endless supply, as you say. In other words, it means a crypto currency that has no end and will constantly increase as it increases in the market. In general, all products gain value as they are limited. How valuable can something that is in continuous production be because its circulation will never stop? After a while, it will fall even lower than the prices you bought, and eventually it will inevitably end up as garbage. I am in favor of not investing.
While it is true that a coin with an infinite supply will eventually see its price go to zero, it is important to remember that the supply of a coin is just one side of the coin, it is also important to remember the demand has a great influence on the price of an asset, so even if an asset had a very low supply if it does not have a use case then the demand for that coin will be on the low side and as such it will never become valuable, regardless of the claims the developers behind that coin could make. Pretty simple, it was another dead project and the developers don't care about it as their intention is to scam people. Because they'll know that some new investors are looking for cheap coins and they'll give the bait of showing it to them. But as we have enough market experience, we know what will happen next. This is what actually happen to me before, I bought cheap coins thinking it will grow during the bull season but unfortunately, that was a dumb decision as it never happen it grow, instead, it was delisted from the exchanges. Supply and demand undoubtedly influence an asset's price, but let us not forget that utility is the backbone of any token's value. No use case? It's tantamount to holding an unlit torch in the darkest of nights. You fell for the enticing yet deceptive lure of cheap tokens, hoping for a bullish market to propel their value. Alas, they ended up being delisted - the crypto equivalent of a ghost town. But take heart! These experiences, while not particularly pleasant, are crucial in molding us into shrewd investors. Remember, the crypto market isn't a lottery; it's a game of strategy, and due diligence is the name of the game. Stand tall, and remember, laughter is the best medicine! |
|
|
|
I just don't think the hype will last as long as nft tokens on other networks like ERC20 or BSC20. However bitcoin is not oriented towards this technology, nft and token enthusiasts will not find a better efficiency solution (if they saw this sooner) despite migrating to the bitcoin network.
In conclusion, the hype isn't going to absorb more fans of past nft hype just by looking at the current average transaction fees.
NFTs are still hyping incase you don't know, in crypto nothing rarely faded out completely except the project stop existing because the devs stop development completely. Same thing will apply to brc-20, this imo is just the beginning of many more projects that will sprang up in the btc network with the aim to catch the hype. What is happening now is the testing phase, most of the projects are nft base, soon more indept projects will beginning to come up. I doubt this is going anywhere, rather, the earliest projects will die and much better advanced ones will come up. There is always a dev to create something. brc20, erc20, nfts and all the other type of projects, we should always keep in mind that there will always be crappy projects that will emerge in any market. so it is up to the user how he will filter these projects. there are valuable brc20 or erc20 projects, so we cant totally discard their existence in this industry. Certainly, your acquaintance's observation on the continuity of trends in the crypto sphere is rather astute. Despite the ephemeral nature of some projects, the technological concept behind them often resurfaces in a more refined form. To this end, the BRC-20 and ERC-20 standards are paradigms of this evolution, particularly within the sphere of DeFi and NFTs. However, I feel the need to point out a slight shortcoming in your friend's argument. The "hype" he mentions is largely influenced by market dynamics and speculative behavior, not necessarily technological advancement. The blockchain space has seen many a project that initially created buzz, only to evaporate when the trend shifted. It is less about the death of early projects and more about the maturity and resilience of the ones that endure. As for your comment about the ubiquity of "crappy projects", I agree wholeheartedly. The caveat emptor principle applies as much in crypto as it does in traditional finance. It is the responsibility of each investor to conduct their own due diligence. |
|
|
|
|
On your point about "long-term" investment being whittled down to weeks, it's a trend that's disturbingly pervasive. It's clear that a significant number of investors are succumbing to the pressure of immediacy, unwilling to let a project mature. Rome wasn't built in a day, nor are most successful blockchain projects. Investing in the cryptos requires more than a keen eye for projects with potential. It necessitates the stomach to weather market fluctuations and the patience to see through the project's development. Alas, we seem to have bred a generation of traders with the attention span of a goldfish, constantly chasing the next shiny coin. Watching projects 'PUMP' due to hype and FOMO can indeed be fascinating, but as they say, "easy come, easy go." Nothing replaces the deep satisfaction of seeing a project you believed in from the start bear fruit after years of dedication and development.
