Yet we still read from time to time about a billionaire or at least a multi-millionaire saying that they own Bitcoin and it's a good investment. Maybe Michael Saylor shouldn't speak for "all" billionaires - after all, they are people, and people can have different views. Some billionaires probably don't care about "supporting anarchists" as long as they get profit, and others might not believe that Bitcoin "supports anarchists", or that anarchism is a huge deal.

It's like if people refused to invest in the Internet, because there's darknet, or even just the fact that there's a lot of awful things on the clearnet, and no one can stop that. Everyone, including billionaires, agrees that the government shouldn't control the Internet like they do in China, so why should they have a radically different opinion on Bitcoin?

Are you concerned that the future "generation" of Bitcoiners will be less knowledgeable about Bitcoin? I think it's not a problem, as more people come to crypto, there will be more people who understand only very little about. It's like with any other invention - first come the enthusiasts, then the masses who only interact with the surface. Early Internet was full of geeks, programmers, hackers, now people who can only visit Facebook and check emails are still using the Internet on a daily basis. Similar thing will happen with crypto - some people will only interact with it through exchanges without ever installing wallets.

You can safely assume that on this forum account's age is roughly equal to the time of hodling Bitcoin, providing that an account is still active. Think about it, if someone registered on Bitcoin forum, that's because they are interested in Bitcoin, and if you are interested in Bitcoin, you have to own it, there's no other way to interact with it. And if someone is active to this day, that's because they still own Bitcoin, because why else would they be on this forum?

Of course there can always be exceptions, most notably people who only own altcoins, but still it's a good approximation. So, if you're looking for big data, search for this forum's account age stats.

The point of gambling is not winning, the point of gambling is having fun. People find rolling virtual dice more fun than waiting for next Litecoin block, simple as that. If you want to attract more gamblers with your 0% house edge offer, then just make 0% house edge versions of the popular games, like the mentioned dice or lotteries. But I won't be surprised if people would still choose places places with non-zero house edge, because overall user experience is more important. People get used to interface, they for connections with fellow gamblers in chat, etc.

I have 56 sMerit, which I would like to use to help good newbies rank up faster. So, here are the rules:

1. You must be of Newbie rank
2. You can nominate only one of your posts
3. The post must be made before my topic was created
4. You must explain why your post deserves merit and how much merit
5. You can only nominate replies - opening posts are not allowed

My goal is to show newbies that making good replies on existing topics is more important to this forum than creating new topics.

Bitcoin can't go for long at this rate, but it can go for some time. And it actually doesn't need to constantly go up to still be in a bull market, if you look at the past rallies, they had ups and downs, and periods of relatively stable price, and the price grew in rapid spikes followed by only small corrections. So, even if we'll crash to something like $16k, which is very possible right now, we'll likely retry $20k after that, eventually break it and a new level will be established.

This can't be true for all password managers, many of them allow you to opt out of cloud backups, or choose your own self-hosted server. And cloud storage itself doesn't mean that your passwords can be easily stolen, the database file is always encrypted, so if your password is strong, even a cloud storage hack won't do much on its own. Password managers are considered a best practice among all security experts, so a long as you do everything properly, they will be more secure and safe than whatever a non-expert person can come up on their own.

I think it's good to see investors having more and more options how to trade Bitcoin, competition is something that we should welcome, but how do they make money if they have zero fees? I hope there's no hidden fees or other tricky mechanisms that in the end overcharge investors.


I'd say it's too early to call the non-crypto markets "old jurassic", there's really no alternative to them. DeFi is a failure, DEX ecosystem is just a tiny beta-test, Bitcoin itself is only an asset or a currency, it can't do everything.

Telling people to "sell your services for Bitcoin" is extremely common on this forum, so anyone who spent at list a little bit of time here already knows it. The problem is, no one is telling how to do this in detail, so it all sounds like that "if you're homeless - just buy a house" meme. And the reality of Bitcoin-paying jobs is that it's very hard to find them, so some in-depth advice would be much more appreciated than simply telling people to go find one.

Theoretically, there's a huge difference between Btcoin and any fiat currency: because Bitcoin is both digital and decentralized, any store in the world can technically accept it if they have Internet connection, which is not true for fiat currency, as most countries restrict or don't allow foreign currency to be used for payments. So, in theory, Bitcoin could be mass adopted, if only people were willing to do so.

