It seems you are raising a number of issues. Anyway, a couple of points:

• Money printing does not necessarily cause inflation. It is also not the main reason for inflation. Also, inflation is not to be entirely avoided.
• Gold's use is not solely limited to its being a store of value. You're definitely wrong in saying gold has no use in real life. Gold is important in electronics, for example. Therefore, gold and cryptocurrency are not really competing against each other within a single market such that people have always the option to either go for gold or crypto.

Yeah, those are correct. That is why a bearish season and a bullish season always compliments each other. Bear and bull cycles are always part of the whole.

What you missed on your list is that a bear market will shake off the weak hands. A bear market every once in a while is actually healthy; it helps the market become stronger and more solid. It is an opportunity for the market to purge the spaghetti hands. It is a period in which Bitcoin is transferred to the diamond hands, those whose belief in Bitcoin is much stronger than others.

You are not playing against the house; you are playing against other players.

In every game, regardless of whether you win or you lose, the house will always have its standard commission fee in percentage from the pot. So the issue here is not beating the house. You cannot beat the house because it is not playing in the first place.

You better look for some other poker sites with the lowest rake. But why are you complaining when you said you could easily win against other players?

I wouldn't quit. Why would I? What then if Ethereum surpassed Bitcoin? Does that make Bitcoin inferior? Of course, not!

Anyway, do you think majority of the people care about putting their money on what you call shitcoins? You have to remember that of the $2.3 trillion cryptocurrency market cap, at least $1.2 trillion of it is in altcoins. So I don't think majority of the people are putting primary consideration to the fact that Bitcoin is the only cryptocurrency which has a truly decentralized blockchain. Many of them are looking at crypto as an investment market. There is no other reason why the likes of Dogecoin and Shiba Inu are occupying top spots and have billions in market cap.

If, and this is clearly a question of if, all the money will enter the crypto market, the first beneficiary will be Bitcoin. That's probably more than enough for Bitcoin to reach a million USD. How probable is this, though? I'd say it has very low probability. Money may, or perhaps will, completely turn digital but there will probably never be an exodus of fiat money into the current crypto market that we know of. That's for as long as government systems will continue to prefer that control over monetary policies be upon them.

Which is more important to you, that you have a good-paying job that is demanding or a low-paying job that is not demanding? I'm not saying all good-paying jobs are demanding but I guess a higher salary is almost always implying higher responsibilities. You can always look for a new job, though, one that offers a decent pay and a more relaxing setup. But I'm afraid you mustn't leave your job while there is nowhere to transfer to yet. 


I haven't mastered blockchain development so take this as a mere opinion. But I guess it will take some time. You cannot master anything overnight. But if your background is somehow related and you don't even have to start from scratch, then I guess you will have a shorter route. Either way, it oftentimes just a matter of time management and determination.

It is actually easy to spot an investment scam. You only need to be skeptical and that's it.

If I were to generalize to make sure you are safe from all kinds of investment scams, I would just say, stay out of every investment opportunity offered online whether by ads, people you don't know, reviews, and so on and so forth. Just stay out, whether the ROI is too good to be true or not. Just say no to investment offers whether they came from Elon Musk, Barack Obama, Jeff Bezos, Theymos, Satoshi, and others.

If you want to invest, buy Bitcoin yourself.

I don't think there will be an invasion anytime soon. Although it is true that China could easily take Taiwan by force if they intend to do it, China is also very much aware how it won't happen without fighting against allied forces as well. And that wouldn't be easy for them. That is a war that wouldn't be worth it. Not only would China fail, they will be humiliated.

As to its potential effect to Bitcoin, I guess there won't be much unless it will become a full-blown war, which I don't think will happen. The China-Taiwan tension has been around for some time. The tension rises and falls but it never escalated into a war.

It is very common for all kinds of sites and platforms to have fake reviews. But you know one when you see one. Sometimes it is quite easy to tell which one is a paid one and which one is really coming from a user.

But, generally, I'd rather not take the risk and use an unknown exchange. If there are complaints in the most trusted and popular exchanges, you can expect much more of it in an unknown one.

Inanomo has been around since 2018 and yet they don't even have data on CMC and didn't make it to coingecko as well.

It is not as if the effect of the ban is gradual. I think the damage is felt immediately by the market. It has a one-time impact rather than a long-term and sustained one. But once it ends, Bitcoin would start to recover. That is what exactly happened. Now, once China is gone, the Chinese market becomes a potential market. Meaning to say, Bitcoin has gotten back to its feet and now has a huge potential market. If the day would come that China would give a green light to Bitcoin, it certainly would cause a spike to the market.

