I'm sorry that this happened to you, and I hope there's a chance to recover the funds because there's your passphrase there somewhere. I also want to join others by saying that it seems that your problem wasn't a mistake in choosing a crypto for investment, but not being attentive enough about where you're storing your coins. ETH was a good choice, so perhaps you can spot an attractive coin successfully once again. IMO, a very promising coin to look into is Polkadot, and now that BTC price is down, it's also worth looking into. Make sure you store your passphrase in multiple locations so that you don't lose funds again. Good luck!

Game 1:  30'  1-2 Leeds United
Game 2:  30'  0-1 Arsenal

If you look at BTC and ETH price charts, you can see that Bitcoin grows bigger and, more importantly for risk management, falls not as low as ETH does if things don't go well. At the same time, ETH's market capitalization has been on the rise lately, whereas BTC's has been going down. I think it's temporary, but perhaps diversifying a little and going 70% BTC and 30% ETH makes sense. Bitcoin is a safer investment, so I would put more money into it, but Ethereum is clearly not going away and is gaining attention, so putting a third into it is probably not too risky.

I think some might drop out of the game because over the years some changes occur and sometimes new coins actually make it to the top. But overall, I think looking at market capitalization to determine the safest choices is a good strategy. These won't be the coins giving the best short-term profit because they don't get as pumped as some shitcoins, but they are the ones that will probably remain relevant in the future. I think Doge is too high, but will not completely die. Polkadot is not high enough because it's a great project with lots of publicity and a strong team.

This might be true, but it's just a speculation. Extrapolating data from the past and expecting it to be accurate in describing the future is a dubious strategy. We don't know how far Bitcoin can go, and after the last ATH there were years of stagnation, so it's reasonable to predict something similar will happen this time. Technical analysis isn't science, and there's no way to know whether this chart provides a reasonable prediction or not. IMO, there's clearly a strong support for $50k, but very weak support of $60k. So it's hard for me to believe that BTC can go significantly above $60k and remain there for a while.

Op's assuming that most of us would like physical gambling but cannot do it because of the pandemic, but that's actually a question that deserves a separate discussion IMO. For instance, while I played poker in real life, it was only for fun and with my friends. As for gambling, I only do it online and would never even go to a physical casino because I prefer not to interact with people unless I really have to, especially given the stereotypes about criminals hanging out in casinos. I think that the share of online gambling will continue to grow after the pandemic is over because it's very useful, flexible and comfortable. It's also easier for casinos because they don't need to rent a building, have that much staff and things like that.

The KYC question is difficult. The documents are checked by professional companies that specialize in KYC checks rather than by casinos (although things can be different at different places, of course). I wouldn't feel very inclined to share my identity online like that, but there's also a bigger problem with KYC that I've learned recently. A friend of mine got a KYC check at a crypto casino, and I was helping him pass it because he didn't manage to do it on his own. And we couldn't get is right together either, even though we had all documents in place and did our best! You load an ID, and then a utility bill. At first, it says that it's all uploaded successfully, and then tells you that your utility bill image is not clear enough (even though it's a high-quality photo). And then the next time you're loading that same ID photo, but a different utility bill where the address is typed in with larger letters, but now it says that the ID birthdate doesn't correspond to the information you've previously provided, even though it totally does correspond and the website had no problem with the same photo during the previous try. So passing a KYC, as I've learned from this experience, can also take a long time and become a really difficult process, even if you provide truthful and real documents.

hilariousetc, congrats on huge wins!
It's exciting that the season and the competition is almost over, and I feel like predicting the outcomes became way harder because underdogs are now fighting hard to finish decently. The last round was terrible for me, and there were many outcomes which had less than 25% expectancy rate in this competition. This round has clearly been more in accordance with expectations of participants so far, and I also got lucky with the Brighton - West Ham draw prediction.
How about you? Do you think we'll see significant changes in the top-10 by the end of the season?

That's a huge amount of money! I've heard of the hacking the pipeline story, but I thought they sorted it out on their own. Of course, it's not okay to just hack companies to get a bunch of money, and it's technically a crime, but then again, I don't support the usage of petroleum which the pipeline systems helps to distribute, so I don't feel particularly sympathetic towards the company either. The hacking group says it's apolitical, so it wasn't some act of protest against huge corporations and ignoring the ecological problems, so that's a bit disappointing. In any case, I don't think it's good that these hackers requested the payment in BTC because I'm sure this publicity will be used against cryptos' reputation.

It's a good story, and I haven't heard of it before. That being said, the Carbon footprint is getting bigger over time, and surely the development and mass adoption of various technologies contributed to that. As for the estimates being very off, it's good that they were and that it's not as bad as some thought it would be. I also think that it was indeed uncalled for to stop accepting BTC payments since it's really hard to fully assess the real impact of BTC (because often the sources of electricity for mining aren't known) and to compare it with the impact of other things. However, I do think that the energy sources matter and the issue of fossil fuels shouldn't be disregarded.

