Well, we're definitely closer to the stage of Bitcoin being accepted by the world. Still, I would preferably retain the ability to be anonymous when using Bitcoin. If push comes to shove and I was to be asked to make a choice between the anonymity of Bitcoin and the Adoption off Bitcoin as a property, I'd rather choose the latter. I think there's no need to compromise on the ability of Bitcoin just to achieve some form of recognition, as well as protection. Anyone that uses Bitcoin is well aware of how it works and if I needed protection in the first place, I'd have never used Bitcoin, I would've just preferred the usage of Fiat.

And that's the reason why BTC adoption wouldn't really replace Fiat in it's place. Bitcoin is more of a specialized currency that can be used on and off depending on what the situation needs. Yes, the anonymity it provides may prove to be used for illegal purposes, but hell, let's stop generalizing things. Anonymity doesn't mean that it's illegal or anything, hiding your identity doesn't mean that you're doing something wrong or anything. Anonymity is just that, anonymity, no need to paint it black or white.

Well, Simplest answer would be Central Authorities are also humans. We put them into high pedestals thiinking they are all oh mighty honest people, but really let's be honest, humans aren't perfect, we're greedy, and I expect them to take advantage of their position for their benefits, which includes mine, so I really think I have the right to avoid them when I want to.

Dude's basically freeloading, if he didn't save up money from that, then he'd be an idiot. Plus, if you really wanted to save money, why even bother spending $3000-$4000 for rent? If you really wanted to save, there are various ways such as living with someone and sharing the rent and the like. Sure, if you wanted to live leisurely and you have the money to do so, then feel free to, but if you're saving? Then you might want to replan everything you have right now.

Apologies, I can't really take this sentence as anything other than investors in the stock market are living with their parents cause they don't have the financial capability to support themselves due to investing. I'm not saying it's bad to live with your parents but to reason it out as a way to save money for stocks? Sounds insulting to me tbh. Damn, if panic buying actually happened due to people staying with their parents, then hell I'd start questioning my time staying with the crypto community.

Like what others have said, BTC dominance became shaky when the ETH period was being run, and really, that was just an instance of people being pushed by the crowd towards ETH back in 2017. Adding to that, Bitcoin has basically asserted dominance for the past 7 years before ETH came, and even when ETH came, it failed to topple the overlord. Just based on these 2 facts, any crypto enthusiast would probably see that Bitcoin is a lot better than altcoins in the overall popularity.

Besides, most altcoins (if not all) have the tendency to spike up and down randomly, mostly due to the manipulations of the companies behind them. How would you even expect to topple Bitcoin if the basis for it was instead partly manipulated by people? Whereas Bitcoin can solely be attributed to its ability as a cryptocurrency. Plus, we've been here before. BTC dominance is stronger than ever, and would only grow, unless a better coin (unlikely) pops out.

I don't think so. I couldn't really find any proper source for them being different, but I looked up both of their websites in simplywhois, and Betking.com is a LOT older than Betking.io. Betking.com was made back in 2001 and .io was made in 2015. If we were to consider Betking.io using another domain to avoid their mess back then, then shouldn't be the .com site younger? Well, there's a chance that Betking.com made Betking.io for purely crypto transactions/bettings but that would also be questionable since I see no need to actually separate them.

I also found this
It was in the Betking.io ANN thread, and if it says that they're just going to develop a sports betting platform, doesn't that mean that it really isn't them?

Hmmm I don't really see any use for it. At the very least, whenever I make a mistake in my portfolio, I have myself to blame. But using ML? Nah, I'd just make up excuses and the like when the fault really lies to me, and that kind of ruins the attitude I should have when dealing with the market. Plus, ML still has a lot of problems imo, yes the idea seems pretty nice and good, but hell whenever an odd pattern is felt, ML has that possibility to actually ruin everything it has learned by trying to adjust that certain pattern. In the end, it's literally just filled with uncertainties that makes the choice of self management a lot better than ML.
It's legit you just pressing 3 buttons and you're done tbh.

Well, there are still people out there who offer legit free money, just look at how Twitter has a lot of people asking for retweets and likes cause they provide free money giveaways.  I have to admit that sending money to gain more money, especially on a social media is quite suspicious, hell, 9/10 I'd doubt it and look it up first and foremost. Still, I suppose I can't blame those that got scammed 100%? I mean, we all had that point in life where we were quite ignorant of something. Especially if you were just hodling Bitcoin and don't really know jack sht about its history. If it were someone who was with BTC since 2017 or so, the twitter post would have probably sent warning signs with the way it was set up.

