Please correct me if I got it all wrong.

Should the prevention of crypto exchanges providing liquidity for cryptocurrencies be equated with shutting them down? I don't think so. That's probably going too far in its interpretation. If at all, it will probably just cleanse trading platforms of fake orders and volumes. If such prevention is implemented, thousands of shitcoins might lose liquidity and die. Well, it's going to be a problem to many but will also be a sort of a protection to a lot at the same time. After all, we all have an idea how huge of these centralized exchanges' reported volumes are fake.

And it's not about privacy. As a matter of fact, the death of centralized exchanges might preserve privacy more than jeopardize it.

I'm afraid you're making a wrong comparison here. Since apple is legal, oranges should also be made legal? Is that what you're saying?

Football is a sport. It doesn't have anything to do with gambling. If people place bets on football games and events, it doesn't have anything to do with the sport. It has everything to do with gamblers. If casinos and betting sites are sponsors of certain football tournaments and teams, it does not speak whatsoever of the sport itself. It simply speaks of teams' decision and tournament management and organizers.

I'm not sure where you got this sort of a theory. I haven't been closely monitoring this news lately either. So I cannot tell whether the winter has indeed this vital role to play in the massive troop buildup in the border. However, the winter will be done by March, right? The negotiations, especially because it involves the very delicate matter of regional security and stability, would probably take more than half a year.

Of course, going into the negotiation table during this particular season gives Russia an additional leverage. However, I doubt it will become the pivot point so to speak. I don't even think the development thus far would force Ukraine to cease participating in various NATO programs and deals.

Well, if a company is innovative and is very much up to date in terms of new available technologies that would help its business operations grow, it is likely that it would employ the blockchain technology in storing important data.

The use of blockchain technology has actually been implemented in various industries for a more efficient and transparent data storage and access. As a matter of fact, it's not just private industries that have employed blockchain. Even certain government agencies are using it.

Especially in the Cannabis industry, tracking and data access are very important considering how huge the illegal portion of this industry is.

If they aren't comfortable sharing contact information outside this forum, then the correspondence will be gone.

But there are a lot of other platforms outside this forum that many users here share. I've made a number of communications outside this forum with some acquaintances here.

However, how many users here are actually friends in real life? I guess not that many. There are probably just a handful especially among local users. Many are probably not interested in revealing their identities behind their usernames. I remember years ago somebody organized a local meetup of users here. I didn't find it exciting.

I guess the winter has nothing to do with this. This standoff has been going on for years, all seasons long. Even before the annexation of Russia of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine, the conflict between the two countries was already there. It wasn't as worse as now but it was already present. It mattered a lot that the leadership of Ukraine changed from pro-Russia to pro-Europe. But even prior to that, the two countries already have their history.

But still I don't think there will be an invasion anytime soon, not within the winter at least, if at all. But things will depend on how negotiations will develop. I am still hopeful that despite the military buildup there won't be any war, though.

Will there ever be a time when people will set aside their emotions and stick to reason in their investments? Or perhaps, to those who are selling during the dip or are selling out of fear and panic, are you overinvested? That's probably the reason why you are severely affected with the correction. If a dip or a bear season, which is a normal occurrence in any market, gives you a sleepless night, perhaps you are investing more than you can afford to lose. Or is it simply a case of low risk tolerance? Or perhaps you simply don't belong to the Bitcoin market.

The price movements of Bitcoin have always been like this ever since. Although the bigger picture has it appreciating, its short movements have always been highly unpredictable. No wonder why Bitcoin trading is oftentimes frustrating; it's because an accurate prediction has always been elusive. Charting doesn't guarantee anything either. So the entry of institutional money in Bitcoin won't really change much its price behavior. It has always been volatile, although with Bitcoin's market cap already reaching hundreds of billions, this volatility now translates to the price quickly jumping up and down by the thousands of USD.

Bounty campaigns may or may not pay you at all. Remember that many projects that are conducting bounty campaigns are scam. Others are half-serious or not all. Still others do not really offer anything at all. So joining bounty campaigns would either give you nothing or a small amount.

There may be a good project or two but it's gonna be a needle in a haystack. Perhaps it helps if you join bounty projects which are promoted by quality managers. Or if not, perhaps there might be some campaigns which pay you in tokens that already have value like ETH or USDT or BNB or whatever. Or why not join Bitcoin-paying campaigns? Explore all options.

Of course, this would easily sell in the UK as both of them are huge names in boxing and both of them are also from the UK. But this could have been an even bigger event during their prime. This must be a very exciting and anticipated match if this was held years before.

This is still a good fight to watch, though, despite the two of them already inactive and old. Their names could still easily ring a bell to many boxing fans.

If I were to bet, my money would go to Kell Brook for the simplest reason that he probably has more left in him than Amir Khan. But I think the odds could have been the other way around during Khan's prime.

It is possible, of course, but with the amount of leverage the US has with other countries, the result would be detrimental rather than beneficial to the country. The Unites States of America remains as the most powerful country in the world. It remains very influential in world affairs.

