In principle, I agree with you, because considering the interest rates on savings offered by banks today, money saved in this way only loses its value over time. Investing in precious metals has always been a good option, especially when it comes to gold, which is still valued around the world, but for the common man, such a way of investing always represents a security risk because gold is something that bad people can always try to steal from us.

Bitcoin, on the other hand, is a relatively new way of investing and the majority is still very distrustful of it, and the volatility that accompanies it definitely does not help to assert itself as an alternative to gold.

On the other hand, although fiat loses its value due to inflation, in some countries it is still the first choice in which people keep their savings because they consider it a safe way, given that savings deposits in banks are insured by governments up to a certain amount (EU to 100k EUR). This tells us that people prefer the safety of their assets more than to protect themselves from inflation in some alternative way.

From what can be seen, it is not difficult to conclude that the winner is already quite certain, given that he only won a little less than 1/4 of all the votes - so I don't see how it can be in anyone else's interest to send PMs with such requests, unless is it about who has the most votes right now? I'm not accusing anyone, I'm just thinking logically, given that the voting results can be seen publicly.

I also agree with @ETFbitcoin that this topic will have no purpose if you don't do something concrete from what was suggested, and I'm sure you're not the only one who got such a PM from the same member.

To begin with, my opinion is that this topic does not belong in this board, because what do the tokens of a crypto exchange have to do with Bitcoin? Furthermore, all those who see CZ&Bankman as leaders and support them in everything they do should be ready to bear the consequences of the stupidity they support.

It has been shown once again why the tokens they print out of nothing are the biggest fraud in the crypto world, of course including stablecoins - all of it is backed with false promises and is worth no more than ordinary dust.

You have been on the forum for 11 months and you should know some things, right? If this education really goes in the direction in which it seems to be going, then a lot of people in your country will be greatly mistaken about what Bitcoin is and what bitcoin forks are. Maybe that's the key to this story, because your government has nothing against a centralized shitcoin that has Bitcoin in its name and is manipulated by only a few people.

As soon as I see that some crypto exchange is launching its token, it is clear to me what their priority is. There is not much difference between all those CEOs who are at least hypocritical bastards who say one thing and do something completely different - and when someone attacks Bitcoin, then they offer help in the form of some shitcoins platforms or turn their heads the other way.

Unfortunately for the minority that tries to protect their privacy and promote decentralization, the majority is so blinded by these people as some kind of crypto leaders who do good for the community, and they will stab us in the back whenever they get the chance.

#More DEX less CEX

It would be really nice if the Nigerian government really decides to educate such a large number of people about Bitcoin and blockchain, but as others have noticed, the article does not explicitly mention Bitcoin anywhere, but that is why it mentions the fake Bitcoin that has nothing to do with the Satoshi vision. Either they are so delusional that they don't understand the difference, or this is another attempt by Faketoshi to try to manipulate as many people as possible.

---

@Agbe, the source you use has been (and still is) extremely hostile to Bitcoin over the years, so it would be good for you and everyone else to look elsewhere for information.

Maybe you are under some specific influence of some projects that ended badly, but the vast majority of projects in the world of crypto currencies are centralized and that is exactly the biggest problem. If we take the example of Terra/Luna, tell me how centralized is better, or how is it better for one person to decide that POS is better than POW and steer the whole project in that direction?

I don't know what you see as the problem of Bitcoin decentralization and what exactly causes the damage you are talking about? Centralization is the real problem, because if one or two people decide on everything, are all those who participate in that project just pawns that someone can move around as they please?

If you take someone's money and invest it in something, of course you will be responsible or at least partially responsible for everything that happens afterwards. I was in a similar situation in the past and I can say that I regretted telling some people that it would be wise to invest in Bitcoin, because some were careless and lost their backup or were hacked, others invested much more than they could afford to lose...

At the end of the day, they all blame whoever gave them the idea to invest in something like that, so I advise you not to get involved in such things, let everyone be responsible for their money and what they will do with it.

What is even more problematic in your case is that this is not only about investing in Bitcoin, but about which coin to invest in. This is equal to gambling, because there is no doubt that some projects will pay off, but many more will fail very quickly.

The latest version on the Nano X is also 2.0.6 (I checked), and I don't think you have to worry about Ledger abandoning the model S just like that, given that they've been selling them for years and there are a lot of people using that device. In addition, why would it be a problem to provide support for all models, considering that it is about identical (or very similar) apps that are found on all models?

That is even better news, and I hope that even more shops, restaurants and private renters will accept Bitcoin, and that we will see good results in the time to come. I know that there are very conflicting views when it comes to LN, but for those who want to pay quickly and cheaply with BTC, it is the only logical way.

However, I would like to see classic on-chain payments supported, because if you sit down in a restaurant or cafe and pay the appropriate fee, the transaction will certainly be confirmed until you finish.

