OP, Bitcoin hashing power is slowly coming back online, and slowly recovering from the recent crash, https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-hashrate.html#3yThe network will be around for a very long time, open and permissionless and just waiting to be used, and filling gaps where Bitcoin can fill them. Tell Xi Jin Ping, the cat is out if the bag. |
|
|
|
77% of the population do not consider it to be good decision to make bitcoin a legal tender there.
That’s not good. Plus there’s Article 7 in El Salvador’s Bitcoin Law that states, “ Every economic agent must accept bitcoin as payment when offered to him by whoever acquires a good or service”. I believe El Salvador should never force their citizens like that. Support it, and make it Legal Tender, but force it? No, that’s not what it’s supposed to be. Bitcoin should be used according to its own good, not because citizens were forced to use it. |
|
|
|
You are part of the team, NEAR project, right? Then, if you are promoting your project,
This might help you to find a way how your projects will run well and not just a scam. Because investors will consider and invest in your project or any projects if that is good-looking and promising.
But this not only the basis if that particular project is worth to invest or it has a fortune. It should have a working product and from that, we exoect that this project will surely gain trust from the community.
Who is part of the NEAR project? OP? I believe not. Big projects’ core team members have stopped coming in this forum currently because it’s full of spam. Or maybe they don’t care to spend their time with us plebs. Hahaha. But if you look for posts from 2011 - 2013, you would see that many of the known shitcoin developers started learning about Bitcoin, then developed shitcoinery in this forum. |
|
|
|
|
OP, for shitcoins, I believe “fundamental analysis” is very difficult to measure/gauge. This is because people treat these projects like real companies, which will NEVER be like real companies. They don’t have a P/E ratio, or Book Value per Share ratio, or other basic ways to measure “fundamentals”.
But, any coin that has “good fundamentals” should be the coin that has an increasing average daily transaction count for over a long period of time. Plus it should be prove to be truly decentralized enough not to be shut down by a centralized authority.
|
|
|
|
Why should El Salvador be THE “Home of Bitcoin”. Did everyone already forget China? The El Salvadorian government can easily cast Bitcoin away too, just as simply as they welcomed it, and gave it a “home”. OP, Bitcoin doesn’t actually need a home.
Of the two, I would probably choose El Salvador more than China, remember how they cracked down on the miners in their country? That's not the characteristic of a country that we should call the home for bitcoin, it's quite the opposite because it's more a warzone for bitcoin or even cryptocurrencies in general. I think that if El Salvador delivers what they promised to do and did more than expected, probably some might consider giving that title. That’s because El Salvador is currently welcoming it, what if it will spit it out next year? Plus the point is not choosing between China and El Salvador, it’s to choose NOTHING between the two. They need Bitcoin, whether they want to actually use the technology, or want to merely profit from it by purchasing it then selling it later. Both options are A-OK, but Bitcoin doesn’t need a home, it will never need a home. |
|
|
|
|
Why should El Salvador be THE “Home of Bitcoin”. Did everyone already forget China? The El Salvadorian government can easily cast Bitcoin away too, just as simply as they welcomed it, and gave it a “home”. OP, Bitcoin doesn’t actually need a home.
|
|
|
|
What I found funny with that article is, Bitcoin was mentioned, praised, and then it went on with the story that he launched a new “cryptocurrency company” called “xxx”. I went to the website, it shills a “xxx” token.
It's not funny, it's a way to promote something of your own, but to attract an audience you have to tell them first what they want to hear, and when the co-founder of Apple says Bitcoin is "the most amazing mathematical miracle", people are thrilled and sure will take a look at his project. In other words, " Bitcoin is a miracle, but I have something even better." By the way, Steve Wozniak has become known to the crypto community in 2018 when he fell for a cheap trick and lost as many as 7 BTC, which does not really portray him as an intelligent man - because if he had the attitude he has today, he would certainly have acted differently. I watched some of his intervews, most of them interviews included in documentaries about Steve Jobs. Steve Wozniak came across as someone naive, and easily swindled from his money. He also had his own story about Steve Jobs commission an engineering job for him while he was with Atari. Jobs never paid him the full amount. |
|
|
|
|
I believe just for charting, Trading View is still the better one compared to all the other charting apps mentioned in the topic. In fact, it might be the superior charting app above the rest available.
