...
сальвадорский колон "обеспечен" сейчас биткоинами.
Было бы огромным жульничеством обеспечивать сейчас сальвадорский колон хоть чем-то, когда он с 2004 года не обращается от слова совсем. Ну, и да, биткойны, в принципе, сейчас в Сальвадоре правительству всегда могут понадобиться для текущих целей, раз они на пару с американским долларом выполняют роль «сальвадорского колона».  |
|
|
|
The existence of exchange is to facilitate the transaction process fast, though it is not fast as p2p. Also some of the exchange platforms pay higher than p2p and that is one of the major reason people are using exchange platforms for their transactions. Another reason why people keep their coins in exchange platforms is because of the transaction fees. That instead of keeping the coins in a wallet and send to someone whenever you want to sell it and the charging fee in the transaction process whenever you send makes people to store their coins in the exchange platforms because some exchange platforms don't charge fees.
Worrying about commissions and losing everything... Yes, it is how things are, but FTX story of the last days hints again that holding assets in exchanges accounts is a really bad idea. It could be good for making deal but main assets better to hold on non custodial cold wallet. We all know that FTX is not the first and definitely not the last example of bankrupt exchange. |
|
|
|
In case of this , that is Bitcoin becoming the future of money and for it to be used world, more improvement would have taken place as regards to the transaction fee, in such a way that the transaction fee is cheap and people could use it to pay for anything, If that did not happen , then it will still be the future of money but would be used to settle or pay for more higher bills other than coffee imo.
Of course, commission, scalability and transaction time are known problems but all of them are solvable. Bitcoin is not what it was at the start because its code is being developed all the time. So one day we'll see how all these problems are being solved. May be not tomorrow but it is better to make it reliably than fast. I'm not saying that Bitcoin is ready for replacing some of anchor currencies at the moment but I'm sure it will be in the future. |
|
|
|
Good to hear about that. Mike is one of the bullish folks in the market and then he attained to make a FUD like that? He should do better than what he has said, he has already lost his credibility long time ago when he has given a lot of bullish predictions but none of them went right.
It seems that these leaders know each other and they're always in close contact to verify some information if it's real or not.
Well, there is a possibility that Mike would be sued for that misleading news that he has spread if Nayib would like to do so.
Anyone can make a mistake and I don't think Nayib Bukele will go to court with this case. The rumor itself was bad but trials based on a stupid mistake apologies for which have been made instantly could be worse for image. I think Salvadorian president understands that and we all will forget this ridiculous gossip very soon. And new narrative Nayib Bukele is starting with buying 1 BTC a day is a good replacement for this story. |
|
|
|
If a nuclear war really comes, what we should consider is whether we can still live? Will there still be a country at that time? Whether there will be human beings is a question, but I think at least there will be no nuclear war in the few decades we are alive Because although there is a war at present, it has not reached a very large-scale war, and human beings have not formally contacted alien civilizations, and cannot immigrate to other planets, so what is the benefit of launching a nuclear war now?
You may be will surprise but no wars are beneficial for humankind so there are some other reasons for them always, most are not really wise. If we talk about nuclear war it is totally mad, but we know there are mad people in society. So some insane things do unfortunately happen. Bitcoin itself will survive as while at least one copy of its ledger exists Bitcoin exists. So main question is if a society will be advanced enough to have need and opportunity to use it and there might be many variations. |
|
|
|
I agree with this. Blockchain will become a huge part of our life for sure, everything in the world could use the technology of blockchain and that will make it a great thing. It will not be easy to start using blockchain in every industry but from insurance to banking to software to hospitals to everything you can imagine could be using blockchain in the future.
That means we just need to make sure that everything goes according to plan and crypto survives, as long as crypto proves how well blockchain can be used, there will be other industries going in, slowly and it will take over a decade but we will get to see many many other sectors using it in the distant future.
Bitcoin, blockchain and crypto are three totally different terms.Blockchain is already used in different decisions but not only in decentralized and it is not even the only existing form of distributed ledger. Crypto contains not only Bitcoin but lots of altcoins as well and we know that many of altcoins are not true decentralized what makes them risky. Bitcoin uses blockchain and cryptography but not equal to these terms. Bitcoin can survive and become a worldwide popular currency even if blockchain will be replaced with some other distributed ledger and other existing altcoins fail. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Yes it is so, but there's one additional aspect with this situation which is mentioned rarely: as Bitcoin is a legal tender and if fact a national currency in some countries then it became a foreign currency (and not a private currency or money surrogate) in jurisdiction of many other countries. It is important because formally there are much more options for Bitcoin to be used worldwide basing on that, for exchanges also. I'm sure this aspect will play its role in the future.