After so many threads about CBDC (central bank digital currency) why would anyone think that central banks are doing this to save national currencies? They are doing this to meet the challenges of the new digital age, and those who want to admit it publicly say that they are actually afraid of the increasing influence of cryptocurrencies, especially stablecoins.

As we have already concluded countless times, not only will such currencies enable the authorities to have complete insight into all transactions, but they will most likely be used to show that they are safer, better and more stable than Bitcoin or some altcoins/stablecoins. It is known that the EU has plans for a digital euro, but also that the current views are that the maximum amount per individual will be EUR 300, which means that we are still far from CBDC completely replacing existing payment methods.

This is definitely good news, not only for island residents but also for tourists who want to pay in Bitcoin. However, the question arises whether tourists can pay with Bitcoin in any other way or exclusively using the app of the company behind this project?

I hope that some other popular tourist destinations will follow this example, because they definitely have nothing to lose, and considering that the popularity of Bitcoin is growing year by year, I hope that there will be more and more people who will start using it as a currency. I will definitely put this island on my wish list when it comes to traveling🏝

You need a person who understands what Bitcoin is, and from everything he has publicly said on the subject, it is more than obvious that he does not understand what he is talking about. In addition, it is mostly ignored that this man does business with state agencies, and that he receives billions of dollars in support from the government for his business. Such a man is up to his neck in a centralized system, and one should not expect him to be against that system.

In the meantime, some users have decided to show what they think about the new boss...

I'm not in favor of the rules that say "you can't do what you want with your money", but I think that in this case the banks are somehow trying to protect their clients from very irresponsible behavior when it comes to risky investments. How many times have we read that someone invested their entire savings in some cryptocurrency because they were influenced by some influencer? After the investment is not successful, everyone is to blame except the one who made the key decision.

People often act very impulsively and without thinking, especially when they are in the safety of their homes and using mobile banking. Maybe this measure looks a bit ugly, but as @stompix already wrote, there is a way to spend much more than that limit, which is quite high (at least from my perspective).

Let's not lie to each other, most of the members are here only for profit and are always looking for a way to monetize everything, so I'm not at all surprised that someone had the idea that even merit sources should be paid for their work. Although money has always been the best motivator, some things really shouldn't be motivated that way because it's simply the wrong way.

As for titles and badges, I don't see it as something bad, especially if it is about some achievements that are really worth it and if they would be awarded on special occasions.

Sport is something that is universal anywhere in the world and we know that for a long time various companies that are connected to cryptocurrencies have been using it to advertise their services. Of course, this helps to raise people's awareness that there is an alternative, although it should be known that Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency that is advertised and that there are a lot of bad projects that are promoted through sports.

The entertainment industry is a broad term because we can talk about online entertainment in the form of sports betting or casinos, but also the film industry and increasingly popular streaming services that still do not accept cryptocurrencies. However, all of them are only part of a much larger puzzle in which there are many participants.

---

Of course they don't want to, because they bought Bitcoin for a completely different reason, and even if they want to pay something with the same, they face the initial problem of how to do it. As simple as it may seem to you and me, I know from personal experience that the average person does not want to think much when they need to pay something - a bank card with contactless payment or cash are much simpler solution than Bitcoin.

Of course, most people would never invest in Bitcoin if there wasn't such high volatility that can result in significant profits, I think that's clear to everyone. Here, of course, we clash with the conceptual idea that Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency as it was originally intended, but with time it became less and less attractive. People have always looked for reasons why Bitcoin as a currency is not good, and the main reasons were that the price is volatile, and that the confirmation of payment is not instant.

Part of the problem was solved by payment processors, and today with LN, payment with Bitcoin can be instant and very cheap - the only question is whether the average investor in Bitcoin will decide to use the same as a payment currency, or will remain only an investor looking for profit.

I think that even those who want to pay something with Bitcoin have certain reservations because they want to protect their privacy and not draw attention to themselves. Owning Bitcoin often means being a target not only of online hackers, but also of thieves who increasingly realize that it is much easier and more profitable to steal Bitcoin than to steal other things.

And I think we will all agree that they are not even illiterate fools who cannot calculate that globally, less than 5% of people are involved in some activity related to cryptocurrencies. When we add to that the fact that the majority invest in Bitcoin+altcoins exclusively for profit, then we can conclude that all these companies have completely different goals than accepting Bitcoin as a currency, and from the post written by @serjent05 we see in which direction the majority are thinking.

They want metaverse, NTFs, centralized blockchains and everything that can somehow be profitable, even in the short term.

I sincerely doubt that he read all the posts in that thread, and that there is some kind of connection between @Gallar and @BRINIRHA, whether they are alt accounts or just friends is a question that maybe someone will know (find the answer).


As things stand, it seems that the exchange of merits did take place, which makes the whole thing even more interesting

Happy weekend pump