Wouldn't those private companies be the ones to start up business with regards to interplanetary stuff? They'd probably have monopoly on circulation by then, and if they really don't view Bitcoin in a positive view, then such adoption may not happen. They may even create their own mode or way of transactions since technically, they monopolize everything and hence, can set everything. Cooperations with various governments may happen, but they'd take little of the pie by then. They may even set up a completely whole new system, one that is entirely different from the one Earth uses. To accommodate the cooperation and transactions between the planets though, a community may be built that manages that.

Yea not happening. If it were in the real world where data was kept in physical records, possibly, since there are thousands of records that could be added monthly and so, such record may just be buried, but since it's stored on the internet where if you know how to, can be simply looked up, letting it rot for a long time isn't a solution.

Even if they do use it in its form as BTC, they'd still be traceable you know? And afaik, exchanges blacklist said marked wallets so that they aren't able to use their services. As for e-commerce stores that accept BTC, they also probably have some sort of setup for that, and even if they don't, there'd be more of it in the future.

And that's why there are trusted mixers out there. They basically ask for a fee when mixing your coins, making quite a profit in the long run. Ofc, there are mixers that are scams, but mixers have been out there for a long time already that you can already look up those trusted and those that are not.

Bitcoin is truly decentralized but companies take advantage of its decentralized idea to create a centralized form of exchange around it so they can profit from it. It's helpful for the most part, but the KYC parts are the part that makes the "decentralized" part of BTC seem non-existent. Also, if Japan had info regarding Satoshi Nakamoto, they'd probably have released it already in the past decade, and seeing they haven't we can assume they had no info about him. We can safely assume that Satoshi left no traces, at least ones that could lead back to his identity.

Quick search shows that Galvin Andresen has left programming and is now focusing on his company. His access to the Github source was stopped at 2016 after him stating that Satoshi was CSW. Not sure about more info though.

https://decrypt.co/29517/the-bitcoin-org-website-is-getting-a-new-owner

The link above states that Co-Owner of Bitcoin.org is Cobra, and well is planning to hand over to other people in the near future.

I doubt they could make this happen. This is probably possible if they set the name for Bitcoin as completely illegal in the entire world, stamping it's name with something similar to a criminal.

It's still entirely possible for both Android and iOS to be infected by keyloggers/viruses. Still, it's not like there aren't signs of it being seen since it still technically uses the processing power of your phone, so if you manage to find something odd from your phone's normal performance, try performing an overall check so you can be sure. As for Emails, opening an Email doesn't let a hacker access your pc/phone. Opening links that contain malware could though, so be careful when opening such links. iOS is the safer one compared to Android, yes, but safer doesn't really mean exempt from danger, so still, exercise caution.

As for Keyloggers in windows, AFAIK, they can force you to download something BUT it still requires you to actually allow them to install it, and that's the keylogger itself. Opening links is fine and even if something was to be downloaded due to someone trying to install a keylogger, it only stops at a file, an installer, not a program for your windows. As long as you don't install it, then you're fine. Still, there are instances of setups possibly having a keylogger background app or something similar, so try to avoid installing apps as much as possible from untrustworthy sources.

I doubt when Satoshi made Bitcoin, he had the idea of it becoming a speculative asset as of date, and would reach such prices in the next decade. Assuming that the Patoshi did stop at 2010, then we can safely assume that the article is indeed correct in saying that Satoshi only wanted to protect his creation from a 51% attack. Judging from his actions back then, we can assume that he won't release said coins back into the market, which would only lead to a crash and possibly ruin the entire scene. We may say that the price doesn't really matter since BTC is still BTC, but hell, the market right now whether we like it or not is basically still a part of what makes BTC.

He'd either just let those coins be lost forever or release them by the end, when volatility comes to a minimum so as to avoid a major change with regards to the market. The latter is kind of unlikely though, since if people were to see his coins moving, they'd probably do something and BTC price would probably rise up again for no reason other than hype.

Binance US requires stringent KYC, and it's only Binance US that requires that. I'm from SEA and I didn't really encounter any problems with that, so in your case, Binance may not be the get to go since it redirects you to the US site. Probably try and look up exchanges that don't require KYC in the US. Psuedoanonymous doesn't really reveal your real info. It just shows the wallet the coins were from in a transaction, and they can't really connect any real information from that transaction to you, that is unless the exchange you went on requires KYC. If CEX's don't really work out for you, try looking for DEX that you can easily access.

I guess judges are now up to times, and are now understanding the development of what is to be the possible future. Especially if we were to adopt Crypto for the near future, and imo, not replacing fiat but rather living together with it. Still, I fear that the recognition of Bitcoin like this would only bring more limits to it's supposedly decentralized system, as you said, create a set of rules for Crypto. Sadly, said rules doesn't necessarily bring an advantage to it, but rather can be used against it. Still, i suppose it's an overall recognition with regards to Bitcoin not being an imaginary asset anymore, but rather as an asset as it is.