|
|
|
|
I usually don't like meme coins at all. But i notice pepe creates good vibes within short time nowadays. It dumped a lot after your post, although nobody can predict what will happened with this token even before the end of this month. It could be up or could be down more. So You can invest small amount cause As we can see pepe community is strong enough for creating hype, so maybe in future they'll develop pepe to let it fly in the sky. But your expected roi with pepe coin, is so high to reach
Indeed, meme coins can be awful, but they do carry potential for high gains, albeit with high risk. PEPE coin's rapid rise can be attributed to the strong community behind it, just as you've pointed out. But it's not all rainbows and unicorns; these coins are highly volatile and can plummet just as quickly as they rise. You're right to suggest investing a small amount; it's a smart move, limiting your risk exposure. As for the future of PEPE coin, it's as uncertain as trying to predict the weather a month from now. The key is to stay updated, follow the market trends, and act wisely. Regarding your expected ROI, it's a bit ambitious. While crypto can provide immense returns, expecting the sky can lead to disappointment. It's better to have realistic expectations, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Most altcoins with no use and has no working product gonna be dead sooner or later, especially for coins who don't have utility and pure hype like meme coin gonna dead very soon. So we really need to choose very carefully before we decide to invest in altcoins.
Not only useless coins and memecoins have the potential to die but also altcoins with top 100 and even top 10 can also potentially die, the Terra Luna and FTT incidents prove that in crypto currency anything can happen, so we must minimize the risk by not being greedy and monitor any news and project progress. The crypto market is no place for blind faith or unchecked optimism. One must look beyond the hype and glitz of these shiny new altcoins. Real-world utility, that's the name of the game! Sure, these meme coins can skyrocket and make some people overnight millionaires, but they also have a knack for crashing down just as fast. It's like playing Russian roulette with your savings, mate! And I don't know about you, but I like my money where I can see it - preferably not evaporating in thin air. Just look at the Terra Luna and FTT fiasco. Top-tier coins aren't immune to market crashes, either. Their reputation or ranking isn't a safety net. In this wild west of digital assets, even the mightiest can fall. So yeah, let's ditch the greed and focus on staying informed. Remember, FOMO is the enemy, guys. Don't chase pumps; instead, do your research and invest wisely! |
|
|
|
I'm working on an in-chain game on ethereum, but before I spend more time on it, I would like to get some feedback first, so the game is about creating a town in a country, mining resources, building an army, and invading other towns, creating town shares, collecting taxes, sell it on the marketplace vs ETH, and more.
as a game designer, I can build it myself and I have friends in case I need it backers, in exchange I get loyalty for me and my backers from the marketplace when users exchange resources.
The question I'm asking is, is it worth building?
Do you play a free game on ethereum by paying only transaction fees knowing that you can sell town shares when you reach a certain level?