Well, Coinbase finally did something in exchange for how bad their site is. Now, only if coinbase were to run their exchange properly, with this move of theirs, I'd properly address them as one of the best even at the current moment.  I suppose all major exchanges should have some sort of central news system that lets them update about news regarding such issues so they can freeze the said accounts on their exchanges to prevent more hacks like this. Coinbase did pretty well imo, and even if it wasn't actually a hack, at the very least, they avoided the worst possible situation and could just provide explanation to their custoimers. I for one would agree to them suddenly freezing my account, as long as the reason is understandable like this one that is, compared to me losing my funds due to a scam.
Well, you can't 100% blame them for this one. It was official accounts of famous people, ones that have the capital to actually do the double amount scam that's been a trend since 2017. Still, they can take part of the blame, but not fully imo. After all, it's not like they can immediately tell that something was wrong, especially if they're only following one official account that got hacked. If they saw that multiple famous persons were doing the same thing, they'd probably find something suspicious after all.

The get rich quick idea is mostly because of the bubble that happened in 2017-18 and all of us that is in the crypto community knows that having such a mindset would not work, ever. Even if people do consider it as a speculative asset, it's actually fine, that is for now. Imo, most people are actually paying attention to it's characteristic of being as said, a speculative asset, which makes it's spread pretty big. Still, said characteristic would, more or less disappear slowly since supply would be limited by the next century.

Talking about another ATH is also fine, look at the wall observer thread in the forum. Basically, it's let the people develop what Bitcoin is right now. Ofc, I'm all in for saying that we should use Bitcoin for what it is, but saying that we should deny it being a speculative asset can also be wrong. No matter what is said and done, Bitcoin being a speculative asset and Bitcoin being an anonymous digital currency, both cases is still Bitcoing being what it is, Bitcoin..

If you were doing daily trading for a long time, experiencing a period of high fees shouldn't really be a question for you. Anyone who daily trades should be fairly familiar about how the fees always change erratically at times. Having an increase in fees and the recent twitter hack seems likely to be just coincidence. Plus, even with the hack happening, I doubt it could affect the market that much, whether it be in terms of price or fees. The hack basically happened in a high scale, considering famous accounts were hacked, but that was it, only twitter was heavily affected imo. Crypto community? I doubt it. The only reason why crypto was even involved in the issue was that the hackers used it as a medium to scam.

They're probably just riding on crypto's coattails. They aren't really looking towards cryptocurrency as it is, but rather just a medium to offer success towards their market. The only factor this could bring is probably the spread of info regarding crypto, but let's be real, in the realm of those investors, who doesn't know about crypto at the very least right? They probably don't know much about it, but they should know at least something. And if they were really interested in investing in crypto, they wouldn't wait till now for stockmarkets to welcome cryptos.

I just hope that for anyone that discovers crypto through these stock markets, they're also able to understand how the system that they introduced fails to give the essence of what crypto really is. The public stock market does consider it as it is, a stock with how they want transactions to undergo after all.

Don't use exchanges then. And as a matter of fact, you should also stop using any type of social media, forum, hell don' t use the internet. Nothing is perfect in this world, and hacks and the like are, as much as I hate to say it, perfectly natural for exchanges and companies to experience, especially if they're just in the beginning stages. It's rather simple to actually avoid your funds getting hacked from an exchange tbh, use a hardware wallet. Stop storing coins in exchanges and you're basically safe. You're insecurity rather really just stems from you believing that crypto wouldn't last due to these setbacks, but setbacks themselves are the ones that provide development to something.

If you fully believe that crypto would die due to this, just stop using it entirely, no one is really forcing you or anything. Being hacked/scammed of your funds is basically avoidable if you put enough preventive measures, especially since you're only managing your own sole funds.

Horse racing is basically dependent on past information as well as a minority of speculative information. Statistics of the Win-Lose ratio as well as the states the contestants were at each contest would prove to be useful in determining the winner. Of course, if past information were all it needed, then there would only be one or two winners, and that's why speculative information is also needed. This is highly dependent on how you judge it since it just mainly comes from the information of the current state off the players based on various interviews, but with that and past statistics, you should be able to somehow form a winner in your mind, or winners if you're unsure.

Still though, even with that much information, you still can't really guarantee a win. It's mostly information plus luck. Can't really remove luck here, especially in cases like these where situations vary from contest to contest.

And the said events could be said to number to be close to infinite. Not to mention the undisclosed news that only those select circles can get their information from. Sure, we can try to trade based on the info we have, but that pretty much results in again probability. Do experts win in any market? Nah, They are able to reduce their losses to the minimum at any market. No one wins always you know.