So there you go. That was one epic battle that would surely go down in the history books of boxing. Fury is the greatest heavyweight. He is now ruling the division.

Wilder seemed to came out a freshened up fighter, a renewed boxer. It was just unfortunate that he wasn't able to sustain with that. It seemed to me that he was still the old boxer inside him. He was hurt by Tyson early on but he was strong and a fighter enough not just to get up and recover but to also hurt and even knock Fury down, not just once but twice.

However, Fury was really the better boxer. He got the stamina. He got the strength. He's simply the best.

I'm going for Fury on this one. Wilder's only chance of winning is by knocking Fury out unconscious. But it seems he now has a lesser chance of accomplishing that than in their previous matches. I also think Wilder is not really in his best emotional shape in this fight. And while I agree with Mike Tyson that Wilder should give his all in the first 6 rounds of the fight, I'm afraid he might not be able to execute that. Fury is Wilder's kryptonite.

Everything they do because they are legally compelled to. They cannot simply abandon the ship at this point. Otherwise, multiple cases will be filed against them. So what choice do they have? They have to show that they are doing something. They have to show that there are developments resulting from their efforts. But I'm afraid this is all just minimum compliance. In other words, just a show. But I hope I'm wrong.

Completely eliminate is something only the obsessed fans or the blinded supporters can speak of. I guess it would be more like meeting halfway rather than one totally replacing the other. If you notice, there isn't really a takeover going on. For one, banks are not really eliminated in the face of the rising Bitcoin. As a matter of fact, they are in the process of adoption. They're even in the frontline now. So I don't think fiat is going to be replaced anytime in the next one hundred years at least. Its dynamics could change, though.

Although I like poker very much, I am not a good player. I guess you simply cannot stick to a strategy or two in poker. And that itself is the strategy.

Also, poker is not purely gambling. And this is where my primary weakness is. I normally fight for my cards until the flop. This costs me a lot most of the time, because I do that regardless of my cards' strength. Chip management indeed matters.

I guess the thing that everybody really avoids in poker is predictability. So it would be a nice strategy to bluff a little, raise once in a while, perhaps all-in a few times, simply call even if you have a very strong hand, and so on.

No, wait a minute, I'm afraid you are going to far with your assumptions. What does this imply, that scammers are brought by cryptocurrency? What if crypto dies? Would that mean scammers will also exit from the picture?  

My point is, whether there is crypto or not, whether crypto will continue to exist or not, scammers will always be here. There is no causal relationship between crypto and scammers. Even before crypto came into this earth, scammers were already here.

For as long as humans exist, scammers will also exist.

It might just be a matter of time before another country will adopt Bitcoin as a legal tender. But, for me, countries don't have to actually give Bitcoin that status. I think it is enough that Bitcoin is legally accepted as an alternative currency which people and businesses have the freedom to use or not. As a legal tender, there is a connotation that business establishments are all required to accept it. Countries must have different set of rules and regulations pertaining to the legal tender status, of course, but to avoid complications it might be enough, at least for now, that Bitcoin is legally acknowledged as an alternative money. 

Well, the most basic of all rules is that you do not invest in something you do not understand. Of course, you speculate, but it doesn't mean you do not understand it first. Speculation has to be founded upon informed analysis. Speculation is not merely wild guess. So a commodity or a stock, whether the price is high or low, has to be carefully scrutinized so that when you invest money in it, you are more or less sure that it will yield some ROI in the future.

However, I cannot speak the same of the crypto market. A meme coin, for example, whose development has been pretty much stagnant could suddenly rise simply due to a tweet. The crypto market sometimes defies logic.

I'm afraid this will only pave way for illegal gambling operators. I hope I'm wrong, but a blanket ban over gambling, with the exception of horse racing, might only cause a lot of unintended consequences. Some of which could be the proliferation of illegal gambling, the failure to monitor and intervene gambling addiction cases, and so on.

I think what needs to be done is not a complete ban but a strict regulation. Of course, implementation is also very vital, which I think is poorly done, if at all, not just in Karnataka but the whole of India.

Yeah, I've read countless of ToS in my life. I have always encountered stipulations such as this. I am always in disagreement with this, but what choice do I have? As a client looking for particular services, I cannot remember a single instance in which I decided not to proceed with a product simply because of a particular clause in the ToS. But it doesn't mean it's all right with me. At the very least, every time a modification is made in the ToS, all users should be promptly informed about it and the specific modifications.

Anyway, as to this particular case with FTX, it is good that everything has been resolved. I guess the user is generally thankful that the funds are returned.