The video clip on this page has Bernard Hopkins' breakdown of GGG vs Canelo.

http://www.boxingscene.com/video-bernard-hopkins-breaks-down-canelo-vs-golovkin--120475

Bernard Hopkins seems to think GGG won't be prepared for the level of competition Canelo brings & he thinks it'll come down to whether GGG can adapt.

I hope other boxing analysts chime in and try to predict the fight. I don't remember that ever happening much like it does in MMA.

There are a number of websites devoted towards providing small start ups with crowdfunding solutions.

Kickstarter, patreon, gofundme, etcetera.

Search for crowdfunding, start up financing and similar terms should yield decent results.

If you're looking for crypto crowdfunding solutions, you might be able to do it using an ICO. I'm not certain what the regulations or guidelines are in play there.

Hahaha.  

Reminds me of a poster on another forum who claimed to be from the future. He called himself John Titor. Its a famous internet story. Someone might even have patented the method of time travel he claimed to have used.

I think if we still have bitcoin in 2020 the price could be higher than $12,000.

Many media figureheads and chinese bureaucrats are launching attacks at bitcoin and the price is barely moving.

I wonder if globalists and cronyists are surprised at the relatively small amount of damage they've inflicted. Its almost as if most people aren't listening to them anymore? As they're saying bitcoin's price "should be $2,700" they may be projecting the price to near half. That could be their end goal. I'm happy to see their attacks fail.

Does anyone get the impression this is a coordinated effort between china and media spokespersons? This was planned by someone?

The basic rules of thumb are:

#1 When there are more buyers than sellers, the price will increase.

#2 When there are more sellers than buyers, the price will decrease.

#3 If the number of buyers and sellers are near to equal, the price will remain stable.

These are basics investors and traders use to predict which direction a price will move.

They've had a lot of success with that. People really believe russia hacked the US elections despite all evidence pointing to an internal leak inside the DNC. People believe there are more than 2 genders simply because of gender fluidity campaigns on tumblr. People believe travel bans designed to keep terrorists out of the country are racist. They believe Trump was planning to put gays and transgenders in concentration camps because social media campaigns spread those lies.

It might seem silly to think our collective lack of knowledge and education could be taken advantage of. Looking around the world however that's exactly what is happening and it does seem to be very effective.

If you do use a wallet, check to see if you're using the correct website. There are many phishing sites masquerading as bitcoin wallets that will steal your crypto. Internet wallets like blockchain are ok. The main drawback with those are they have the private key associated with your bitcoin address. For security purposes desktop wallets which in theory allow only you to have the private key to your account are more secure.

Of course security is a multi layered thing. A desktop wallet probably won't be the most secure thing if someone manages to install a rootkit or trojan that keylogs what someone's private key is on their PC. There are many vectors of attack/defense when it comes to OPSEC(operational security).

I've tried using scrapers/web crawlers/spiders in the past to cross platform arbitrage on exchanges. I also had an app to calculate price difference between coins to try cross coin arbitrage via taking advantage of price gaps. This was like back in 2013.

There could be an opportunity for a browser extension, smart phone app, desktop app that scrapes those types of data across exchanges(assuming someone hasn't already made one, which is very likely). I get the impression there may not be a lot of people who need those types of stats. Although, I could be wrong on that.

There's a website called:

http://haveibeenpwned.com

It searches via email address to check how many times an account has been referenced in leaks connected to known security breaches.

I'll probably make new email accounts eventually and do away with old ones which were compromised.

From searching my own email it was connected to bitcointalk, btc-e and tumblr leaks.   

In reference to the 2008 real estate bubble, it helps if people watch this to help put things into perspective. (It is a youtube clip which shows footage of analysts in the mainstream media warning of a housing bubble as early as 2005)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ79Pt2GNJo

What happened with the housing bubble was, buying of real estate/homes was on the decline. Banks lowered their home loan qualification standards in an effort to keep demand steady. The government also incentivized high risk real estate loans which had a high rate of failure. These measures were taken to compensate for the diminishing buying power of the average american which in turn translated to diminished demand for homes/real estate.

If I remember right, eventually these loans (with their increasingly lower standards) were bundled together in a derivative. The problem with home loans is they carry a 15 to 30 year term accumulating high short term debt, expecting to profit over the long term. When a large number of these loans fails early on, without the time necessary for loan issuing banks to make back their money or break even, it can make a decent dent in a bank's liability balance sheet.

Of course one thing not many mention is the "home loan toxic assets" may have only accounted for 15% to 30% of the actual bailout. There may have been other derivatives which failed around the time freddiemac and fanniemae failed.

Long story short the 2008 bubble was driven by lowering standards to prop up diminishing demand which could be the complete opposite of bitcoin's current market which can be defined in terms of increasing demand with higher standards. The 2008 bubble and btc's current market could well be opposites.

Part of bitcoin's volatility is due to it being a new invention, an emerging technology. It lacks the benefit of being tested through trial and error the way fiat or gold has been. Other inventions like the automobile or personal computer have faced similar trials and tribulations (volatility) in their early periods of history. Its inaccurate and unfair to compare bitcoin's volatility with older and more established technologies like paper money. A better comparison may be to compare bitcoin with marijuana legalization. They're both controversial, emerging, markets which are volatile due to them being relatively new.