Everything would boil down to asking, what would a country gain or lose if it rejects the USD in trades and other international dealings? For now at least, the loss would be unbearable. The gains might be minimal to none at all. The rejection of the USD will have a tremendous ripple effect to the country which would include trade, loans, grants, foreign investments, military, and so on.


Nope, the US Dollar is the official currency of El Salvador. It is the country's legal tender.

Basically, an altcoin's value is either sourced from its own project's success or simply sucked from Bitcoin's popularity or from a certain crypto hype. Majority of the altcoins, though, are simply parasites. Bitcoin represents the entire crypto market such that when Bitcoin is bullish much of the entire crypto market is also bullish. But when Bitcoin is down, the entire crypto market will also be down. When altcoins fall down together with Bitcoin, since many of them don't have anything really, not a working product, not a community, and so on, many of them can hardly get back again.

We've always been told, buy low sell high. To those who are interested with Bitcoin, how low should the price go so that you will start buying? Bitcoin has gone to $65,000 and above. The price then fell down to as low as $33,000 or even lower. If one is interested to have Bitcoin, I cannot find any reason why buying has to be put off. Why not buy during the dip? Will there be a $20,000, $15,000, or $10,000 anytime soon? The price has been in a bargain. Are we gonna wait for the market to give us a signal that the bull run has resumed and that we should start buying already?

This has been a repeated call. But it seems the president is adamant on his government's new policy.

I don't understand the IMF, though. Why do they have to treat the country's adoption of Bitcoin as a big deal? It is not as if the country of El Salvador is ditching fiat for Bitcoin. It is not as if El Salvador is removing the USD as a legal tender. The USD is still the country's official currency. Bitcoin is indeed a legal tender but it is probably there playing the role of an alternative. I haven't been there myself but I doubt it's acceptance is widespread across the country.

The number one thing, of course, is when the casino steals money from its users. That could happen in so many ways. For example, the casino freezes the user's funds all of a sudden without proper explanation why, or the casino did not pay the prize money, or the casino suddenly withholds withdrawal and requests KYC, and so on.

These are all stealing. This turns me off. Especially if the casino has a mountain of unsolved complaints of this kind, I would label that casino scam right away.

I don't know how correlation is being understood by the writer of that article. What I know is that having the same direction once in a while does not mean correlation. Both the stock market and the Bitcoin market have only a couple of directions, up and down. When the stock market goes up while the Bitcoin market is also going up; it does not automatically suggest correlation. Correlation is more than just sharing the same movement every now and then. Mostly this is simply coincidental. Correlation means relationship. And Nasdaq and Bitcoin don't have that.

Should you learn about Nasdaq? It depends on your interest. But it's not a matter of should. Generally, you don't have to.

A CBDC is both a better and worse version of fiat depending on how you look at it. In terms of privacy, however, it is definitely worse than the good old cash. At least with the old bills and coins, transactions could be anonymous and irreversible, big brother could not snoop each time your money moves, they couldn’t be frozen, and so on. With a CBDC, you are very closely monitored. Whatever little sense of ownership you have with money is taken away.

If privacy matters to people, the demand for Bitcoin would spike the moment a CBDC will replace the old form of fiat.

I am a retail user and I didn't sell, not a single Satoshi has left my wallet for quite a while now. On the contrary, I am happily stacking Sats. I work and get paid in Bitcoin. Whatever I earn stays in my wallet. No conversion is made. I have to find other ways to live, but I don't touch my Bitcoin salary.

Anyway, there's no way we can tell whether the retail users in this forum have stronger hands than those who are outside. It seems to me they're not, there's nothing special with the users here except perhaps the advanced ones or the OGs.

You might want to have a copy of the seed yourself. You're the one who knows better.  

Of course, nobody knows how much a Bitcoin would be 15-18 years from now. But with a hundred dollars, I doubt it will reach a thousand by the time it matures. So that wouldn't still be a lot of money.

How much Bitcoin would probably be 15-18 years from now? $150,000? $200,000? $300,000? Possibly. Even then, that $100 might still not be enough to give your beautiful nephew a good university education.

But that's probably not the point. The point is that you're saving something that does not decay. On the contrary, it becomes more valuable over time. You do it with fiat, your savings would only go to waste. Not only does its value naturally depreciate, inflation has recently been moving beyond the tolerable limit. It could happen many times in 15-18 years.

So if you or your brother's family intend to save a little more extra every once in a while for the child's future, it might well be done in Bitcoin rather than fiat.

You're a good soul!

We, Bitcoin supporters, oftentimes think that Bitcoin is already playing a huge role in the world of e-commerce, that it's a significant loss to international companies not to embrace Bitcoin. That is probably wrong, at least for today. It could altogether be different in the years to come. But, for now, let us be realistic and admit the fact that Amazon, eBay, Walmart, and so on do not need Bitcoin. Again, at least for now.

So it is not about price volatility, tax, pseudo-anonymity which could be linked to money laundering, and so forth. It simply is a case of platforms not seeing the need, much less the urgency, to admit Bitcoin to their payment options.

I know we support Bitcoin and have a bias with it. But perhaps it's better to be objective about it and moderate our expectations.