Forgive me for not knowing this, but how is Kuwaiti dinar a top currency in the world? When someone asks about top fiat, USD, EUR and perhaps CNY come to mind, and I've never seen or heard of Kuwaiti dinar even being available in local fiat exchange places. If we judge fiat by them being traded, the most traded currencies are USD, EUR, JPY and GBP. Kuwaiti dinar isn't even in top-35, according to Wikipedia. And if it's not traded, it means that other countries aren't very interested in it. Or did you mean that it has the highest value? But IMO having technically the highest value while not of interest to the international community isn't enough to say that the currency is the top one.
As for the growing popularity of Bitcoin, maybe that's because it offers things that fiat cannot: a limited supply, decentralization, investment opportunity.

While Bitcoin can be considered money, I think it's important to remember that it's probably not how most people see or use it nowadays. Some trade Bitcoin, others use it as a store of value, and probably a minority of people actually treat it as money and spend it on goods and services directly. Moreover, while I'd like to see the future where Bitcoin is more adopted as money, it's also important to note that it has disadvantages in comparison with fiat that present serious obstacles to it being used for everyday purchases. I'm talking about high fees and slow transactions. So while in theory it's all great, in practice, Bitcoin isn't very efficient for everyday money usage.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was also thinking more in the line with what FatFork wrote. This whole halving thing means that there will be a division by two going essentially ad infinitum, just like in the Ancient Dichotomy paradox by Zeno. Unless, of course, some limit like 1 Satoshi (or more 'cause there are probably things I haven't taken into account here) finishes this process. At that point, however, it's possible that Satoshis will get divided into even smaller bits, I think, so when the amount will be reaching 21 million forever. Or does the point that we won't have precisely 21 million mean that this number can somehow be exceeded? In that case, the validation line in the code that was discussed above would become a problem, no?

You're right that when institutions become unreliable, the price can change as rapidly as when newbies were investing back in 2017. However, I do believe that it's different this time because the support for high prices is clearly much stronger than back then. For instance, while the price did drop to around $47k, it's back to $50k once again, so even such a big event as Tesla stopping accepting BTC managed to cause a 15% drop of the price which was shortly reduced to a 10% drop. While significant, it's not that huge for Bitcoin and could happen for other reasons at any point. Investors might pull out, but I don't think they'll do it simultaneously, and I don't think the price will remain low for a long time after these events.

Well, since his net worth is extremely huge, I think it's not a big loss to him. But since Bitcoin suffered a loss, I think it's fair that so did Tesla (if it's true that Tesla's stock was affected by it). Musk shouldn't have cancelled Bitcoin payments, this option was boosting both the popularity of Tesla and of Bitcoin. He cites environmental concerns, but that doesn't account for the environmental impact of processing fiat by banks and for the fact that electricity sources can be different. I mean, his own cars can raise concerns similar in nature to those of mining Bitcoin because in both cases we're talking about increased electricity usage.

When it comes to doge, it's indeed a highly speculative coin which is not so much the playground for the riches, but for one particular rich guy who's obsessed with it. As for his move with Tesla stopping accepting Bitcoin because of environmental concerns, I think it wasn't a fair thing to do. However, Bitcoin lost only 10% of value compared to its price a week ago, so it's not a huge hit, and I'm sure it can bounce back. Crypto prices are volatile, but it doesn't mean that the price is controlled by the riches or that these price changes are all there is to cryptos.

I'm against cars in general, so I know I'm not going to buy Tesla (although I do believe they're better than other cars in terms of environmental impact, so I'm really glad they exist). From that perspective, I don't care how Tesla is sold and which payment options are available, but since I'd want cryptos to be considered more as money and I want to see more Teslas around (instead of cars running on fuel), I care about it. I think that Doge is an okay coin, so accepting it as payment could be a good thing. And this would definitely bump Doge even more. Almost 80% of votes are in favor, so now I'm really wondering if he decides to go for it.

I haven't heard of this thing before, but I guess it can be true that summer isn't great for investments because people switch to vacations and relaxing, so resources are pulled out of many areas during this time. Looking at the picture regarding Bitcoin, though, it doesn't seem obvious that summer is worse than winter. There've been 5 years of January being pretty bad and 4 years of November, whereas June was actually fine most of the years and July being bad during 4 years (so the same as the allegedly good month of November). March, August and September seem to be the worst, so not pulling out at the end of February but doing it in May doesn't make much sense based on the data about Bitcoin.
Anyway, I'm not going to participate in these things because I don't care about short-term price changes. I sell when I need to and hodl when I can, and "sell in May and go away" thing ain't changing that.

I think that for now it's a potentially dangerous thing that we should keep an eye on, but it's also something that probably won't get particularly popular in the mining community. I don't fully trust agencies like OFAC because of course their decisions can be politically motivated and addresses can get on that list for dubious reasons. But I agree with those who say that miners in China aren't likely to be interested in complying with whatever the US authorities claim to be illegal, so the issue seems minor for now. That being said, China could totally introduce a similar thing and enforce it upon mining farms, so the risks can get very real very fast.

It's a fact that there's been a year since halving, but implying that it means Bitcoin growth was caused by halving is incorrect. There isn't sufficient data on this matter. With the same level of success I could say that Bitcoin cost $5k at the beginning of the pandemic and a year after that it cost $53k. Or that Bitcoin cost $29k on New Year's Eve, and cost $59k at the beginning of April. All of these things are technically true, but at best they signify a correlation, not a causation. So counting halving as a significant factor of BTC growth doesn't have enough grounds behind it. As for the future growth or decline, nobody knows that for sure.