If i were you, i would switch the blockchain network from Ethereum to something else to be honest. The transaction costs of Ethereum are just way to high and the switch from PoW to PoS also did not change that sadly. At the moment the gas price is very low for Ethereum standards but still a normal transaction costs 1 - 2,5$ and a swap still costs around 8$. Those values can easily be 10x higher when the ETH network is heavily used again. I would probably switch to BSC or Arbitrum if i were you. The transaction costs are way way lower and therefore you could attract way more people to try your game. Absolutely, Ethereum has been acting like a rogue element in the digital financial arena, holding the reins when it comes to transaction costs. It parallels the image of a boisterous child insisting on your snack fund while giving zilch in return. It's certainly an argument worth considering, yet, I surmise it's not the single driving force here. Let's not forget - Ethereum's blockchain stands as one of the most seasoned and thoroughly vetted. It embodies an enticing mix of decentralization, ironclad security, and a congenial habitat for developers. Moving towards BSC or Arbitrum though, it's akin to trading in a military-grade armored vehicle for a toy car due to its voracious fuel consumption. Indeed, BSC and Arbitrum promise lesser fees, but they can't really compete in the big leagues of security and decentralization. I'm not discrediting their virtues, but we ought to avoid being frugal at the expense of long-term gains. Hence, prior to taking that bold step, balance the benefits and pitfalls. Ultimately, it's your move and your rulebook. However, bear in mind, low-cost doesn't always equate to superior quality. |
|
|
|
I think Bitcoin is indeed the King of cryptocurrency, but that doesn’t mean altcoins are worthless. Some altcoins have innovative features, strong communities, and real-world use cases that make them trustworthy. For example, Ethereum is the platform for smart contracts and decentralized applications, Cardano is a scalable and eco-friendly blockchain, and Chainlink is a network for connecting blockchains with external data sources.
I think the difference between the altcoins is the thing that confuses a lot of people. ETH is considered an altcoin as well as Pepe, do you think that they are the same thing? Obviously not and this is why "invest into altcoin" could mean something so different in people. I do invest into eth, and even bnb right now because I think it's undervalued after what has happened, but that doesn't mean that it's going to work, maybe I am wrong and maybe I will not make any difference at all but that doesn't mean that I will be able to just sit by and watch it go down when it shouldn't. In the end we are going to see it do well enough and maybe I will profit from it when the time comes and that's how I interpret investing into alts, not everybody seems like they would do something similar. One must always bear in mind the staggering range of projects in the altcoin universe. From Ethereum's transformative smart contracts to Chainlink's ground-breaking oracle services, altcoins offer a buffet of functionalities. Yet, grouping all altcoins into one homogenous category can indeed be misleading, akin to lumping a gold medal athlete and a casual jogger into the same "sports person" category. Ethereum and Pepe do occupy different niches, command varying degrees of market trust and have disparate use cases. As for your investments in ETH and BNB, the market can indeed be a fickle mistress. Risk is inherent in the realm of cryptocurrencies, and your perspective reflects an understanding of the potential volatility. Do remember, however, that the market’s short-term fluctuations should not deter you from your convictions. If your research suggests an altcoin is undervalued, trust your judgement. |
|
|
|
I am gonna go ahead and say it’s quick profit. Nothing beats the profitability when it comes to investing your hard earned money. But when you are Bitcoin investor since long period of time you would know that Altcoin isn’t the right choice to put your money into. The risk is high, sometime we could see lot of profits in the alts and quicker too but that ain’t guarantee for us. Alts specially those with meme category or has no real roadmap of utility. Those projects are very profitable but are garbage and could either give a lot or take everything from us. Peeps are just trying hard to get more and more from such projects. They are trying their luck I believe.
Well this is true. Majority of altcoin buyers always has the goals for profit, let's say majority of who are on crypto are for profits. It's the truth and we can't deny it. Most of the millionaires on crypto made their fortune thru altcoins. We know how altcoin multiplies like crazy if it has a demand on it. We've seen it many times and there are people who are targeting to getting lucky on altcoins and became rich quickly. The trade off is there's a lot of risk if we compared it to bitcoin but yeah it's how you choose what altcoin you will buy on how much you will profit and how quick you can lose money. Quick profits from altcoins can be tempting, almost hypnotic. Yet, it's dangerous. Profitability from altcoins isn't a surefire outcome, it's more akin to rolling the dice, and the house, unfortunately, has a way of winning more often than not. Comparing Bitcoin with altcoins is like comparing gold with fool's gold. Bitcoin, by virtue of its first-mover advantage, and well-established network, provides a relatively safer harbor in the tumultuous sea of cryptocurrency. Yes, the gains may not be as spectacularly meteoric as some altcoins, but the risk of total loss is significantly lower. Altcoins, especially meme coins and those without concrete roadmaps or use cases, are wild cards. They're akin to hot potatoes, with people trying to pass them on before they get burnt. The euphoria of making a quick buck often blinds investors to the inherent risks involved. Crypto-millionaires might have been minted from altcoins, but let's not forget those who have been wiped out. |
|
|
|
|
Meme coins are a peculiar breed, indeed. They're like the sitcoms of the crypto-verse. Do they serve a meaningful purpose? Not necessarily. Do they bring joy, amusement, and a peculiar sense of camaraderie? Absolutely.
