of coins with attractive rewards that can't be beat. "De-Fi" and PoS is where the money is, so buying and "hodling" altcoins in the long run will leave you with plenty of BTC in your wallet. Considering that 90% of altcoins are pure speculation, it's easy to make money with any altcoin than Bitcoin itself. Look at how DOGE went from being worth nothing to something since the start of 2021. Ultimately, a very small number of altcoins will survive while the rest will go all the way down the drain. As long as you don't invest more than what you can't afford to lose, you'll have nothing to worry about. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
To be honest, I do not see the point of those people who claim that they are "satoshi" or anyone whatsoever. Aren't they just endangering and compromising their safety with such declaration? Are they just purely doing this for pride and for recognition around the world without even thinking the possible outcomes in the event that people do believe that you are satoshi?
Anyway, what you guys mentioned is the most easiest way of proving that you are indeed satoshi. If you can move the BTCs stored in his wallet address and personally sign a message, then you would be able to prove that you are indeed the almighty satoshi!
I think they're doing it mostly because of the fame and fortune. With a huge stash of Bitcoins from Satoshi's early Bitcoin addresses, anyone can try to impersonate him with the intent of gaining mainstream recognition. Even Craig Wright tried to make people believe he is Satoshi by "faking" his ownership of Satoshi's early Bitcoin keys. People should just move on and focus on what matters most. It's not about Satoshi but rather the community as a whole. As long as Bitcoin works as intended, nothing else matters. So far, the project's been doing good without Satoshi thanks to its decentralized and open source design. Who knows what the future holds for Bitcoin and crypto in general? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
The interests of the state and the interests of the people very often do not coincide. Bitcoin gives great freedom, and now the leadership does not have the ability to control cryptocurrencies, so Russia has the largest dark market in the world. But the most important thing is that no one forbids the use of cryptocurrencies, and the current prohibitions in the form of payment with cryptocurrencies for goods are not controlled. I very often meet on trading platforms the phrase that it is possible to pay in USDT That's certainly true, mate. Just because people are interested in Bitcoin, doesn't mean it's approved by the state. Everything will depend on how beneficial Bitcoin can be to the government itself. In these troubled times where the Russian Ruble is falling, Bitcoin can be seen as an alternative or escape route from economic sanctions imposed by Western countries and the EU. Russia can also decide to create its own digital currency, but it can be easily penalized by other countries due to its centralized design. Something that's resilient, decentralized, and censorship-resistant would be the ideal tool for the Russian government to become self-sustainable and impervious from international sanctions. If Russia decides to approve BTC for legal use, then adoption for the cryptocurrency will soar towards new heights. That and also the fact that other countries will try to tighten regulations in order to stifle Bitcoin's growth in the mainstream world (but without any widespread success at all). No one can predict the future, so all we can do is hope for the best. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
