No, it won't. BNB is rising because of the feverish hype over IEOs. This mirrors what happened with ETH in the ICO fever a couple of years ago.
BNB is a good coin, but it is very limited in what it can do. I can't see it ever overtaking BTC to become top in cap across the whole market.

No, it absolutely won't happen. XRP at $60 would be far and away the top coin - miles ahead of bitcoin.

Maybe it can overtake bitcoin in the long term future, but if it does then that day is a long way off. XRP certainly can't rise to multiple times BTC price in the near future.

Some new coins will increase by a greater percentage than any of the old established alts. Crucially this is only some of them.

On average I would still go with the old and established alts. If you pick a random established top alt and a random new coin, then I would say that the old coin would be much more likely to have a big price rise.

As for leading the market, no, new coins are much lower cap and don't have the trading strength to influence the whole market.

PoW isn't sustainable in the long-term, not for big coins anyway. Look at the energy expenditure for Bitcoin, it's insane. This can't continue forever. PoW is useful for new coins just starting out, but as they become bigger this approach becomes ever less sustainable.

PoS is one solution to this for mature coins, and can be an stable end state that resolves the energy issue.

Don't take risks in crypto purely for the sake of it. It is certainly important to take some risks, but this should be done after some assessment. Don't gamble everything at once on some low-cap high-risk coin that just happens to be mid-pump.

The most important thing is to learn from our mistakes. If we are too cautious and don't take any risks, then this is also a lesson to learn from. But the most valuable lessons are often those when we have taken a risk but it has turned out badly. These are the ones that really help us to refine and optimise our decision-making process, leading to better evaluation of future risks, and maximising the likelihood of positive outcomes.

Yes, USDT is linked quite strongly to BTC price. Whenever there is an increase in USDT supply, then BTC often surges up in price. Similarly whenever there is uncertainty or potential scandal around USDT, then money flows out of the "stablecoin" and back into BTC, driving the price up.

Recently, an injection of $300m in Tether arguably caused the BTC rise above $6k https://www.newsbtc.com/2019/04/25/tether-treasury-stablecoin-bitcoin-price

And then another injection of $500m arguably caused the next rise above $8k.

There are plenty of articles to Google about this.

I'm not sure how relevant TA is to alts during a strong bull or bear markets.
We have been strongly bullish for a couple of months now, and I think ETH gets dragged along by BTC to a large extent, I don't think TA works that well in these conditions.

I don't think either Capitalism or Communism are viable long-term.

Capitalism relies on ever increasing efficiency and ever expanding markets. It is more a process than an end-state. It can't continue forever. I dislike the excesses of modern capitalism, and find it morally abhorrent on many levels - the move towards ever-increasing inequality, setting accumulation of money as the highest moral good, destroying the environment, causing wars, etc etc ... but capitalism has proven to be the best mechanism so far for advancing tech (in peace-time...). And whilst it has caused wars, I think the main reason that developed countries no longer go to war with each other is that the ever-advancing tendrils of capitalism mean that the successes and failures of the big economies are all now intertwined.

Communism whilst good in theory has failed in practice largely partly it is even more prone to corruption than is capitalism. Even if some measures could be devised and put in place to prevent against this, Communism is not viable because it is based on the collective power of the workers. But workers in general are on the way out as tech advances in every sector and automation starts to take over most jobs. throughout history we have needed workers, but that is gradually coming to an end as computers, robots and AI take over.

I'm not suggesting I have the answer as to what is the best system to use, I'm just suggesting that the old debate of Capitalism vs Communism is losing relevance, as neither can be an end-state.

I don't understand those who think that Bitcoin is the only crypto that has any future. Crypto (and blockchain) has a huge number of use cases, and I can't see that bitcoin will be the perfect answer to every single one. Smart contracts for example will surely be best on a platform that has spent years developing it specifically for smart contracts (eg, ETH). Fast payments will likely be best on a platform that has likewise spent years developing for that specific use case (eg. XRP).

Bitcoin is great, and I think likely to remain #1 in cap, but that doesn't mean all alts are useless.