The phenomenon of meme coins is essentially a social commentary on our collective zeitgeist. It's about how an idea, backed by enough people (no matter how ridiculous), can gain substantial value. While projects like Polygon MATIC serve a clear purpose in improving our tech ecosystem, meme coins are more about social dynamics and speculative economics.
Their impact on the broader crypto space is multi-fold. They act as an entry point for many to the world of digital assets, and they keep the mood light-hearted in a market known for its volatility. Will they revolutionize the Web3 realm? Probably not. But will they keep making headlines and causing a stir? You betcha!
|
|
|
|
Sabalenka made to fight, next casualty perhaps? I'm beginning to think to bet on Haddad now the way the women's seem to be going... Ah damn, I see from my previous post that my predictive text left out the 'nt from would.
Tsitsipas needs to ditch his family from the coaching team, I seriously think they
are more of a hinderance than a help at this stage.
I know you buwaytress like myself and others have been let down by his performances
in the past so at this stage of a GS its way too risky to bet on him especially against to top guys.
I should have known that's what you meant -- no idea about players and their relationships with family/coaches... Djokovic I believe has had several, and Raducanu seems to have parted ways with a lot of talk surrounding it, but I never paid attention to that news. Maybe I should start? But yeah, Tsitsi, I'm over him, to be honest. Would love to be proven wrong at some stage (as I actually like the guy) but I'm more inclined to put my hopes on other rising (youthful) stars -- a revival by 26 and powering on from there maybe? Hard to say. Sabalenka turning it around and looks like sure thing now even though result is not backing it yet. She started to simply overpower Muchova. Tsitsi had no chance against Alcaraz and before we start to pile on him let's wait to see how Djoković will fare tomorrow. I feel like there is nobody on tour capable of competing with Alcaraz when he is on his best. First 2 sets against Tsitsipas he was simply unplayable. But if anybody can test him it is player like Djokovic, full of experience and tricks even when he is not in his best form like here. Alcaraz managed to show an unbelievable performance against Tsitsipas especially in the first 2 sets. However if he becomes complacent as he was after the middle of the 3rd set, Djokovic wouldn't forgive this and he would send Alcaraz back home. Djokovic can still have a psychological superiority to his opponent somehow even in times his opponent is better than him. Therefore unlike the betting odds the person I expect to see in the finale is Djokovic. Indubitably, Alcaraz's performance against Tsitsipas was nothing short of impressive, however, his complacency during the latter stages was quite concerning. Should he exhibit such overconfidence against Djokovic, the result could be disastrous - like a mouse challenging a lion in his own den. Alcaraz might be packing his bags sooner than anticipated. Djokovic's psychological edge over his opponents is rather remarkable. It's like a chess grandmaster subtly manipulating his adversary's strategy. Often, even when he appears on the backfoot, he manages to shift the momentum in his favor. Betting odds notwithstanding, it's quite conceivable that Djokovic could indeed find himself in the final, capitalizing on the slightest of missteps by his opponents. |
|
|
|
Zinedine Zidane has once again rejected Paris Saint-Germain's offer as the French champions look to replace Christophe Galtier at the helm. https://www.goal.com/en/news/psg-approached-zinedine-zidane-over-replacing-christophe-galtier-but-former-real-madrid-boss-turned-french-champions-down-for-the-second-time/blt29f406b7d0e60ba6It doesn't even matter how many times PSG tried to approach zidane to be a new coach and the result will always be the same. I see no hope for PSG to get him. PSG seems very ambitious to get him as a new coach for the club yet zidane reject it again. It seems like that the possible thing for PSG to sign naglesman at this moment but yeah this guy is not having very good track record like zidane. Im willing to see who will become alternative coaches to be signed by PSG in the future. We can remove zidane from the list of potential coach that will be signed by PSG. I see no hope for PSG to sign him. Zidane was always rejecting PSG so many times. But I would even say that this is embarrassing if you can't get Zidane as a coach for the team of the main city of his home country. Zidane probably shares the opinion that many people have. The league isn't competitive and if you won the Champions League with Real Madrid and the La Liga title against Barcelona, why would you want to find yourself coaching PSG? That team is a step back and it doesn't matter how many superstars they have. I mean I think they have already reached the maximum with Messi, Neymar and Mbappe and even Ramos. There isn't much more you can do and yet they were without a chance against Bayern Munich. Zidane knows that. If he accepts an offer he can only lose. Winning Ligue 1 and Coup de France doesn't count for PSG's management. But I would like to know which clubs Zidane would accept an offer from.  