Those who are still talking about transaction fee reductions because of the Ethereum 2.0 implementation still seem to ignore what Vitalik Buterin repeatedly says and said: The London hard fork is not going to change the transaction fees. It will stay high during busy times for quite a while. The transaction fee solutions are still quite a bit away.

Well, I think the way it is going to happen is rather top down, with Bitcoin being top and governments being down. If there is something you can't stop, pretend to embrace it and regulate it / pass laws that you think will appropriately be considered by most of the users. It won't be possible to fully stop Bitcoin. That is a bit similar to gambling websites online. In some countries the governments understood that there is almost no way to fully stop them. So how to benefit as a government regardless? Raise a little bit of taxes, such that gambling websites feel the urge to pay their taxes to play it safe because playing safe isn't that expensive. Bitcoin is similar to that kind of situation. If they prohibit it, they are probably going to raise public cost by a lot only because they have to pursue all these "criminals" who deal with crypto. Drugs is another example, but you get the idea.

Sure, you can apply all kinds of different statistical parameters to detect connections between wallets. Output sizes and so on, but as you say timing is very relevant, but that also applies to mixers for Ethereum or Bitcoin. That is why mixing service providers usually recommend to wait even up to 24 hours if possible. I guess that is where many users think that they can go for shortcuts and 3 hours are also fine, but it is in fact not. You really need to be a patient individual to ensure that you've put the most effort possible into keeping your actions on the blockchain private.

That is one way to see it, right? But those who are a bit more experienced by now and know that Bitcoin can drop also could play it quite a bit smarter than newbies. When people say buy the dip, that is quite hard to do for people are brand new to the market. Those who are around for a while can make those judgments with a bit more certainty, never with full certainty because nobody knows what's going to happen tomorrow or next week, but sometimes I consider a dip a welcome opportunity.

I would say that if nothing completely unforeseen happens, like a real global disaster or some coordinated government attack on Bitcoin, we won't see $20k again ever. Retail investors and institutions would start buying like crazy as soon as Bitcoin drops below the $30k mark because everyone will consider that a huge opportunity. I would also consider it an opportunity. What I am 100% sure about is that we will never ever again see Bitcoin below $10k. For that to happen there must be an event that would kill Bitcoin in its entirety.

According to your logic, is XRP good? If so, why? What does XRP contribute to decentralization in general? Because that is what cryptocurrencies are about right?

Monero as a coin that is aiming at providing strong privacy could run into problems legally. If governments don't want fully private transactions to be available to anyone, the first thing they could do is to prohibit registered and licensed exchanges from listing the coin. There will still be ways to trade it of course, but it will make things a lot harder.

Generally, I like Monero a lot because as long as it is not possible to trace it, and it seems for now that is still the case, it does indeed work like magic money. You send it, it disappears on your end, leaves no trail and shows up on the other end.

I have never really had the impression that other countries, especially Western countries copy China's strategy. Rather it was the other way around except for political ideologies. China isn't ahead two steps everywhere in technology. Most of the technology they have available today was bought or copied from other parts of the world. They are acquiring tech companies like crazy. What they are doing well though is to keep those companies researching and growing. By now they are slowly but surely pumping out innovations that is fully under their control and in their possession.
I think when China bans crypto there might be well developed nations around the world that could see Bitcoin as an opportunity rather than a threat. The key is to integrate it wisely into your economy. I don't know how that could work without undermining one's own financial system, but maybe some governments find smart ways.

Second largest platform for what? Are you talking about market capitalization? You can't put Bitcoin and Ethereum into the same category. Ethereum is a smart contract platform, Bitcoin is not. When it comes to smart contract platforms, Ethereum is still the largest with probably the strongest developers being part of their ecosystem. This is not meant to discredit BSC in any way, but I still think Ethereum is ahead despite its higher fees. I hold them both as they both are great picks for an investment in my opinion. BNB can go to $1000 and Ethereum may soon make it to five figures.

This is actually an interesting point you are bringing up here. If Tether was backed by a bank, it would indeed might have been bailed out by a government. Now that it is a crypto company, governments will let it die with enjoyment. That's where the hostility comes into play towards cryptocurrencies. These bank bailouts back at the time were a big fat joke because it is not like the whole banking sector changed afterwards. They are still trading faulty products, selling that stuff to people who have no clue what they are buying.