Well, it is anonymous till date, but it's anonymous on its transactions. The fact that your account creation was littered with KYC wasn't really the fault of Bitcoin, but rather the fault of the company behind the exchange you're creating your account. (I'm assuming BC is BTC kay?). There are other exchanges out there that let you create an account without any KYC and let you transact BUT after a certain limit has been met, then you need to provide your information to them, an example would be Binance. There are also DEX's that don't require you to KYC as well as P2P trading which probably requires escrow service to ensure secure transactions.

True! Hypetrain of crypto, but in the end, it's just fiat in the guise of crypto. They can't really change their entire setup to make it as a crypto gambling site so they instead opted to make it seem like they are one. If new players were to actually enter on crypto gambling, they may just actually attract some with such ideas, after all, they have no particular idea on how crypto sites work and just the work "crypto" is enough to make a gambling site a crypto gambling one in the eyes of people who don't usually gamble on said sites. I guess the only advantage they could get here is that transactions would be faster if they used crypto, but I'd still opt for pure Crypto gamblings sites since they offer the same speed and I know that I'm playing with crypto, not fiat.

As long as you know how it works and what to avoid, it's pretty secure tbh. Using hardware wallets and learning to identify scams from legit ones are pretty much the simplest ones that could help you from losing your crypto. If people were scammed of their coins, it isn't the coins' fault for being faulty, it's the persons' fault for being ignorant, stop blaming a medium for your mistakes, it makes your mistakes more blatant imo.
Your definition of secured is kind of skewed to the identity of authorities. Secured transactions of Crypto basically means every transaction is recorded on the blockchain, and can't basically be removed. That's the "secure" part, and in the case you described, it's mostly the judgment of the owner on how they would take action. Bitcoin isn't called decentralized for nothing after all.
Stolen in what way? Most issues about cryptos relating to theft were related to either scam, which is mostly attributed to the person themselves' ignorance, can't really blame crypto for that. As for hacks of exchanges, it was your choice to store it in there, not really crypto's fault. A lot of people have already been saying that storing your coins in a hardware wallet is the go to when holding after all.

Only people who recently got into Bitcoin would even consider it as such. Even if some do consider it even though they've been in the scene for a long time, they also consider BTC as a digital currency, not only as an investment. Clickbait articles and Youtube titles? As you said, it's only "clickbait" and only those who consider BTC as a money-making machine would even click on it, and even if they do, it's not like they actually can make Bitcoin as such. And as much as some people like it or not, Bitcoin being a speculative asset right now is part of what makes it in the community.

There's also no need to actually obsess over it reaching an ATH or not, or whether we should talk about it or not. if you don't like such topics, avoid the speculation/trading discussion threads, that's it. If you want it to be a digital currency, then it is.

Bots don't really trade for you, more like they just make your life easier. It's still basically you trading, but it's more automated, more reliant on automatic response that you've programmed, and less reliant on your instantaneous judgments. It's like if you ask 5 programmers to program an AI, they could basically have 5 different types of program that do the same thing, just that the difference is the process of how to achieve that end. That's how bots basically work.

There isn't really the best bot out there since you're technically still the one managing how it performs, but the more able the bot is to respond to your commands, the better the type of bot it is. Bots in a sense are still you, just automated, so it doesn't really make trading easier or profitable. Think of it like leaving your trading schemes to someone else that has the same brain and ideas but has less emotions.

Damn man has balls of steel. He should've gotten warning signs when he registered but failed to comply in 2018. He could've gone under for a bit of time and proceeded to continue after a period of time has passed. Well, not like I know how investigations go though. Still, it's pretty fair for him to get punished, his illegal activities have been ongoing for ~5 years after all. If the guy still got away even after doing that openly for 5 years, then I suppose investigative units should just quit their jobs.

Then technically, shouldn't the malls also be fined or something? I mean, they were technically part of illegal activity, whether it is voluntary or not. Plus, it wasn't only malls but convenience stores and gas stations.

If this was a new case where scammers just recently used his face, Youtube could've honestly salvaged the situation still. Sadly it's been on for months and youtube has been doing nothing, which is oddly weird imo. They're algorithm has been ruining some people's experience in live streaming in youtube and yet they allow these kinds of situations, which imo, a lot more worse than some simple gore scenes and the like.


The case where people where fighting for crypto was about just crypto-related vids tbh. Yes, I think Youtube/Google was fighting against the scams and just literally steamrolled even those that weren't a scams, and that's what people were mad for. Cause of that, they probably just stopped caring and let the vids go on, scam or not. It's odd how they aren't filtering these vids, not only vids but also the ads they have on Google possibly as well as their extensions if possible.

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.