There was a new update. It seems like that PSG was not sending a negotiation to the zidane. There have been so many fake news. it's very hard to determine which was true but the thing that makes me feel curious is with the confimation that came by romano and it seems like that PSG was not even willing to sign zidane as a new coach. This becomes even more non sense since zidane has so many good achievements in the past and PSG is not willing to trust him as a new coach. It seems like that if PSG knew zidane will not be interested on its offer or what? PSG is seriously in talk with naglesmann to be a new coach. I don't even what's wrong with this team. It's always refusing to sign a good coach to rebuild the club. Zidane has a lot of experience to make it happen. PSG can at least The situation around PSG and Zidane indeed leaves one scratching their head! Zidane, with his array of accomplishments, appears to be a perfect fit for any team wishing to ascend in the football hierarchy. Yet, for reasons as clear as mud, PSG doesn't seem to be keen on bringing him aboard. Football news can often be a mess. In this cacophony of transfer rumors and coaching news, we must learn to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to media outlets. It is absolutely crucial to ascertain the reliability of a source before taking the news at face value. Because, in the end, even the best of us can be led astray by fake news. |
|
|
|
If they wanted to run projects like PSg in the premier league they had to spend much more money because in the premier league, there are many ort rich teams and there is a closer race between other teams while in the French League, they could have easier days, if they were spending this money in premier they could even lose the top of the table easily.
That is exactly the point and that is why I am not a big fan of picking a league that is inferior and then invest a billion and celebrate the team for winning the title on a yearly basis. Not a lot of people are truly excited when they can watch Neymar, Messi and Mbappe play against Troyes. But what if they hypothetically be playing for Newcastle instead and people get to see them to play against Manchester United / City, Liverpool, Tottenham, Chelsea etc. Having those three guys play for the Ligue 1 title in the same team became very boring over time. Everyone was waiting for half a year to pass until the knockout games in the Champions League finally began and if PSG got eliminated early, then the season was essentially over. PSG spent a lot of money and signed several star players. Even then their performance was not good. Even though the Ligue 1 teams are not very strong, the PSG team cannot perform well. Even PSG spent a lot of money to win the Champions League title. But their performance in the Champions League was worse. Even though they have a lot of money, PSG management can buy star players even if Messi and Neymar leave the team. We will see a lot of star players in PSG's squad next season as well. However, Ligue 1 is not very competitive. And I think the Newcastle team is much stronger than PSG right now. Because the Premier League is very competitive. The standards of Ligue 1 teams are much lower than Premier League teams. PSG's spending spree, in contrast with their subpar performance, seems as mismatched as a bird at a fish party. Messi's situation in PSG is a stark reminder that the best of players can struggle under unqualified management. Galtier's public admission about struggling to tap into Messi's potential exemplifies this issue. The role of a competent coach, as you aptly pointed out, cannot be undermined. It's indeed true that Ligue 1 falls short in terms of competition when juxtaposed with the Premier League. While PSG may dominate their domestic league with their galaxy of stars, the real test of their mettle comes at the continental level, where they've been underwhelming. Perhaps the likes of Newcastle are indeed in a better position to compete given the rigorous competition they face week in, week out. |
|
|
|
I see many As Roma fans blaming Mourinho because of the bad performance he had this season and because he lost the game against Sevilla in the Europa League while in fact Mourinho had a good performance and we can't blame him for anything. The only thing they can blame Mourinho for is the place of As Roma in the league where they got 6th pale of the table.
