I wrote about this a while back.

Identifying Satoshi would be an ugly experience for sure. The smear campaign would be one for the history books.

I think they will have their own respective uses in the financial system.

I could see a digital dollar being what we use in stores for everyday transactions, while bitcoin being a strong reserve asset/SOV.

I would love to see the LN take the load of everyday transactions, but in all honesty, the government use various legal means to ensure their currency is what is used in stores.

Tennis is one of those sports that I wont follow as the year progresses, but will always stop to watch when I come across it.

There's always that time in the summer where the only thing on is baseball. Football, hockey, and basketball are all out of season. This is when tennis becomes of interest to me. I have always loved watching Nadal play.

I am a huge Chelsea fan, I am not sure how I would feel about this.

The problem is that he is such a controversial figure. You will have some fans that will boycott games if something like this were to happen.

I have nothing horrible to say about Mr. Trump, but I just know wherever he goes, a storm brews.

This is what I have been attempting to focus on these past few months. It doesn't matter how large your wallet is, if you ignore mental health you will be doing yourself a lot of damage.

Getting off of the terminal has been the best way for me to relax. It is always good to step away.

The whole purpose of bitcoin is to provide an alternative to cash/gold. Legal tender laws and forcing people to use a certain currency defeats the purpose of why we have bitcoin in the first place.

People should be able to pay with whatever they please. While yes, a world with crypto only payments would be sweet, it's simply not feasible at this time. There are far, far too many people that are clueless as to how to work a wallet or any piece of crypto-related hardware. Education and time will solve this.

While it would be tremendous for bitcoin to be accepted world-wide as legal tender, it's success is not reliant on attaining that title.

Bitcoin is a perfect store of value. As long as it maintains the integrity that it has had all of these years, people will continue to look to view it as such. To answer your question, bitcoin will be successful as long as the integrity/durability of the protocol remains.

I was blown to see they are including biometrics on a hardware wallet. If they are, I have strong doubts that this will be the only way to verify. For example, you will not be able to sign a transaction with your fingerprint alone; the verification process would likely include a PIN of some sort.

Like you, I agree having biometrics would not be a very safe way to secure a wallet. Especially when you consider our favorite $5 attacks.

Well if you recall from months back, Elon said his doge holdings are insignificant to that of his bitcoin holdings.

People don't understand that Elon has significantly more bitcoin than any other crypto in his portfolio. He just wants to cover all the things he said in the past were "good".

The thing is I can't see either of those nations physically attacking the Russian homeland. What I am saying is that the sanctions will provoke cyber attacks from Russia. I don't think any country in this scenario would be foolish enough to mount a ground assault on enemy soil. It almost feels like political suicide at this point.

Bitcoin provides us with the strongest form of money available on the planet. It's decentralized ledger has a literal perfect track record against any and all attacks. While bugs have been discovered, none of them have resulted in stolen coins from other wallets.

If you think a network like that is worth the power consumption, than this solves the problem. The thing is..there are people who don't think bitcoins power consumption is worth it's utility. If you ask them why, they will surely not give you a reasonable response.

So essentially, this is all point of view. Some people view this level of power consumption to be acceptable, given that it is giving us the most secure money the world has ever seen. Others see this power consumption as an unnecessary waste by a current fad.

I am curious if you are running your coffee stand using LN or just using on chain transactions. I cant imagine it being very convenient especially for a business to take on chain payments in regards to selling things in person. If you are using on-chain transactions, have you had any impatient customers waiting for the block to be validated? Obviously you don't have these issues if you are running some sort of lightning service.

Fiat/legacy finance firms launder money on a significantly larger scale than crypto. To use that as the excuse for why crypto is "bad" is just laughable.

*Their main concern is loosing financial control to an open network, not whether it's used for laundering money.

The situation between Russia and Ukraine has been something many of you have been following.

Many people are set on the idea that Russia will never invade Ukraine because of the repercussions from other global powers. The United States has already issues a warning of sanctions should Russia invade Ukraine.

However, some have speculated that Russia could retaliate in the form of cyber attacks in the light of any sanctions. These attacks would likely be focused on key infrastructure throughout the country(ies). This includes water systems, power grids, military comms systems, and whole lot more.

We all saw the cyber attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure a while back. The damage they were able to cause through those "practice" runs were just a taste of what they could potentially do in future attacks.

I'm not saying we bend over and allow them to do as they please, but I do believe we need to take into consideration how they could retaliate if we decide to start slapping them with sanctions.

It has been revealed that United States infrastructure severely lacks counter measures for cyber attacks. While there are companies and organizations looking to get this fixed, I believe it needs to be treated with a stronger sense of urgency.

Let's say Russia decides to go ahead and invade and the United States does end up slapping them with sanctions.

Couldn't Russia retaliate with cyber warfare?

There has been strong evidence the past couple of years that they have been honing their infrastructure attacks. We saw the attacks in Ukraine and the damage they caused. News outlets have brought up the concern of US infrastructure lacking any serious cyber attack protection.

I'm not saying the United States shouldn't place sanctions; I'm saying that they would be foolish to think Russia doesn't have a backup plan.

I've said this in posts before, if quantum computers managed to crack bitcoin wallets, we would have a lot more to worry about than just bitcoin. This would pose a serious risk to many forms of encryption. (I say many because of quantum 'resistant' algorithms.)

Privacy and security would be at an unprecedented risk if current quantum computers had these cracking capabilities. This being said, its useless to worry about something like this happening as it would have much more serious implications than the security of your bitcoin.

I just hope that this is implemented correctly unlike how it was done in El Salvador. While, I am not opposed to legal tender laws, I think they need to be created with the people in mind.

Dont forget El Salvador's law was passed without the public knowing, and was also passed in the dead of night. While I dont think the El Salvadorian government had any ill intentions, the way they went about getting this bill passed wasn't exactly the most transparent.

Just to be clear, MicroStrategy is not the largest bitcoin holder, but the largest corporate bitcoin holder. Meaning of all corporations with bitcoin on their balance sheets, they have the largest amount.

Michael Saylor will continue to load up on bitcoin no matter the price levels. He has bought at ATH plenty of times. Tesla has to be careful how it goes about publicly investing in bitcoin. While they havent sold any, I cant see them making another public purchase any time soon.

This is entirely a question of perspective.

This question largely relies on information like, "What country do you live in?", "What are your living standards?", "What do you view as comfortable?"

Any change to these questions may change what you think will be "enough" money. What someone in Nigeria thinks is enough money, will almost certainly not be the same as someone from Dubai.

Not many realize that this is a large key to happiness.

Having a good work/life balance is key to anyone keeping a healthy mind. If you are not taking care of yourself, you are hindering your own happiness. I'm sure there are plenty of us that have very comfortable sums of money, but how many of them take care of themselves and lead a happy/healthy life?