Let's put it this way, if you manage to close/block 1 such site, at least 2-3 new ones will appear. Bad guys use the freedom of the internet to do bad things, and no one seems to be able to stop them at this point. However, it is not just that such sites exist, but that someone can even think that such an offer can be true - a grown man who thinks logically should never fall into such a trap.

Furthermore, people looking for ways to get rich quick are most often victims of such scams, and scammers are counting on that. Money does not fall from the sky, unknown people online do not share it with other strangers, but false promises are enough for some even when they suspect that something is wrong.

It’s good to be optimistic, but it’s also even better to be realistic. After all that is happening, I do not think that such a jump is possible, because if we look back, we can see that Bitcoin is having a hard time recovering from such blows. Of course, some super good news could reverse the trend, but in general there are many more who have decided to sell, even at a loss.

The old saying "Historia est magistra vitae" doesn't seem to apply to them.

We can call him by any name, but the fact that people like him have very little (or not at all) scruples and sell their ideas very successfully (however pointless they may be). They all prosper and cooperate in a world where profit is the common denominator, where all boundaries and disagreements disappear. It’s easy to be a survivor when you always have enough money to live like a king, no matter what happens to the projects and companies you have.

---

As for these crypto-landers, in my opinion, they should never have existed, much less they should have been trusted. Many have said it was a bad idea in the past, and now we know they were right - and I wouldn't care that they fail, but their failure hurts us all. Will people learn anything from all this? I honestly don’t hope too much given the short-term memory that the average cryptocurrency investor shows.

I am of the opinion that nothing can surprise us at this time when literally anything is possible. We knew that crypto winter could happen, but unlike 2018 we now have circumstances that are much more severe than anything that has happened since Bitcoin existed. I think this will be the biggest test Bitcoin has had so far, and that at this point it is completely pointless to speculate on where the price will stop because @pooya87 said well that the market is completely irrational.

---

How Bitcoin is conceived and how people use it are two different things. The philosophy of people who only want profit prevails and they sell at the first sign of panic, and few seem to buy because they expect an even lower price. Those who have already experienced this well know that such things are obviously inevitable, but also that after each crisis Bitcoin becomes even stronger.

If you mean circulating supply then it is true that the number is currently 19+ million, but the max supply is still 21 million and will be almost reached in less than 10 years. We also have to accept that part is currently lost, and various speculations about whether it is 10% or 20% do not play too much of a role, given that there is more than enough BTC on the market for anyone who wants to buy.

As for the current situation, we need to be aware that not everyone can afford not to sell, people are panicking because the bottom is not in sight and media campaigns are relentless in trying to portray Bitcoin as a Ponzi scheme that is finally falling apart. This is a time for cold heads and strong hands, because everything is losing value.

I am glad that someone agrees that such things should be regulated even more strictly, because it has turned into a global mess that has no end in sight. And if it goes on like this, it's only a matter of time before the next scandal happens, and the worst thing about the whole story is that people think Bitcoin is to blame for all the bad things that happen - and when people lose money, they have to find the culprit.

When it comes to losses, it would be good if it was only a few million dollars, the thing is unfortunately much larger and measured in tens of billions of dollars only in the case of Kwon, and in total, with DeFi/NTF we can talk about hundreds of billions.

Being pro-Bitcoin and being pro-crypto are completely different things because who can say the new president is someone who will support Bitcoin, not some new Kwon shitcoin?

Has anyone read the article at all? It's about shilling some shitcoin whose name I won't even mention, and all wrapped up in a story about how the crypto market should be deregulated. I think that even stricter measures should be introduced in countries like South Korea, because history has shown that these people have very strange ideas that affect everyone else.

@cheezcarls -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5391301.0

It is wrong to call any wallet a "cold wallet" if that wallet connects to the internet at some point as is the case with the hardware wallets most used. Such devices have so far shown that they are relatively secure and are a much better choice than desktop, mobile or online wallets, but they also have some problems in the form of data leakage of their users, or vulnerabilities that can be exploited in a specific situation.

Vulnerabilities that have been found in the past and those that are likely to be found in the future are something that tells us that we should always be on the lookout for whatever crypto wallet we use.

Mike has moved on to the dark side and should not be relevant in any speculation, especially since everyone with a little brain understands that the big ones played the gods, and now the small ones, as always, will pay the price for it. His opinion is as important as the project that pulled the whole crypto market down, and he promoted it and maybe earned a few million in the process.

Now it's easy to talk about the collapse of the economy, and then say "well, I told you it would happen".


Source

Your example is the opposite of most others, as most invest only a small portion of their income in Bitcoin and spend the rest of their money on regular living needs. Another misconception is that by buying more and more Bitcoin you will have more and more money in your wallet, because the value of that BTC can change at any time - so someone who bought BTC at $40k is today at a loss of as much as $20k if decides to sell.


Everything spent on things like cigarettes, alcohol, and even coffee is in some way lost and wasted money, and even going to expensive restaurants or visits to cinemas, considering that I have top-quality TV at home and can prepare the food I want, all with considerable savings. All the money I save that way can be invested in Bitcoin or something else, and that money is always something I am willing to lose at any moment since I know how I saved it.

You should have emphasized the word "temporarily" because shortly afterward a light came on in the head of Mr. Mars, who realized that Bitcoin transactions were not in line with his green policy, so he decided to remove this payment option. In my opinion, such behavior did more harm to Bitcoin than good - because it only supported those who spread the idea that Bitcoin is dangerous to the environment.