For real, aren't we being a bit too quick to pounce on Mourinho with disapproval, given his tally sheet this season? Isn't it kind of off-kilter to point the finger of fault at him alone? C'mon, he brought Roma to the threshold of the Europa League final, a triumph they hadn't tasted for a fair bit, no? Even within the handcuffs of financial limitations, he's turned Roma around, like a master mariner charting a course through turbulent waters. Debate may rage over Roma's not-so-top-tier 6th place finish in the league. However, consider this: isn't it paramount to admit that soccer is a group effort, where, yes, the manager is critical, but the players' performance and other factors are also key players in the game's final tally? Mourinho's tour de force this season has been praiseworthy, and the fanbase seems to be tipping towards admiration rather than admonishment. |
|
|
|
Real Madrid has this confidence that they can still bounce back to winning the La Liga title next season with the way they want every quality players across Europe. Well they're doing all it takes to cover the spot in their squad.
With Benzema leaving the side I don't know they can get someone who's good as him or even better than him. Well the Madrid I know can get anybody in the transfer market but the question is, can they develop more in their scoring habit and try as much as possible in winning the league.
Indeed, Real Madrid has an illustrious reputation of springing back like a tenacious cat, always landing on its feet. Yet, they face an uphill climb, especially in the wake of Benzema's departure. Can they find a worthy successor in the transfer market? Only time will tell. This coming season, the club's performance must redefine their trajectory, and no stone should be left unturned in the quest for their resurgence. Their mission is not just to fill Benzema's shoes, but to eclipse his legacy, an ambitious endeavor. Could Real Madrid not just find but also nurture talent that outshines Benzema's accomplishments? What are the odds, right? |
|
|
|
Union Berlin was my favorite team this season and I was even hoping to see them at the top of the table and racing with Bayern Munich until last week when saw them having a bad performance because of having not enough potential for the rest of the season. I think Union Berlin could have much better transfers and they could hire better players to help them in this situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021%E2%80%9322_1._FC_Union_Berlin_season#TransfersIndeed, Union Berlin has proven itself as a team to watch, especially at the start of this season. They took us on a roller-coaster ride, a captivating chase for the top spot against Bayern Munich. Yet, as the saying goes, "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link." Their squad depth—or lack thereof—may have precipitated their slump. In the spirit of constructive critique, I'd posit that it's imperative for them to focus on transfers and augment their player base with more high-quality players. The draw of the European competition might now prove irresistible for potential new signings, giving Union Berlin the much-needed lift. A fortified team will undoubtedly aid them in their quest for the championship in the upcoming season. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting perspective, however, I'd argue that the percentage of the bankroll used for bets should not be rigidly fixed. Factors such as risk tolerance, knowledge of the game, and personal financial situation can all influence this decision.
When it comes to depositing and withdrawing, I'd advocate for responsible gambling practices. This could mean only depositing the exact amount intended for gambling, to ensure you're not tempted to exceed your budget. Discipline is key in any form of gambling and should not be underestimated.
|
|
|
|
|
Initiate remembrance mode, okay? Game's not over until you tap out. Your narrative is practically oozing with that rags-to-riches charm, transforming a wee bit of investment into a full-blown bonanza. Hats off to that! But the hitch, as you've duly noticed, lurks in the labyrinth of making that bonanza play nice.