OP, simply curious, but what didn’t you like in Trading View? It’s the most complete charting app available for free on the web.
|
|
|
|
In December, he launched his own cryptocurrency company, Efforce.
This ^^ is the part that tells that he indeed believes in crypto. His own token? Haha. After this company was made, all his further public declarations on the matter are biased  But I don't deny either that they do help  What I found funny with that article is, Bitcoin was mentioned, praised, and then it went on with the story that he launched a new “cryptocurrency company” called “Efforce”. I went to the website, it shills a “Woz” token. Is he truly the founder of the company? |
|
|
|
OP, good plan! But don’t be afraid to make your second bid, and subsequent bids lower. Because if Bitcoin crashes below $30,000 in a truly convincing way, you can be sure that bids made at $20,000 to $25,000 will be hit. Prepare for the worst hope for the best. Plus you can always average up on strength by buying dips during a surge.  |
|
|
|
Watch John Bogle’s advice in how to invest in stocks and equities, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doKsy4itiREJohn Bogle was a HODLer-type, and was the founder of The Vanguard Group. It’s obviously very applicable in Bitcoin’s HODL-style investing, and he also addressed and encourged a dollar-cost-averaging strategy. BUT, he also said that an investor should “get in right in the first place”. Is the current market the right time to enter? I believe it’s an opportunity, but leave yourself more capital to average down because no one gets it in right unless you’re very lucky. Of course, there is a lot of luck in investing in anything, but persistent investing creates some of the luck in terms of if the investment ends up going up in the long run. So, in some sense, if you do not have a lot of money to start with it is going to either take a long time or a lot of BTC price appreciation for you to either feel the effect or to become rich off of it, yet at the same time, you should be attempting to work with what you got rather than engaging in overly leveraging kinds of behaviors - and in that regard, bitcoin seems to continue to be one of the best investments out there in terms of considering both downside and upside risk and both downside and upside potential. So a convincing definition of luck is where preparation meets opportunity.. so yeah, the idea of DCA investing is good, with a wee bit of front loading of the investment (if you can) combined with some levels of preparations to be able to buy on the dip, if the BTC price dips from here or if it ends up dipping at latter dates (presuming that it already went up and then dips at that point). Do you believe that, “right now”, would be a good idea to front load the investment? For example if you had $10,000 available, would you use all that $10,000 in one trade, then DCA with 10% of your monthly salary? Let’s assume that $10,000 is 10% of said person’s total networth. |
|
|
|
this sounds like proof of work without the work  I’m technically challenged, but that’s how I understood it as well. If it is that, then OP is removing the best part of Bitcoin and replacing it with something else that could weaken the Sybil Attack protection mechanism, and weaken the very thing that makes everything stick together in Bitcoin. Satoshi’s utilization of POW is pure genius. |
|
|
|
I believe the support for Bitcoin privacy features by some users haven’t truly considered the consequences. I think I'm going to agree with this. I've said it on another thread too; you can't make everyone agree upon such upgrade even if it's better for the sake of your privacy. Bitcoin was designed to be transparent and I'd continue running a node that supports transparency. If you don't like the way Bitcoin works, there are plenty of other altcoins built with a different purpose. Nitpicking here, but I don’t think it was deliberately “designed to be transparent”. If Satoshi had the technical knowledge, I believe he would have implemented privacy features early in Bitcoin. It will increase the size of the blocks, and centralize the network. How would that increase the block size? What kind of privacy implementations are available? Ring Signatures? Confidential Transactions? Both of them will increase the block size, or am I wrong in this? |
|
|
|
Watch John Bogle’s advice in how to invest in stocks and equities, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doKsy4itiREJohn Bogle was a HODLer-type, and was the founder of The Vanguard Group. It’s obviously very applicable in Bitcoin’s HODL-style investing, and he also addressed and encourged a dollar-cost-averaging strategy. BUT, he also said that an investor should “get in right in the first place”. Is the current market the right time to enter? I believe it’s an opportunity, but leave yourself more capital to average down because no one gets it in right unless you’re very lucky. |
|
|
|
|
I believe the support for Bitcoin privacy features by some users haven’t truly considered the consequences.