I think it's quite likely to have a big price increase, yes, IEOs (particularly on Binance) are to 2019 what ICOs were to 2017. Whether this is sustainable is another question. It seems likely that a large part of the increases we're seeing is because these are Binance IEOs, rather than the inherent merit or otherwise of the particular project.

Apologies, I'll correct that: gold has very little intrinsic value.

Yes it has some use in electronics, and probably other areas as well. But this isn't the reason that gold has a high price. I think my point still stands.
People buy gold, but the main reason for this is not that they want to use it in electronic circuits. That's nonsense. I mean, why were people buying gold hundreds of years ago?

Gold is valuable because people agree that it is valuable, that's it, that's the main source of its value.

It did, yes, it started back in Feb/March. But obviously prices have been dropping again recently. The question now is whether this is just a correction after the big increase, or whether market sentiment has now turned bearish again.

It's difficult to call at the moment. Prices are still falling, but slower than they were. I would be wary about buying in now, as the odds of prices rising soon are probably 50/50. Overall the trend over the last few months has been very bullish, but its unclear whether this is now exhausting itself or is just a temporary cooling off period.

There's been a bit of a loss of confidence over the last week. I'm not sure it's a good idea to buy in right now. I'd wait and see how it settles down first, as prices may drop some more before the recovery resumes.

It seems weird to say it but I kind of think that governments might prefer bitcoin over evil data-vampire coin Libra.

Everyone is getting wary of Facebook having so much power. I would think that if crypto starts to take over from fiat, and the two choices are a) decentralised, or b) hand over control of everything to Facebook, then bitcoin might be preferred.

The counterpoint I suppose being that Facebook can always be taken to court, whereas bitcoin cannot. So Facebook is theoretically accountable, although in practice they have shown little evidence of accountability over their history so far.

Libra taking over BTC might be possible, but it's certainly not desirable.

I like the fact that Satoshi is anonymous and hasn't been traced. It's kind of part of the point of bitcoin that everything is decentralised without some overarching single authority figure. Anyone who claims to be Satoshi really demonstrates that they are not purely through the act of making the claim itself.

An aim of Satoshi was decentralisation, so in a way Satoshi himself is decentralised as all of us who believe in the original vision hold a fragment of it from our own personal perspectives. In a way we are all little Satoshis.

I am Spartacus! I mean Satoshi.

Quick aside, don't want to derail the thread: Pretty much every atom in your body was formed through nuclear fusion billions of years ago inside a now-dead star. The exception being hydrogen, helium and a few of the other lightest elements, which are likely much older and formed shortly after the Big Bang. We are each carrying a lot of history

Facebook have always done whatever the hell they like, regardless of any legal implication. Their mindset is to do anything they want, and if someone kicks up a fuss afterwards, then FB can just apologise but then continue anyway. Conflict of interest means nothing to them. They are engaged in far more illicit practices, such as sucking up all of our personal data and monetising it to benefit their own greed. Not to mention meddling in elections...

Money is an abstraction and standardisation of value.

There is nothing wrong in money itself, it is the way societies are structured that is wrong. We live (most of us) in advanced capitalist economies, the ultimate purpose of which is not the moral or emotional benefit of humankind, but rather the pursuit and accrual of money. The barometer of being a successful individual in modern society is not how much good you can do, whether you can come up with amazing inventions or advance science or devote your life to healing the sick, instead it is all set up as how much money you can get. How much you can earn, how much you can gain through any means, whether exploiting others or not. Even evasion of responsibility is sometimes lauded, as in the attitude of "only losers pay taxes".

Money in itself is not a problem. The way that money is perceived is a reflection not of money itself, but rather of the society in which we live.

This is true, and generally when you see people on the street, those people are being paid to be there out of the charity's funds. So if you give to the charity, you may be doing some good, but you'll also be paying the wages of these "charity muggers" who accost people on the street.

Before you give to any charity, it is important, as with new crypto projects, to do some research. Some charities have CEOs and ambassadors on huge wages, some charities are inefficient and the money is wasted, some charities the money gets siphoned off by corrupt middlemen.

I find this site invaluable: https://www.givewell.org/  They analyse charities thoroughly, to give you a very good idea of exactly where your money is going, and what is the most efficient way to help people.