When Bitcoin peaks hard and goes into bubble territory, it actually means that the price of Bitcoin is increasing faster than the buying support is building, meaning that liquidity at the price peak becomes extremely thin. Then they have a huge balance in their books, but they can't realize those gains because buying support lacks behind and there is nobody to sell those Bitcoin to at the peak, at least not in masses. That's when a crash is likely and a panic can easily break out, causing other coins to fall as well.

That post of the guy you quoted looked weird anyway. Maybe he could just provide the source for his "rumor" that Elon Musk will launch a coin called space coin. I bet if Elon Musk were to start a coin, it would almost certainly not be called Space coin. Anyway, I guess Elon Musk is just busy enough with the companies he has right now and is not really planning to run a cryptocurrency in addition to what he already got to do.

I think that is what is mostly happening anyway and why it is hard for other smart contract platforms to gain traction. BSC and ETh are so big that the project teams also consider whether they can reach a sufficiently big audience if they launch on yet another smart contract platform where those who are interested have to get another wallet again, sure everything etc. Most have an ETH or BSC wallet anyway due to the practical switch in Metamask and they wouldn't prefer to have another wallet going.

Well for Bitcoin as well as for Ethereum to really go for another massive rally will be hard. I mean I am talking about a several X rally. That would mean Bitcoin crosses the $100,000 mark and Ethereum crosses the $10,000 mark. A lot of money is needed to be poured into those coins to really push them beyond those marks. I expect quite a lot of resistance on the way there.

I consider all coins that are making fun of something or are rather meant to be a joke a meme coin. The weird thing is that if a big name gets behind it (like was the case with Musk and Dogecoin), these meme coins can seriously start flying. Shiba was another example, but those particular trends come to an end at some point. However, topics that are suitable for meme coins will be there forever. It could be about politicians, animals or maybe even soccer players who behave bad. They are almost always just for pump and dump though.

If a project performs really bad in fundraising, tell me what good is it to receive an excessive amount of bounty tokens if it is 100% certain that the project will be dumped into oblivion? I do exactly know what you mean and the sad thing is that even well funded projects decide to cut the bounty in half. That sucks big time and shouldn't happen, but when I see that the project almost failed anyway, there is nothing to win for me if bounty people can give it the rest and let it die. You are running into a deadlock if you didn't raise sufficient funds while paying an unreasonably high bounty. Nobody is going to invest in that situation, meaning that the token will never gain value.

Bitcointalk Username: Noruka
Current post count:957
Merit earned in last 120 days: 3
ETH wallet [Address Must be from MetaMask wallet]:0x862325bc9995EE3E0a218F5A7f20d8C38b0a743A
 

Very good point and I fully agree with it. If the team communicates in a trustworthy and convincing way, even if they cut the bounty in half in order to make sure they'll have enough finances to keep going and finish the product, it is fine. But they should stick to their schedules regarding payments. If they do that and build trust with the people who support them, I also believe that not so many will immediately dump. We should keep in mind though that there are people who do this for a living in poor countries and they might be forced to dump. It hits them even harder if bounties aren't paid out out of a sudden. That just sucks and hurts everyone involved in the end.

Haha yes, regardless of liquidity. Go 100x with literally a non-existent order book because the team holds 95% of the supply and then call it a day: "we've delivered on our promises!"

Well, according to that logic a lot of coins did not die in peace. Or maybe I just failed at decrypting the cryptic language in the white papers and they in fact all reached their goals. Good old times when the white papers became more and more buzz wordy

I once read something like "we may or may not reach our goals, depending on various circumstances". Does that mean they may or may not scam us, depending on various circumstances?

It's also important to know what he means when he says long-term. If he means really long-term, I agree that the top coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum are the best choices. They might not explode, but they can grow steadily and probably will do exactly that. You could say that those coins are the least gamble of them all.

When you say that during the next bull run the top 20 coins could go 10x to 20x, do you know what that means? Do you know that this influx of money has to come from somewhere? When we talk about 20x, you are literally saying that during the next bull run we'll have an overall market cap of around 20 trillion dollars. Does that sound realistic to you for the next bull run?