If there is a flaw in the privacy implementation, then some entities would have the advantage to exploit the flaw over the users who don’t know how to exploit the flaw.
Bitcoin might also be “more feared”, and it might not enjoy the government’s tolerance for it anymore once privacy features are implemented.
It will increase the size of the blocks, and centralize the network.
Auditability of the ledger through transparency, to assure everything is balanced, is good.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I want to see people under Business Development work with Lightning builders and exchanges, and start implementing the infrastructure required for mass use and adoption. Some things can be learned from Jack Mallers’ “experiment” with El Salvador.
|
|
|
|
But many people who just know Bitcoin will pay more attention to its practical value, so what is the practical value of Bitcoin?
For Bitcoin’s “practical value”, you simply don’t have to look anywhere else, except its market that’s right in front of us. Based on that reply, you might say that its practical value is based on nothing but mere speculation. BUT I would reply, yes because Bitcoin depends on the open market for it’s current “practical value”. It’s value depends on US, collectively known as “the market”. |
|
|
|
Can you post what your definition of a blockchain is? Because you and I might have a different understanding of what a working “blockchain” is. I believe some people view it as “something secure/decentralized”, but has stopped there, and hasn’t understood how/why it is decentralized.
I am 100% sure we both understand it differently. I am the definition of the masses. We do not have a good education. We only improved English online in past few years, in fact, I learnt a lot from this forum and just reading other people's thoughts. I still have trouble understanding Bitcoin whitepaper,,, so for sure, I am not the guy who understands fully how/why blockchain is decentralized. But I always speak from practical side of things,,, because I only know what I know from practice:) I never saw blockchain as decentralized by the way, I saw Bitcoin as. 99% of blockchain projects out there, can claim secure/decentralized but even a small user like me knows these are only claims. YES, then connect that to the co-chairman of the blockchain caucus, CLAIMING that government must have the power to reverse transactions. Is he talking about “blockchains”, a real blockchain? Or mere databases? Plus what’s his definition of a blockchain? I am sure you know more than him. |
|
|
|
that means the lightning network it is clearly dependent on the bitcoin network and also i would say, that both networks have an impact on each other. i agree with the last part, that no one is force to use neither networks (some say people in el salvador are now force to use it, but that is another topic)
Lightning is an “off-chain” layer and doesn’t impact the Bitcoin blockchain/the base layer. just because it is called "off-chain" doesn't mean it doesn't impact bitcoin the base layer, if you think about it, you have to do at least two transactions for every channel (okay maybe one if you count channels you will "never" close), but my point is: it impacts the base layer, cause lightning needs a base layer and using it means that there is an impact / influence, whatever you want to call it - or are we takling about two different things here? In that regard, then yes, it does have an “impact”, but I believe “impact” might be too powerful of a term to use. When you posted “impact”, I thought you believed that Lightning would truly have a strong influence on the consensus layer. |
|
|
|
awesome faq, was a pleasure to read Is Lightning Network centralized? Is it more centralized than Bitcoin? Does it make Bitcoin more centralized?This topic has been brought up many times. The Lightning Network is a second layer scaling solution which has no impact on the Bitcoin network. It works independently and no one is forced to use it. the wording here is a little bit off imo. i guess you are not talking about the lightning technology used on another network than bitcoin. You guessed right, ser. Those altcoin “Lightning Networks” are their developers implementing it for themselves, probably truly as a computer science experiment/test, but to some of them, probably just for riding the bandwagon.
that means the lightning network it is clearly dependent on the bitcoin network and also i would say, that both networks have an impact on each other. i agree with the last part, that no one is force to use neither networks (some say people in el salvador are now force to use it, but that is another topic)
Lightning is an “off-chain” layer and doesn’t impact the Bitcoin blockchain/the base layer. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
