I don't really think this is the case here

Though I agree that cryptocurrency trading is pretty much like gambling. What I think is that people were blindly believing that Bitcoin was going to rise only. If you read the forum a couple years ago, everyone was euphoric about Bitcoin's future. So instead of getting out of their positions immediately when things turned from bad to worse in early 2018, they started adding more to their market exposure. Obviously, this couldn't end well

Things have dramatically changed since then

I guess many of us would be extremely curious to see what would happen now with LN and SegWit in the mainnet if we were to face the same situation. And that would be a decisive answer to your stance that Bitcoin hasn't matured as a currency, though I'm strongly inclined to think that people would just start using LN in earnest to avoid the exorbitant fees we had to pay in 2017


I essentially agree with this part as Bitcoin will likely be a "digital gold", i.e. a store of value rather than a means of payment if it is going to succeed big time in the future

Well, Warren Buffett is not a god after all

Personally, I don't agree with him and his words on Bitcoin, but we should take into account which business and investment environment he comes from. It just means that we shouldn't blindly trust anyone and their word, be it in favor of crypto or against it. On the other hand, I perfectly well understand why Buffett and investors of his caliber may not be interested in Bitcoin. It is simply too small and too risky, so it is not worth it to them


If he invested 1M, he might in fact have been able to profit handsomely in %% terms. But 26M millions is simply dust to him in absolute terms. But if he invested 1B, he would be a bagholder by now. I leave it to you to guess why

I'm not sure if there are demo accounts for that

You see, margin trading involves a lot of really complicated stuff on both ends of the stick. It is demanding not only on you (in terms of trading expertise) but on the exchange as well (in terms of technical complexity), so it is unlikely that you will be able to find demo accounts offering this type of trading to novice traders

Further, such demo trading can in fact turn harmful in the end, especially if it is a bit different in respect to things like margin calls and similar tricky matters. In other words, you can easily get into wrong habits which may cost you dear when you switch to real trading

It doesn't matter what people want

As it is what they actually do which counts in the end. People want to buy at the bottom, and this is what your "people want to buy but want to be sure that their asset will retains its value" essentially boils down to. But who is to pay for the party? If everyone wants to buy at the bottom (which is understandable), who is going to push the prices up really? You see, prices can't grow without someone buying all the way down or up the road

Why should it necessarily disrupt the previous ecosystem?

Technically, the two systems, i.e. a payment system based on Bitcoin and a legacy payment system based on fiat are not disrupting each other in any way. You, as a merchant, can integrate Bitcoin into your shop in addition to whatever you might already be using, and the two will live peacefully together. If anything, it gives consumers more choice provided they are actually going to consummate that choice (i.e. pay with crypto)

Halving can in fact be a good or even perfect trigger for a new bull cycle, but without strong fundamentals, it will likely be very short lived and small. After all, the reward halving only diminishes the supply of new coins but doesn't reverse it. And I don't think either that the previous reward halving which occurred in July 2016 caused the bull run to 20k, though we can't completely exclude that it played a factor in that rally and more importantly in starting it

And there is not much left to diminish anyway

Ironically, Buffett is really a smart person

As he was telling what was going to happen and really happened. If people actually listened to him and what he was telling about crypto, we wouldn't have so many disappointed and despaired, hapless and hopeless bagholders now. And even more ironically, without them, without all this relentless speculation, we might have been much better off in terms of adoption by now. As you can see, things are more complicated than they look at first glance

I think things are not that simple

The halving halves the block reward (as the name correctly suggests), but it is not the halving itself which matters here. It is the reduction of coins relative to total supply which plays by far more significant role here. And with each halving this ratio keeps diminishing until halvings are not going to affect the supply in any significant degree even though the reward is still being halved every 4 years

Let's cut the crap here, mate

Most people are involved in Bitcoin for profits, even if some of them may claim to the contrary, and it is kinda normal. Buffett has proved that he certainly knows his shit, i.e. knows how to earn money. So it doesn't matter what he thinks about Bitcoin (we all know what he thinks). It is his skills, expertise and life experience in general which are of interest to us. Yes, he does mistakes (which he evidently admits) but it doesn't take anything from his wisdom (actually, it may even add more value to it). Well, this is what I think at least (you may think different, I don't mind)