It's never mentioned because it's not true. Bitcoin is not considered currency. There's a difference between legal tender and currency. Yes, there is a difference, and not only currency can be a legal tender, but in this case Bitcoin is used in El Salvador as a currency if we look at most definitions of this word. Because generally currency is money used at some territory what is authorized by law at this territory. So Bitcoin is a currency of El Salvador. |
|
|
|
I do agree that bitcoin is already doing great, if we are talking about going side by side with fiat, then we are already at a great level. Doesn't mean that it’s used a lot, it's invested a lot but not used all that much. But, I am 99% sure that the more bull runs we have in the future, he more places will start to accept it.
On the other hand, we are getting more and more common stablecoins, which means there could be some business' out there which doesn't want to accept bitcoin because of the volatility that could end up with some stablecoin alternative and start taking in crypto. So, I think it’s not even about the future, it's already at a very good level of adoption even currently, and future is even brighter.
Bitcoin is still used as a currency not too often if we talk about it's global usage: you'll hardly pay for a cup of coffee in a cafe or for a bread in a bakery, you'll rarely get a salary or pay taxes in Bitcoin. Of course is has a good level of adoption and we can do many of these things in some places which is great if to look at the dynamics. But to become a really popular worldwide currency there is still a plenty of work. So, I'd say, that as for now Bitcoin is more a global investment asset than a worldwide currency, but it is possible that Bitcoin will become a worldwide popular currency as well. |
|
|
|
We already have two countries which have Bitcoin as legal tender.
That means that people in those countries can simply live in a Bitcoin standard today, by receiving bitcoin for their goods and services and paying with bitcoin for goods and services.
Yes it is so, but there's one additional aspect with this situation which is mentioned rarely: as Bitcoin is a legal tender and if fact a national currency in some countries then it became a foreign currency (and not a private currency or money surrogate) in jurisdiction of many other countries. It is important because formally there are much more options for Bitcoin to be used worldwide basing on that, for exchanges also. I'm sure this aspect will play its role in the future. |
|
|
|
There were speculations that I've read that El Salvador has deposits on FTX and they can't take it out. I don't know if that's true but I guess that was just another made FUD to make the market's move as much as these speculators want. What we understand is that we need to be careful and don't be fooled because Bitcoin is here to prevent financial crimes.
And there's really no need for some new amazing tech and project to come out to kick bitcoin's ass. That's overused and exaggerated already that has made a lot of projects think that they're better than bitcoin. As we can learn from press as of today, rumors about that El Salvador holds its Bitcoin assets in FTX probably were first inspired by Mike Novogratz. Then CZ refuted these rumors basing on his conversation with Nayib Bukele. Later Mike Novogratz apologized for misleading. So all this situation looks like a classical FUD (as we see despite these rumors were refuted they are still in discussion). |
|
|
|
only people who don't appreciate the process who always think like that, their way of thinking is erratic, vacillating, inconsistent and likes to turn directions.
...
Yeap, most people want more money today and feel upset when see how Bitcoin rates to USD are in downward trend. So it is natural that they don't want to buy something that gets cheaper. In the bull market they'll see the opposite process and will be encouraged by upward trend. Psychology. To do not basing on this natural reasons they should learn more about Bitcoin, about investing, about economics, but no one can learn everything. So we'll see the same in the future as human nature hardly changes. |
|
|
|
The value of Bitcoin is comparable to that of gold. Bitcoin cannot be used as legal tender. Even the legal currency of a country is to save the country's economy and does not want to rely on the US dollar for development.
Bitcoin is an emergency safe-haven solution. It cannot be said that Bitcoin is the future of money, it can only be said that Bitcoin will exist for a long time in the future.
You should learn this topic better as there's much misunderstanding in your words. First, Bitcoin is a legal tender in El Salvador and can be used so in some other jurisdictions. Next, talking about the future of the money: we all know which problems Bitcoin has, we know that these problems are solvable, then it is a possible situation that Bitcoin will become a worldwide popular currency in the future (not inevitably but possibly). |
|
|
|
It will probably end up being a bit similar to how gold was treated in the century in which gold standard was used worldwide (around 1870s-1970s).
Maybe the Bitcoin standard will start in the 2020s.
Hardly. Main idea of fiat currencies is their inflationary nature, so any mistakes in financial governing can be solved at the expense of everyone by currency depreciation. So today's money should always be more expensive than tomorrow's money. Modern economics is also based on this system: you can get more money tomorrow and take expensive money on credit today and pay tomorrow with cheaper money. If they wanted to return golden standard they'd already done that, that's why they'll hardly implement Bitcoin standard. |
|
|
|
As long as bitcoins are not generally obtained by providing goods and services, we would need exchanges to switch fiat received for goods and services for a better money, Bitcoin.
But even at places in which that happens, like El Salvador, there would still be people that prefer other types of money, like USD in that case. So exchanges will probably always will be needed.
