Most people with bitcoins can no longer use them for transactions. That means that if Bitcoin is a store of value, then it is a store of value in the same way that collectibles are a store of value.

Like a painting, the value of your bitcoins is no more than the value of having them and the value of being able to show others that you have them.

The QR code is simply a computer-readable version of the google authenticator secret.

If you didn't save a copy of the secret, you can get it again (or perhaps get a new one) by disabling and re-enabling 2fa. I wouldn't rely on the site believing you when you tell them you lost your phone.

"network marketing" is a euphemism for "pyramid scheme". Most people lose money in a pyramid scheme. The people that make the most money are the operators because they risk nothing (except the possibility of prison).

I recommend that you read more before you post.

No, though many people confuse the two. A Bitcoin address is a base-58 encoding of a hash of a public key.

More specifically:
1. Determine the public key from the private key.
2. Hash the public key using SHA-256 to get a 256-bit value.
3. Hash the result of #2 with RIPEMD-160 to get a 160-bit value.
4. Encode the result of #3 using base-58 encoding scheme to produce a Bitcoin address.

That question was answered a long time ago with this:

You are focusing too much on the addresses. Let the wallet manage the addresses. There is no need for you to get involved. My wallet has generated hundreds of addresses. I have never needed to keep track of them. My wallet lists every transaction I have ever made.

Either way, you can reuse addresses if you want. Get an address from your wallet, and print the QR code on a piece of paper and laminate it. Now you have your one address.

I agree that the possibility is real, though actual occurrences are rare and inconsequential. However, people frequently believe that specific moves in the market are caused by manipulation without any evidence (other than the movement itself), and that is fantasy.

No proof --> fantasy.


Potential? Maybe or maybe not. Again, no evidence --> fantasy.

I would also like to note that I don't feel that many situations that some people might consider manipulation are really manipulation. Just as fee-paying Bitcoin transactions that seem purposeless can't really be considered spam, placing orders can't be considered manipulation. For example, is a "sell wall" manipulation or is it just a large order? Are high frequency traders really manipulating the market by placing and canceling orders, or are they just gaining information or perhaps using game theory to compete against other traders?

Unless anyone can produce any real evidence of "manipulation" (which I have yet to see) having any effect on the market, these claims of manipulation must be considered to be fantasy.

People are very susceptible to confirmation bias. They see what they want to believe and tend to ignore evidence to the contrary. Read about "street light interference" and be amazed.

Perhaps you could support your opinions with some facts and actual quotes?

Besides, a large number of the people here on Bitcointalk believe that Bitcoin is no longer a currency, but is now a "store of value". Are they morons, too?

The number of satoshis in a bitcoin is arbitrary. People are accustomed to the decimal system and defining, for example, one bitcoin as 2³² satoshis has no benefit over defining it as 10⁸ satoshis.

From your point of view, why would a binary system be better?

Keep in mind that these are addresses and not wallets, and there is very little that you can determine about the people holding bitcoins just from the addresses themselves.

Satoshi is estimated to have up to 800k BTC (which typically gets rounded up to 1 million), but these all remain in the original addresses, each containing 50 BTC.

Many of the top addresses, such as the Bitfinex address, contain bitcoins held for millions of people.

I had this conversation recently:

Him: "I bought a cloud mining contract at the beginning of the year and I tripled my money."
Me: "Well, if you just bought the bitcoins instead, your profit would have been 10x, so you lost money."

1. That applies to most people. However, Bitcoin users tend to know more about money and economic value than most people.
2. Yes, hopefully.
3. A rational person would say that "intrinsic" value doesn't exist, so arguments about the intrinsic value of anything are moot.
4. See #1

The difference is optimism vs. pessimism.

The people that wrote that article are pessimistic about Bitcoin. They focus on its problems and shortcomings, and they are intentionally short-sighted. They correctly believe that current price is not justified by its current utility, but they refuse to accept that future adoption and improvements could justify the present value.

On the other side are the optimists. The correctly look to the potential benefits, but they focus on an idealized future -- one that may not even be possible. They go to irrational extremes to justify their wishful thinking, and they intentionally remain ignorant of reality.

In the end, you have the endless articles by the pessimists stating that the optimists are irrational or naive and that Bitcoin is a failure because it is not what the optimists believe it is. And you have the endless rants by the optimists stating that the pessimists are ignorant or malicious, and that Bitcoin will succeed because it is more than what the pessimists believe it is.

Scam

Well, considering that the people selling at a good time have to sell to people buying at a bad time, and people buying low have to buy from people selling low, i think that it shows that there is not a reliable way.

You don't have a time machine? I thought every investor has a time machine. If you want to invest, you really must have a time machine. How else are you going to travel into the future in order to find out what to invest and what not to invest in?

That question is difficult to understand. Perhaps you should explain what you want to do.

The wallet uses a private key to sign a transaction in order to prove that you have the right to send the bitcoins and to prevent anyone else from modifying the transaction.