Only time will tell

But if the bottom is near, you can (and should) put your money where your mouth is. For example, I short Bitcoin Cash as I expect its price to fall below 50 dollars. This is my target as shorting below makes no sense as the potential profits become not worth it even if this shitcoin goes down to zero in the end (which I don't mind at all). I also have some Bitcoin shorts but these are mostly for hedging, not so much for speculating, apart from making a few bucks now and then. So personally, I'm kinda neutral on Bitcoin price in general

The price started to rise before the halving

Though I agree that it was mostly hype back then, while the real rise started only after a couple of months past the actual event (if that is your point). Also, I agree that may interesting things can happen prior to reward halving. However, it can also be said that many not so interesting things can happen as well up to a point of being absolutely anticlimactic (say, Bakkt turning into a complete disaster). So it is a moot point and not an argument at all

Actually, it depends on what you mean by "investing" here

If by that you mean speculating, i.e. buying bitcoins with the sole purpose of selling them later at a higher price, then it doesn't look like a plausible assumption. If you disagree, think how much of the 2017 rally to 20k really helped mass adoption and whether it helped it at all. And don't forget to take into account that you can't consider this rally without the crash that followed it. Simply put, not all investments are born equal, the point being that speculative investments are not likely to help adoption (in a big way)

Are you sure you are not "off your rocker"?

Which real value should these people focus on? I don't particularly disagree with your point that early investors might in fact have got involved with bitcoin "because they saw the true potential of a decentralized payment system that nobody can censor" (though it remains to be seen whether this statement is actually true in and of itself), but did Bitcoin actually live up to its "true potential"? In simple terms, how can people actually use Bitcoin in their lives so that they wouldn't hesitate to buy it?

That's clearly not so

In fact, it is far from being so. There was a lot of price action before the halving as prices started to rise since September 2015 (i.e. 9 months before the event itself) and soon afterwards. Bitcoin had been rising till mid-June 2016 (the halving occurred on July 10, if I'm not mistaken). Then there was a correction followed by the Bitfinex hack in early August of that year, and prices continued to rise again since the fall of 2016 and till the end of December 2017

Merited this post for its excruciating truthfulness and authenticity

Though there is already a topic named appropriately, i.e. "Are long-term holders idiots?" (or something to that tune). Bitcoin has been steadily spiraling down for over a year already but people still believe in miracles. I know we kinda had already been there in 2014-2015, but it is only a seeming similarity as the market back then was totally different from the market today. Basically, Mt. Gox was a false start, but what we see today is a genuine downfall, carnage, bloodbath and rude awakening (you name it)

If you are involved in banking business or know someone who is, then you can probably help with an expert advice on IP/IP bank transfers. If you don't know what it is, don't look for it on Google as first-hand info and expertise is needed. Think of it as a consultancy job which will be paid accordingly. If you feel like you have relevant information on the subject and can actually help, feel free to contact me via PM

Disclaimer: I'm providing translation services here

I mostly agree with your point

But as they say, the devil is in paying special attention to detail. For example, there is only one Bitcoin out there (well, if we exclude from consideration all its ugly copycats, of course), but there is no one paper money as there are almost as many fiat currencies as there are countries in the world. So when talking about "paper money is still as usual", you should spell out which paper money or currency you refer to specifically. If you refer to Zimbabwean dollars, for example, this is simply not true

Yeah, a good signature campaign should definitely be in the pipeline

Regarding chats (aka trollboxes) specifically, they are a required feature as most people like sharing their wins with others and look for support when they lose. But please don't fetishize it, i.e. don't make a fetish of it (as some casinos as well as exchanges often do) as trollboxes can be annoying as fuck, especially if you can't switch them off for good (in the very least, hide them)

If ever, it was not the direct cause

But obviously, people were pretty much discouraged to pay such exorbitant fees even if they wanted to buy something for Bitcoin as it was them who paid the transaction fees, not merchants. So merchants (whoever accepted cryptocurrencies) turned off this payment option due to lack of demand as it might have become prohibitively expensive for them to support see (see Steam as an example of that)