As Bitcoin is a decentralized currency and has no options of making anyone of using only it there will always be some other kinds of currencies (until the idea of currency will become outdated in general). So right you are, if we have any different types of payments we will certainly need an exchange to transfer from one into another, and it will last invariably within the foreseeable future. |
|
|
|
No exchange is above bankruptcy but CEXs cannot be avoided completely. Not everyone who got affected by FTX collapse are holders some might have moved their coin there for a possible swap and others for quick sell to fiat but ran out of luck. If they was a way to sell direct to cash in DEXs i think CEXs manipulations would have been a long forgotten story. Avoiding this exchanges would have been much more easier if there were better options because not everyone is conversant with Bitcoin has legal tender so many still see it as an asset because of its volatility and how about the aged in underdeveloped countries who sell in local markets how do they get paid in BTC so one will always have to swap to fiat to fit into the society the belong.
DEX and cash can be combined by connecting people in p2p deals. Main problem is that you can never believe someone totally anonymous in a p2p transactions and there is no way of safe proving that someone gave cash. So if you want to have a deal with cash you need to be prepared to lose your anonymity. And that's why DEXes don't work with fiat currencies: it is easier to use CEX if you lose anonymity anyway. And if you withdraw all assets just after buying, CEX is not so unsafe place to trade. |
|
|
|
А чем BNB хуже того же BTC?  Вполне равносильные проекты и могут конкурировать друг с другом за первенство. К тому же, у первой достаточно сильная фундаментальная база и по этому параметру значительно лучше выглядит, если проводить по этому факту сравнительную характеристику. И ещё одно по монете от биржи Binance: в районе уровней 200-220$ на графике отчетливо видно сильную поддержку, которую не смогли преодолеть и отбивались от неё несколько раз. Тем, что BNB, по факту, централизованная сеть, чему пример совсем недавно обсуждали в этой же теме. Тот же цифровой юань в перспективе может получить и большую капитализацию, чем какие-то из топовых криптовалют, но тру-криптой никогда не станет. Так и проекты, которые демонстрируют признаки централизованности, уже выглядят весьма сомнительно и конкурировать могут разве только среди своих таких же централизованных. И тогда классические фиатные валюты и банки с гос. гарантиями выглядят надёжнее частных централизованных валют. Так что Биткойн очевидно лучше. |
|
|
|
...
Bitcoin without a mystery will not be popular
...
We all know not only that Ethereum's developer is Vitalik Buterin but even who is that guy, who are his parents, where was he born and where did he got his education, what are his points if view on different topics, etc. Does it impact on Ethereum? Of course! But does it make Ethereum unpopular because of having less mystery? I don't think so. So I don't think that revealing or not revealing of Satoshi's identity will impact of a future of Bitcoin significantly. |
|
|
|
With the widespread use of Bitcoin now, El Salvador's move has become a start. Bitcoin is recognized by the government and used as legal tender, which means that Bitcoin is also likely to become money in the future. It may be a matter of time, but we This generation can't wait.
El Salvador wanted to get benefits of popular topic being first and attracting true Bitcoin supporters and they've got some effect they hoped for. To become a popular currency worldwide Bitcoin needs more: first to solve problems of scalability and transaction time. LN is a good but not universal answer. Next it should be enough popular and competitive to replace any of popular anchor currencies, as for now it is not yet, and governments prefer to operate their own inflationary currencies as they make financial administration easier and give an option of hiding financial mistakes. So probably someday but I don't think that the same way as in El Salvador which even doesn't have an own national currency. |
|
|
|
Mistakes are common and this is why we do really learn up things basing up on that experience.Im aint saying that mistake is necessary but it is something an inevitable thing which you cant really be able to avoid.
Panic selling is common, Buying in Fomo is common which its a behavior on where people do usually jump in.Its never been that new that they are really doing such thing.You could really be having the confidence on
buying out if you do see that the market is already in green which you should suppose to buy when the market is dipping or decreasing, it might sound simple but its understandable that its not.
You cant really be able to do such action considering that emotions would be your primary enemy on this time.
Anyone should take account of his own emotions making decision on become a trader or investor. If they are too emotional maybe they should consider investing in some conservative assets for long term and not to look at the market intently not to get too much of losses. I know about myself, for instance, that I'm not calm enough in rapidly changing circumstances so I prefer not to play with trading too much and definitely not to risk with everything or even much. |
|
|
|
...
If Bitcoin more or less stabilizes at $17k for years, for example, it would be perfectly suitable to be money.
...
But it will be bad for Bitcoin's main idea of being better than fiat currencies: dollar is inflationary asset while Bitcoin is deflationary, and being at the same level with depreciating asset is really bad for Bitcoin. It is much better to keep being volatile for years and to postpone transformation into really popular currency than to find a strict correlation with dollar. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
