First, I agree with the previous opinions that you should inform yourself better before investing, otherwise you are playing roulette.

Between Bitcoin or Ethereum, I clearly choose Bitcoin, because it is decentralized and because it was not premined by 70%. If you study the difference between Bitcoin and what we call shitcoins you will see that although there are 11,753 cryptocurrencies, there are 11,752 that share many characteristics and one that is essentially different from the rest, which is Bitcoin.

I hope that someday you will come to understand the difference.

If you are referring to whether the information will appear in the draft of the income tax return, I would say no in most cases. Coinbase reports to the IRS, but in other cases, like Bitstamp, simply reports gross proceeds to the authorities, and I understand that they only provide more information if the authorities request it.

You have to think that there are people from all over the world who make transactions on the exchanges. It is not like a bank in a country that automatically reports X type of transactions to the tax authorities of that country. At least in the vast majority of cases you will have to declare it yourself.

I saw the news yesterday and I really thought it was great. What makes me wonder about this is the tax issue. I don't know the fiscal regulation in Brazil, but if this becomes generalized, it will be a hassle to declare each payment for capital gains tax, or hopefully there will be programs that do it automatically, but if so, the countries' treasuries will also have to develop programs that check automatically, I don't see treasury officials checking thousands and thousands of transactions between $0.50 and $100.


Theoretically, political right-wingers should have an economic conception in the style of the Austrian School, which advocated the gold standard, and today it would be the Bitcoin. I am not surprised by what you say then. The thing is that in recent decades, some political right-wingers have also taken a liking to massively print fiat money.

If the trend you say consolidates, in the end we are going to see Bitcoin being accused of being sexist, racist, oppressive, etc. Lol.

No need, it's already clear, I'll wait a little bit to see if any more interesting answer comes up and I'll proceed to lock the thread. Anyway I don't trust giving data to someone who calls himself "malevolent", lol.


I agree.


Not a chance. It doesn't work that way.


Yes, maybe "launder" isn't the most appropriate word, but I'm not talking about me to begin with, I'm talking about my friend, I don't have that problem. Besides, we are talking about a purchased amount of a few hundred that has turned into a few thousand. That is not a problem today. The IRS is not going to waste time starting an investigation, requesting IPs, etc. because someone supposedly has $3k that they have not declared (yet). It's not even a tax crime.

Edit: I am locking the thread, as there is another similar one and my friend went to consult a specialized tax advisor and he has already solved the doubt.

I agree with this. I think this is likely what happened.


I don't agree with this at all. A few weeks back Bitcoin went up $10k in a day because the opposite happened: short leveraged positions were liquidated in cascade.

Bitcoin is strong enough as a long-term project for anyone who wants to bet against it to bet that they will not be able to break it.

Only weak projects succumb to shorts. The strong have short term volatility from shorts but long term gains.

On the other hand, how would you do it, does a politician have to come in and establish a ban on leverage in this market? Politicians of the world would have to agree and they haven't reached an agreement to ban bitcoin or to regulate it globally (yet).

This is not like the US regulator temporarily banning short positions in the NASDAQ. It is a global market.

I don't see it.

I like your reading of the situation. Instead of panicking, thinking the world is going to end and hesitating to sell, much better to think we can buy at a discount price.

I just made a purchase. Fuck FUD!

I see some similarities. First, to me that a newbie who registered on January 3 but only started posting two days ago is talking about how Bitcointalk has changed in the last few years smells funny.

Then, the first responder, he registered on August 4 but only wrote 3 posts since then and comes just today to respond to this one. The second responder, registered on July 5 and that same day wrote a few posts, but has a gap in his posts like the other two and the first thread he has responded to today is this one.

It is clear to me that they are somehow connected.

I doubt that the forum is going to revise its policy on how to deal with plagiarism, but I agree with you. If it's just one case, if it happened a while ago, if it's moderate (not someone just copy-pasting whole paragraphs, but some sentence), don't rush into banning him.

Fuck, you've left me shocked, JJG.

200 bitcoin is a tiny amount.

I believe that if this has had an effect on the market, it is more a psychological issue than the quantity purchased.

Hi WO friends.

I got myself a hat. It's a sponsored hat, but I like being part of the hat-wearing family.

Thank you.

Well, but I've already finished the week in the other campaign, so I've already changed the signature, I don't mind wearing it one more day. 


I also hope everything is ok.

Thank you for accepting me. I will wait a few hours to change the signature because the campaign I was in ends today.

I will edit this post with the start post number as soon as I change the signature.

Congratulations to Mpamaegbu too, because although I don't know him, and the first thing I saw about him in the forum was the plagiarism problem, I have realized that he is very well liked in the community.

Hi @Hhampuz,

Thank you very much for the opportunity you have given me to participate in the campaign during this short period of time, but this is going to be my last week. Today from 23:59:59 CET, probably tomorrow, I will change my signature.

Thanks for everything and best regards.

That's why I said "so to speak", lol.


My vision is that if it is a minor case, which happened only once, I could accept that person being given a second chance. But if it happened repeatedly, 3, 5, 10 times or more, I prefer to ban him and never come back. There are a majority of us who do not cheat.

But it's not so much my view as Sir Theymos', I understand he doesn't tolerate plagiarism very much, although he lets the odd mild case pass.

I didn't know him and I've just recently seen the feedback you left him (neutral btw, was that negative changed to neutral?).


In this I do not agree with you at all. You are basically telling two criminals to hide the evidence of the crime, so to speak. If they have plagiarized repeatedly they don't have to delete the evidence, what they have to be is banned from the forum, which has already happened in at least one case, and never come back, as the rules say.

Another thing is that he might be a troll, but he is a troll who discovers plagiarists.

Before jumping the gun, let's look at what the person who discovered the plagiarism says. I have asked him to expose all the evidence he has now:

Hey man. On the one hand I thank you for the work you do against plagiarists, but on the other hand I think you should expose all the evidence you have now. I think it would be the most honest thing to do and would save the forum the most work.

Not completely. No government should force users to accept Bitcoin, or Euros or USD or any kind of fiat. But yeah, you've got a point there.

I think it is more to lease out their brand image, kind of advertising:


Source: ESPN Explores Sports-Betting Deal Worth at Least $3 Billion

I don't know what would happen with this if the recent ban on gambling ads in Spain (although not a total ban, it reduces it a lot), becomes generalized and they start copying it all over the world, although I don't think so.