The call of the wild, the adrenaline rush of putting all your chips in one basket—it's an irresistible siren's song, even for those grizzled finance veterans. It's like an action flick, yeah, but seldom scribbles a happy ending in the long run.
Ever thought about sprinkling your windfall across other not-so-rollercoaster-y investment paths? Like putting your eggs in a few different baskets to dial down the gamble and invite a steady stream of greenbacks. Okay, it might not be the same adrenaline shot, but it could fortify your financial fortress. At the end of the day, isn't the real dream a comfy nest egg rather than an arbitrary 'milli' goal?
|
|
|
|
6 months ago, my savings went down because of the FTX debacle. I've never used FTX, I've never been a customer of this company, but my savings are in BTC, and because of that failure, BTC's value went down, and so went my savings.
Today, bis repetita. I've never used Binance. I've never been a customer of this company, but because the SEC sues Binance, BTC is down, and so are my savings, so I have a message to all bitcoiners out there.
Exchanges and BTC are 2 different things. One exchange going down doesn't mean BTC must follow.
Binance will disappear? I don't give a damn.
Everything has its place. There are people who believe so much in exchanges to take care of their assets security more than they think they can do for themselves, and as such, most people save their coins on centralized exchanges with hope and believe that they are the best option. Which is the worst idea anyone can have. A true Bitcoiner knows the value and benefits of self-custodial. The price of Bitcoin always goes down based on the level of fudz, which is a cause against Bitcoin. The Bitcoin price is not controlled by anyone, but most times it can be manipulated, since the case of the SEC coming after Binance CEO is enough reason for non-believers to start panic selling, which can cause a drastic price dump, but this can only be temporary and not a permanent price. But you shouldn't be considering your savings gone until you have sold them out entirely. So long as you still hold your coin, there is a higher chance and possibility of regaining everything that you have calculated to have lost when the bull market comes. That's why we are always advised to hodl strong in a bearish market and never to sell under panic. I don't think it's about these people believing in the fact that Binance will secure their assets better than they could, I mean this is a CEX that gets hacked and robbed from almost every year by the millions, I don't think it's going to scream "security" anywhere, although you're right, there's a good amount of people in this industry who thinks that Binance will take care of their assets. Although going back, that is not what I think is the reason why. Bitcoin as it stands today's accessible through multiple channels, but it would be stupid and dishonest to say that Binance and Centralized Exchanges aren't a way for these people to get into crypto and start their cryptocurrency journey. It's been like that for years, and the recent barring of Binance and the legal implications it carries with it just spells "we can't use bitcoin anymore" to people who were introduced to cryptocurrency by Binance. And it being a major player in the industry too, makes a lot of people lose confidence in the industry, hence the drop in valuation. You could say that OP is right, people are giving too much importance over exchanges, but that attention is warranted and deserved, as they played a great part in introducing regular people into this industry too, especially in the 2019-2023 mark. Your viewpoint does carry weight; it's true that trusting centralized exchanges entirely could potentially be risky. However, let's not neglect that these platforms have catalyzed the crypto revolution for the common man. For many, exchanges like Binance have been the gateway to the world of crypto, simplifying the process of buying, selling, and holding digital assets. Yet, I agree that complete reliance on such platforms for asset security could be a bit naive. The mantra in crypto circles, "Not your keys, not your coins," still rings true. An ideal approach might involve using hardware wallets or other self-custodial solutions, along with exchanges. As for the FUD impacting Bitcoin prices, I concur that emotional trading often leads to volatility. In such scenarios, the classic advice of HODLing (Hold On for Dear Life) seems most apt, don't you think? |
|
|
|
That's what I thought too. Robbers probably aimed for the cash inside that ATM, but unfortunately It seems like the ATM wasn't really used that much for the people nearby to purchase bitcoin using that ATM. I am also wondering, there might be some cash inside since it might offer deposit and withdrawal feature like the fiat ATM. I didn't take a time to read the article though, dont know how the story goes, but if the Robbers were actually aiming for some physical Bitcoins, then I don't what else to say other than asking them if they just came out from the cave LOLOL!