Just as I suspected when I saw the title, they used debit cards, which of course makes it significantly more easy to spend "bitcoin", since merchants won't even have to deal with Bitcoin, it will be automatically converted to whatever currency the merchant accepts. But this is against the core principle of Bitcoin of having no middlemen.

I don't think this story proves anything, living 100% on Bitcoin is like trying to write a book without the letter "e" - possible, but very hard and time-consuming. This isn't a proof that mass adoption is happening.

This isn't correct, it's one thing to buy or sell crypto and withdraw the funds, and another to store your ETH on a custodial platform that can be hacked and so on. Plus there can be additional risks with stacking - maybe they will suddenly change the terms and start taking bigger fee, or they will use voting power to support a less popular chain in case of a network split, or they could lie about how many coins they earn from stacking and effectively rob investors.

I'm not saying that Binance will do such things, but the risk and trust are there. Think carefully if you are willing to take it.

I like milibitcoins, because I'm very used to the SI, and having 1 mBTC ~ $19 makes it easier to calculate the amounts I typically think about in my head. If Bitcoin will be worth millions, than microbitcoins aka "bits" will be more convenient, though milibitcoins would still be useful when you'll deal with thousands of dollars of value in BTC.

I think now is still too early for sats and bits, they would result in too much zeroes in numbers for typical payment, and this can cause errors, especially if a website has poor user interface and doesn't properly separate digits to make them more clear.

Unlike shitcoin projects, Bitcoin developers don't make any promises about Bitcoin's adoption and usability. It's not a problem if Bitcoin won't achieve mass adoption, or if it will happen after decades - both Bitcoin's network and Bitcoin development are decentralized, so there's no strict timeframes for any goals.

Satoshi was quite optimistic that Bitcoin can be mass adopted, but still he never said for sure that it's going to happen, or that it must happen for Bitcoin to be counted as success.

In my book, Bitcoin is doing good as long as at least some people use it.

Bitcoin is a currency, so regulating exchanges is a pretty big deal. If governments can regulate the majority of Bitcoin's volume, then it's pretty close to having Bitcoin itself regulated. In this scenario there will be 2 parallel Bitcoin ecosystem - the legal one, which follows the regulations, and the shadow Bitcoin economy. If most people will interact with Bitcoin through centralized platforms like exchanges or PayPal, then the regulators may consider their goals achieved.

Bitcoin maximalism doesn't come from some emotional attachment to investment, if you look at prominent Bitcoin maximalist, almost all of them are people with good technical knowledge and many years of experience in crypto. They have seen countless scams, countless projects with big promises that flopped, countless "bitcoin killers" that now trade at 1 satoshi. Altcoins only go up in the long term because their USD value is tied to Bitcoin. If Bitcoin was removed from the equation, they would be just a more volatile and risky version of penny stocks.

Any sort of web tool is inherently less trustworthy than a software that you run on your computer, because every single time you load a webpage, you might get a different version of a program. Maybe today their message verification is legit, but tomorrow it won't be, maybe they can selectively serve a modified version of this program to certain users, and so on - there are many negative possibilities. If you don't trust the site owners, then you shouldn't trust anything on their site, because they are in total control of it.

There's a ton of ways to verify a Bitcoin message, like wallets or other sites, there's no reason to give more traffic to Roger Ver, even if this tool is indeed legit.

I still hodl the coins that I earned by participating in various bounty campaigns in 2016-2017, but I don't think that something like that is possible today. Back in the day I was earning $400-800 from them every month, these days bounties are so oversaturated that bounty hunters probably earn $20-40 or less. Even if Bitcoin will increase in its price by a factor of 20, it's still would be worth than earning money through any traditional method and putting it into Bitcoin.

For these purposes, you need to think about USD value - you goal is to get as much USD as possible and convert it to BTC.

You need to avoid centralized exchanges, you need to use mixing and maintain your anonymity to the highest levels, because any party that you deal with in your country could be an undercover police officer.


Vote for politicians that promise to decriminalize Bitcoin, support such politicians on social media, etc. This is the most realistic thing that you can do.

If all it takes to stop Bitcoin is to trade Bitcoin derivatives on traditional platforms, then Bitcoin isn't as resilient, or like some people say "antifragile", as some people though. But I don't believe that neither the Wall Street traders are going to manipulate it any more than the current crypto players are doing so, or that this would cause some irreparable harm. All the additional liquidity can offset the new manipulation, if there will be such thing, so it could be a net positive for Bitcoin markets.