Zuckerberg grilled over Facebook and Libra in congressional hearing - live (record)

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/live/2019/oct/23/libra-mark-zuckerberg-testifies-live-facebook-cryptocurrency-latest-updates

Zuckerberg directly stated today that Facebook is ready to exit the Libra project if regulators do not approve it. He also said, as far as I know, that the Libra project is not an independent association from Facebook.
This means that this very tricky move Facebook can crank up to save face, and enter the Libra project later when it is convenient and approved by regulators.

Perhaps I can agree with you that essential goods should be available to everyone in order to not only survive the crisis, but it is also possible to speculate on this. However, I have a question in what kind of assets you invest so that they do not depreciate in the future, and there are not many such assets.
Since we have already touched on essential goods such as water, food, gasoline, and so on, all other assets are, in principle, subject to depreciation during periods of crisis.

I believe that bitcoin ATMs in Venezuela and the rest of the world are a very useful thing for the future development of blockchain and cryptocurrencies in the world.
Indeed, even if now people do not have enough funds to use cryptocurrencies in the future, the situation may change, and in this case we should already have a developed infrastructure that allows all people in a wide range of countries to easily exchange and withdraw cryptocurrencies.

I do not see anything surprising in this, given that everyone who is not lazy is now joining the cryptocurrency hype.
Cryptocurrencies provide quite a lot of potential for the development of the future, this is a financial system that may well replace the current, or may not replace, but somehow it has a significant impact on the processes taking place in the world today. Due to the fact that a very strong interest in cryptocurrencies has already been created, the development of the technology itself continues without stopping, more and more people are accepting the idea that cryptocurrency is possibly our future. Even if the cryptocurrency does not receive maximum distribution in the future, it has a certain potential. Therefore, the largest companies are afraid of lost profits and they will maximize their influence in the cryptocurrency sphere in one way or another.

If you think carefully, you will find not many methods that will help you and your asset to survive the crisis without losses. Personally, I am going to diversify my assets so that the largest shares in assets are less prone to price dynamics during such crises. Although it is possible that I could be mistaken and some of these assets, in view of the new largest global crisis, all will fall in value.

The past is speculative coins on which people tried to make quick profits. Future - coins with certain benefits, used as a reward or fuel in ecosystems. Such coins are not an additional means to motivate people to use the project and its services. Utility tokens are the future. It can still be assumed that in the future STO coins will dominate among institutional groups.

If I and my half had a common budget and bitcoin earned together, then I would have easily opened my wallet to her. However, most often it is better that only one person in a pair knows everything, since this increases security. They should also leave instructions if something happens to you so that your soulmate can find your BTC.

I think Ethereum will once again disappoint a lot of people in view of the fact that it has been under the gun since 2017 when, from the moment when people bought it at a price of $ 1000 -1500 $, which means they will wait for it to return to at least such marks after the release of update 2.0. It is possible that a lot of funds will be invested in the Ethereum before the upgrade.

Personally, I don’t have any specific expectations at all because in my opinion all expectations always spoil people's lives. Take for example those people who are now actively leaving the market, they leave only because their expectations were not met. Having entered the moment when the market was at its peak, they expected big profits and as a result they had to bitterly disappointed only because they had high expectations.
When you have no expectations you have no disappointments

Probably a hype around certain projects such as Libra and telegram could well create a strong wave that could give a breakthrough to the market if one of these projects were successful, in particular, I think the telegram project would have a special impact. However, given how the regulators tightly took up such large projects, it is possible that all of 2019 we will remain in place and maybe even see several recessions.
The market needs a catalyst that will again attract the attention of cryptocurrencies and will allow attracting new money to the market. While I do not see what could become such a utilizer in 2019.

Then a system will be needed that produces complex calculations of bitcoin price adjustments due to the dynamics of its price. Or a system that will exchange bitcoin for fiat and make payments, but then why not immediately pay with fiat money without using intermediaries. Fiat greatly interferes with your concept, in which case it is necessary that all products have a price only in bitcoin.

Even now, at the time of recession, we can say that the market really looks better than before vey bitcoin is being traded at a fairly high mark, and altcoins have a good potential for growth at least twice in case of a small push. Accumulation will indeed be the most optimal action now. As for the halving, I think that after this event we will see growth no earlier than a year later, as it always has been. Accumulation and Hold are my choice.

Libra can replace the dollar. Imagine that you can exchange all your dollars for digital dollars that have a legal status and are accepted absolutely everywhere.
Such a thing can become a single world currency, because it is completely centralized and has a stable fixed price, which makes it safe from market fluctuations.
And would regulators attack the project so hard if it weren’t at all dangerous for them?

The most important thing is to understand how the project will implement its idea. How much is it applicable to real life, and whether it will be in demand in the future. Or the project will go along the path of marketing and speculation in order to get a quick profit and send your coin to the flat. It depends on whether the investment in this project will be long-term or short-term.

Top 50 altcoins is a great investment if you invest now while altcoins are at the bottom. The proposal made by the author of the topic is aimed at those people who bought altcoins at a price three times more expensive than now. He recommends that they sell them in order to fix losses and make a little money on the growth of bitcoin. After all, he offers to sell in favor of bitcoins.

Reputation = money. It is worth a large exchange to place a scam project at home, as its reputation will collapse instantly, which will lead to an outflow of users from the exchange and its further boycott.
All subsequent fundraising will fail, which will not bring any profit to the exchange.

To admit, I have not met exchanges conducting IEOs and not requiring the passage of an identification procedure, except for the two you listed.
Identification is necessary in the first place so that the project is not financed by dirty money, because in this case the project may begin to have problems with regulators and, therefore, the exchange that conducted the IEO too.

Amazing things are happening now. The regulators turned to face Libra as opposed to TON. The libra already has people in the Senate who support her. G7 spoke positively about stable coins, which was not the case before. At the same time, they declare the full regulation that Libra provides.

It’s hard to say, it all depends on the project. Some successful projects simply do not need to update their forum threads, or they rarely do this. But most often, given the number of bad projects on the market, this banal death of the project leads to a stop in the updates of the announcement branch or its quick death. Why should developers maintain interest in the project if they got everything they wanted.