It's basically how there's only two events when trading, winning or losing. A 50/50 chance, but that doesn't necessarily mean that losing is bad, there are various types of losses, ranging from controlled losses to total loss. Experts don't always win and can always control their losses because they know that the chances are always 50/50, it's rather easy to know when you're going to lose and not. And it's not like the more you lose the higher your chances of winning are next time, the odds always reset, whether it be every second, minute or hour.

Nope, Nuh uh. The world you're basically talking about is a world where rules can go to hell. Well, not to the worst extent it could get, but somewhere there. The world where Crypto is above fiat is asking for something similar to central governments disappearing. They're basically useless at that point since, hell, what can they even do when we use crypto as you said right? And that's why it wouldn't happen, cause they wouldn't allow it in the first place.

Plus, the issue accounts for the world asking for liberation from the centralized government we have right now. The majority aren't agreeing with how the government works (mostly due to corruption inside) and yet, they don't change the government but rather change the ones in the government right? They won't agree to a centralized body disappearing since that means they themselves would have to do things on their own. We're innately lazy ngl, and most of what we do is to make our lives easier, so going for a decentralized system worldwide might actually just bring negative effects instead of positive ones. Still, a compromise must be met since decentralized systems are also needed at times here and there though.

Painful. Fear of losing out made me literally lose everything lmao. It's like I made a compromise, instead of losing everything, I might as well just lose a part of it and call it quits. Did that for about 3-4 times before thinking, "Am I retarded?". Stopped trading since then and now I just like to look at charts and movements without any reason at all. Even if I am not trading, just seeing the price go up and down makes me quite satisfied. I didn't really experience any FUD tbh, hell, I don't look up much with regards to news tbh, and I see no need to. When I traded, I always just thought of what I can do to make profit or make it even out, which most of the time happened, I lost out. But well, experience is experience after all.

That's kind of.. odd? I mean, do they have a reason big enough to decline to pay their workers? Plus, wasn't there a contract of sorts between those famous celebs and the workers to prevent this kind of thing? Or are those things just verbal agreements? Plus god these celebs earn more each week than their workers earn for each month. What's the problem with paying them? They're basically living off of huge villas, not to mention the multiple houses they probably own, and yet they can't even pay their workers for what they deserve?

Well, fame supersedes skill most of the time after all. If you were to ask to choose about a quality product that isn't famous and a bad product but was endorsed by literally every famous person out there, most would choose the latter instead of the former no? Still, some people acknowledge skill but would take quite a bit of time, making the idea itself hard to implement since time is one of the things that most people don't have right now.

What's it called, Social Engineering? Heard it about in a hacking movie in the past where the guy was basically able to manipulate employees into allowing him to do stuff that looks fine, but really isn't. Got the name from the movie Who Am I.

Anw, considering how the hacks went, it was understandable how there were inside works, and if there weren't it'd actually make these hackers quite insane imo. I can't really blame the staff if they got tricked into doing something they didn't even know was wrong. It's not that they were ignorant but rather the actions done by the hackers didn't seem like it'd actually affect their system, that is, in their eyes. It is kind of odd though, how they're internal staff were the ones that got tricked. That, or they're pretty much hiding some info to avoid their system from being doubted. The Social Engineering trick did happen, but who knows if they really got in through internal staff though.

Wherever you place yourself at tbh. The current situation could be said to be a standby period, not just for us but also for those investors of stocks and the like. They aren't just going to switch to a speculative asset all of a sudden just because of the Covid, cause if they did, they would've already done so in the past. But they didn't, just goes to show that they don't trust crypto that much that they'd be willing to switch out. Plus, the government is pretty much trying to (at least, their showing up such fronts) make the economy live again.

Additionally, you could say that the attention being put into the pandemic has reduced dramatically now. That is unless, the second wave that most have been expecting hits harder than the first one. If so, you can naturally expect huge collapse of various markets, since with the recent breathing room we got, most businesses have expected for everything to go back at the very least, minimum working situations if not the normal ones.

Probably half fake. It's probably just to appease the masses about the current state of affairs of the US especially in this case where they have to do everything to make it seem like everything is okay. That, or just the info actually not really releasing any relevant info with regards to the economy. We may say that everything would return to normal since quarantine period is easing up and all of that, but the amount of businesses that could go back to a 100% can be counted in one's hands most likely.

And recovering is a too much of an optimistic period imo. It may have stopped dropping, but that's it. It hasn't recovered, but it also hasn't dropped more so than it already has. I expect the economy to actually below the average of the past years and that's already an optimistic view with regards to this years economy.