If we take into account that Mr. Mars has not yet changed his mind despite various studies that say that most of the energy for mining comes from renewable energy sources, I wonder how much damage he still does today in terms of discouraging others from accepting Bitcoin as a means of payment in their companies?

I could still understand those beginners who are inexperienced and do not understand that such things do not work, but I can not understand that such projects are launched by people who have been dealing with cryptocurrencies for years. Stablecoins of course offer relatively fast and cheap transactions, but the risks for me personally far outweigh the benefits because it is a 100% centralized private system that always claims that one of their coins is backed by $1, but we know that is not always the case. People today can be sold all kinds of fairy tales, and some have decided to use it to the maximum.

The privacy you are talking about has long been just a story for young children (if they even believe it), because regardless of biometrics in this case, smartphones are spy boxes anyway, especially for those who do not even try to turn off some options which would give them more privacy. For those who haven't heard, big brothers from all over the world have long since found a way to get into any smartphone -> Pegasus


Do you trust any other company more? In the end, it all comes down to who is spying on you, because we don't have to delude ourselves that the world is what they want to show us - it's (and much worse) than what the most famous whistleblower in recent history has shown.

People should be given the option to use the classic ways to protect their accounts or choose the biometric option - because if Apple thinks everyone is so naive as to use simple passwords that you can guess, I say there are people who know how to protect themselves well without biometrics.

I had the option to unlock my laptop with face recognition 10+ years ago and it worked quite solidly, although I preferred a strong password. I've never used this option on smartphones, even though I have it, but I use fingerprint unlocking, although in some situations I still prefer PIN lock/unlock.

What I've noticed about fingerprint locking is that the sensor usually doesn't recognize the fingerprint when you wash your hands, or if your hands are dirty - and that you may have facial recognition problems if for some reason you don't look the way the camera recorded you at the time of facial sampling.

In terms of security, there are various tricks to bypass the fingerprint sensor, as well as to fake the fingerprint - but what about twins who are identical and facial recognition - not to mention masks that can be made with today's technology so you can look like anyone in the world.

Activity has declined with the number of active members since the merit system was introduced, but also since some things have changed when it comes to signature campaigns. During 2015 and 2016, some campaigns were even run by bots, spam was at an incredible level and what we have today is far better (though not ideal).

---

Without Bitcoin, this forum would not have been created - and I am sure it will continue to exist regardless of the price of Bitcoin.

One important difference between 2011 and 2022 is that today people sell BTC for stablecoins, and before they sold them for $, so although fiat is not something to trust, stablecoins are another higher level of risk since they are backed with the same fiat, and in addition have the added risk of being frozen no matter where they are stored.

I can understand people selling BTC for a variety of reasons, especially if they have no choice because they need that money for daily needs - but it’s hard for me to understand that people don’t learn from the past and repeat the same mistakes. I have already written several times that from the perspective of profit, which is why most people are interested in Bitcoin, the most important thing is to determine the point of entry and exit.

So far, it has proven to be the entry point in situations like this when the market has suffered a severe blow, or for those who want to profit in the short term at the time of halving. ATH will most likely follow in 6-8 months after that and the smart ones will know how to take advantage of this by selling little by little on the way up.

Of course, this is not financial advice, but only what can be seen if you look at the brief history of Bitcoin.

Big losses because Tesla bought some 40k Bitcoins (of which they sold 10% at a profit)? An investment of $1.5 billion for a company whose net worth is currently just under $700 billion literally means a drop in the ocean, especially if we take into account that the investment was made at a time when the price of BTC was around $30k.

The fall in the company's share prices cannot, therefore, be linked to the fall in the price of Bitcoin, although some will be very happy to use it to put Bitcoin in a negative context.

Who could have hoped that we would talk about whether the bottom would be on the 2017 ATH or whether it would be some value lower than that? Given everything that's going on, it's no wonder we're where we are, but when something loses as much as $10 000 in just a few days, many inexperienced people begin to seriously suspect that someone has cheated on them. My local media is literally crucifying Bitcoin and talking about the complete collapse of the Ponzi scheme, but that’s nothing new considering what they wrote in 2018.

I’m not in TA and I can’t say if the bottom has been touched, but for now we’re sticking above $20k and maybe some things will be clearer in the next 12/24 hours. My layman's thinking tells me that this will not end so quickly, but we can hope that things will move in a more positive direction.

A commendable attempt that I hope will bring results in the future, because knowledge is very important for anyone who wants to succeed in life. Children need to be taught the basics, but I don't think they should be encouraged to invest until they become independent and find their own jobs. Yet the greatest attention should be focused on security and on how to avoid online scams.

As far as teaching is concerned, in some African countries the situation is probably different from that in the EU or the US when it comes to education, and special permits should be sought for such things - in other words, you can't teach in public schools about something that is not in the education program.

As for privacy, I agree that faces should be blurred, as well as that the names of children from tests should be covered.

There is no doubt that this service is far from honest with its tactics, but do you think that a similar thing would not happen to you and that you are trying to withdraw from any online crypto wallet/exchange? Even those who do not ask for KYC today will freeze your account if you try to withdraw because it is in accordance with the AML directive (money laundering and terrorist financing) and all those who avoid it can be left without a license.

If you don't believe, here's a fresh example -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5402427.0

The only way to get your money back is unfortunately KYC, and now the question is how much you value your privacy and data sharing with such companies? Today it's only about $10k, which can be a lot more (or less) in few years.