Although a thief in a cave cannot obtain Bitcoin from an ATM, it is not accurate to claim that 'Bitcoin cannot be robbed'. To this day, there are still numerous cases of theft and scams involving Bitcoin. Hackers can still target all our data, which poses a threat to the wallets we keep secure. As of now, I can still assert that Bitcoin ATMs (BTMs) are safe from thieves who are not familiar with the internet, technology, or blockchain. What we've been reading in the news is mostly about Bitcoin wallets with substantial balances. However, cases of Bitcoin wallets being hacked with small balances are not widely publicized. That means there's still a significant number of incidents that go unreported. I think it's critical to distinguish between physical robbery of a Bitcoin ATM and virtual theft of Bitcoin. The former, as you've humorously pointed out, is an exercise in futility. Cryptocurrencies exist in the digital realm; one cannot "rob" them in the conventional sense. However, you're correct that Bitcoin is not immune to theft. Sophisticated hacking techniques can compromise wallets, and phishing scams can trick individuals into revealing their private keys. We've witnessed these in the numerous high-profile security breaches that have hit crypto exchanges in recent years. I'd suggest the discourse should focus on strengthening the security infrastructure of cryptocurrency systems. This involves stringent regulation of exchanges, educating users on secure handling of their private keys, and promoting hardware wallets for long-term storage. That's the way forward, don't you think? |
|
|
|
I don't think they are. If Ledger is good at one thing, that's marketing and advertising their products and services. They did a lousy job with the PR for Ledger Recover the first time. I think they will hang back, gather their thoughts, and try again once the storm passes. We are forgetting that many ideas shared by members of this forum is not what the regular crypto user thinks. The average person isn't going to run their own node, stay clear of centralized exchanges, never submit KYC, or worry too much about privacy-invasive software and services. I don't think they will see the dangers in sharing their seeds with multiple online partners either if you package it and sell it to them in a nice wrapping. Ledger will probably lose a percentage of their current userbase because people have found out their hardware wallets aren't as safe as they trusted Ledger they would be. In the long run, they might make up for it with new users, like the millions of mothers  looking to purchase hardware wallets where there is a system in place to correct their mistakes. I guess you're right. The vast majority of crypto users want convenience on top of privacy/security/decentralization. While Ledger will lose customers because of its recovery service, it won't be much of a big deal compared to the rest of the people who really don't care about anything. For crypto veterans like myself, we would look into other alternatives that respects the true values of crypto/Blockchain tech. I'm glad there are plenty of open source alternatives on the market. This would make crypto stronger in the long run. Would you imagine hardware wallet companies being compromised by the government in the future? If there were no open source wallets, no one would be able to use a hardware wallet without giving away their privacy and freedom. I hope Ledger learns its lesson and decides to abandon plans to launch the recovery service. Maybe it will turn into an open source hardware wallet company in the long run? Interesting! Still, I’d argue that the crypto is diverse enough to accommodate a spectrum of user needs and preferences. While I acknowledge the flaws in Ledger's approach, isn't there room for a more varied ecosystem? Crypto veterans like us are likely to prefer open-source, non-custodial wallets for optimal security and control. However, there's a substantial chunk of crypto users who prefer a degree of convenience and user-friendliness, even at the expense of some privacy and control. Isn't the key here diversity? The more significant issue I see here is user education. Many newbies are unaware of the potential privacy risks associated with certain practices. Rather than demonizing Ledger, perhaps our energy should be focused on enlightening these users? Remember, a well-informed user is less likely to fall prey to pitfalls, right? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