Its normal for the stock market to experience volatility when news stories involving a certain stock or bond are published. Some centralized and regulated fiat currencies like the bolivar (venezuelan currency) are subject to extraordinarily higher degrees of volatility than bitcoin is. There are many historical examples of fiat currencies hyperinflating. Many world economies are experiencing upwards of 8% inflation per year. Its not hard to make a case for bitcoin having less volatility and inflation than many centralized, regulated, currencies issued by governments.

China knows this news will push the price down. It is possible they released this news deliberately to lower the price and give themselves a good buy position before the next big pump. There's no guarantee the proposed ban on exchanges will be enforced. China has a "one child policy" which wealthier demographics are able to buy their way past. In china it may be much easier to avoid laws and regulations with bribes than it is in the united states or most western nations. This ban doesn't have to be a hard ban etched in stone. It could have no palpable effect over the long term.

When people discuss stock markets and topics like price manipulation come up. This type of news can fall under price manipulation. The information doesn't mean much within the grand scheme of things. But that doesn't matter if the end goal is to move the price in one direction or other, with the intent of profiteering.

I think that's misleading.

Its meant to imply 10% of world GDP will be reflected in blockchain -- if banks and other large financial institutions switch to blockchain


Blockchains are to finance what bittorrent is to downloading files.

A case might be made for bittorrent not being the most efficient method to download files. But in some cases the different format has advantages which might outweigh any disadvantages.

The only games I can think of where a decent sum of btc can be won are fantasy sports games related to gambling similar to draft kings or fanduel.

RPG's, MMORPG's and other games involving btc usually payout similar to faucets. You can earn btc that way but for most it probably wouldn't be worth the time and effort if you're planning to use it as a way to earn income.

Some whales make their money by buying in @ $4,000.

After buying in, they go on social media and tell all their followers the price will "go to the moon".

The price goes up to $5,000 on increased demand of casual buyers entering the game.

Whales sell at $5,000 causing the price to dip down to $4,000.

That's one issue with being a casual.

They seldom hear about good opportunities unless its a whale tricking them into buying something to generate profits for themselves.

It wasn't a good fight. They were both waiting to counter & spent a lot of time not doing anything waiting for the other person to make a move.

Gilbert Melendez vs Jeremy Stephens was a brutal fight. Can't say that was really a good fight either so much as a one sided beat down.

Ilir Latifi vs Tyson Pedro might have been the best fight on the card that wasn't a completely one sided affair.

One currency is a centralized paradigm.

Centralized paradigms are very similar, possibly identical to monopolies.

Monopolism could restrict innovation, advancement and progress.

An example of a centralized paradigm or monopoly is the telecommunications monopoly that existed in the united states until the 1980's. It wasn't until after that monopoly was broken up that real progress in the industry was made in the form of push button phones, cell phones, cheaper long distance calls, lower monthly phone bills.

When one currency has control of the entire market, there's no need for it to improve or grow.

Advancement typically comes from competition such as AMD vs intel. If either AMD or intel had a monopoly over the market for the past 10 years there's no way chips would have advanced or innovated as much as they have. Competition and progress tend to be found together.

Also monopolies and centralized paradigms are correlated with exploitation and unethical business practices. One currency is similar to pharmaceuticals in the healthcare industry which raise their drug prices 1000% due to them being the only drug on the market.

A more decentralized mining paradigm split between countries other than china could be a step towards the type of future Satoshi originally envisioned.

People may have witnessed firsthand the disadvantages of miner centralization in terms of the amount of influence chinese miners wielded during fork negotiations due to something resembling a controlling majority of miners.

Russia pledged $200 million towards bitcoin mining in previous news releases. It remains to see if they will follow through. There seems a decent chance we'll see mining decentralize further.

As far as I know, Mao Zedong's revolution was primarily funded by international foreign bankers. The same might be said of Joseph Stalin and Valdimir Lenin's revolution in russia. Also Che Guevara and Fidel Castro's revolution in cuba. Many if not all communist revolutions & regimes were funded and paid for by international banks.

In discussing china, to some extent, Mao Zedong was likely a puppet of globalists. Mao's party affiliation, values, ideals, economic and foreign policy. All of those things were likely created by banks who funded Mao. It may be accurate to say that today nothing has changed. China is still ruled by international bankers who coordinate behind the scenes.

If this is true then it may not be china banning crypto exchanges but rather china following a script written by banks.

I've had this issue numerous times. Its caused by the idea that history or circumstances will repeat.

Sometimes its good to be reminded that every case is different and unique. We as people try to identify patterns in things like price movements. What happens if there are no patterns? That could be the most frightening prospect & the one we try to avoid by expecting history to repeat.

This happens a lot in sports. If Ronda Rousey wins 5 fights in a row. People expect her to continue to win so that history can repeat. Of course any trend is likely to be broken at some point in time. The same principle could apply to markets, currencies, price movements. It may only be a case of when.