Selling properties to invest in Bitcoin is never a good idea. You got your profits because the market was favorable towards you. This won't be the case every time. Bitcoin investment carries a great risk. The volatile market is one of them. Also, you have doubled your money because you entered the market at a very favorable time. What if the situation were different? The price has grown very fast, but there is still room to grow more. Bitcoin is a long-term asset. The best outcome can only be seen in the long run. But before that, it faces many difficulties.
Bitcoin investment is not for everyone and not everyone can make a profit out of it. Many lose everything in it. So the situation and the circumstances were in your favor and you made a good profit. But this will not be the same case for others. Keeping that in mind, invest only what you are willing to lose if the market is against your luck. Lands, golds, silver- these are some assets that will give you proper return and are not as volatile as Bitcoin. So selling them to choose something that contains higher risk is a foolish decision to me. At least from my point of view. But you made a good profit, so congratulation for that.
I grasp your take on Bitcoin, but it lacks layers. All investments carry risks, right? Conventional assets like real estate and precious metals, despite steady returns, arent they subjected to market swings too? You underscore Bitcoin's high-risk, high-reward nature, but doesn't that make it a tantalizing gamble? You concede Bitcoin is a marathon, not a sprint, kind of investment. Only risk what you can afford to lose, agreed, but isn't that Investment 101, not exclusive to Bitcoin? It seems wiser to say a strategic, diverse investment approach, Bitcoin included, is the real winner.
|
|
|
`
Is this happening? If yes then it would really be a good thing about exposure and recognition of Bitcoins existence but if we do speak about its utility and application then going pass through banks would definitely be removing the real essence of Bitcoins existence or actual utility. For sure for those people who doesnt have idea on what about Bitcoin is would definitely be having that kind of question and on the time that they would be able to make out some Bitcoin investments then the banks would really be still the ones who would be holding those coins or still simply means that you arent the ones who do own those coins in the end of the line. Sooner or later people who had invested Bitcoin would really be building up that kind of curiosity on which it would really be resulting on making up some realizations that Bitcoin isnt something that should be connected by the banks and this is where they would be able to point out on what decentralization means. Your point on Bitcoin's route to popularity via banks is nice. Imagine a world where Bitcoin holders don't really own their Bitcoins? Talk about irony But lets remember, we need to walk this tightrope with care. Yes, it seems like a smooth path to mass uptake, but it might lead to central control over Bitcoin - a total antithesis to its spirit. While banks can't be sidelined in promoting Bitcoin, we must ensure it doesn't damage its fundamental value. Lets keep Bitcoin's true essence intact
|
|
|
Although I still studied, I invested a small amount in Bitcoin. I will get married if I get a good job. Many people give many things to their wives as wedding gifts, I have a different plan. I am planning to gift bitcoin to my wife on her wedding day. Bitcoin is still illegal in my country so I invested with caution. On my wedding day I want to gift half of my investment to my wife. Should I gift bitcoin to my wife? I want your advice
I think you should invest and purchase BTC for you to HODL it long-term. Regardless if you want to give it to your wife as a wedding gift or not, you should definitely invest in BTC. Though it may be somehow difficult given the current circumstances surrounding your country of its prohibition, the fact that you purchased it already makes it possible for you to do it. Personally, I would give my wife something that she would understand and love. Giving her BTC as a form of investment is like giving someone shares of stock to a certain company. I mean, it is not bad per se but a wedding gift should be something that is tangible for her to remember as a remembrance of your wedding. While acknowledging your perspective, gifting Bitcoin or other crypto, especially as wedding favors, really boils down to personal taste and knowledge. The potential of hoarding Bitcoin for the long run is huge, but its rollercoaster nature may not sit well with everyone. You tout it as a solid investment - does it really fit the 'gift' label though? Giving your better half Bitcoin as a wedding keepsake relies on her crypto savvy and embrace of this elusive asset. Remember, the heart of a wedding present is often more about its sentimental worth than its future monetary gains.
|
|
|
The concept of 'bouncing' Bitcoin for privacy is intriguing but not fail-proof. Bitcoin moves are on a public stage for all to see. No matter the ricochets, the breadcrumbs are always there for the determined. Yes, the tracing becomes a mind-bender with multiple moves, but it doesn't erase the digital footprints. Too many moves might ring alarm bells to those keeping a hawk-eye on the blockchain. As for 'tainted' Bitcoin, believe me, playing hot potato with it won't wash off the stain. Whoever is on the hunt, if they've got the grit, they can always track the path back home.
|
|
|
for now we have not used bitcoin ATMs or seen bitcoin ATMs themselves because in my country it is not yet fully public for widespread adoption of bitcoin and also in coins it is still not officially legalized.so to make transactions or use bitcoin ATMs it has not been realized until now because these factors.but if bitcoin has begun to be accepted and adopted in various worlds, it is not impossible that we can also make legitimate transactions or use bitcoin ATMs to carry out a transaction process.
Same case also applies in my country and at some point I don't think they might want to build new bitcoin ATM in my country if it finally gets legalized in my country because I'm sure that the government would want to seek for every way to task its users and they might simply just incorporate the bitcoin transactions in the regular ATM machines available now in the country as that will even make it easier for the government to task bitcoin even on ATM withdrawals. I've read of some news where it was stated that bitcoin atm transactions are way expensive and cost more as compared to the online transactions. So I wouldn't have to use the atm if the news is correct when I can simply do such same transaction with my phone. Your Bitcoin ATM perspective is intriguing, no doubt. Governments eyeing Bitcoin taxes? A prickly topic. Bitcoin was the ultimate tax-free haven, but now with its rising star, governments want in on the crypto action. On the Bitcoin ATMs, your doubts seem valid. Sure, they might have steeper fees than online dealings, but consider this: their unique selling points include unmatched access and secrecy - benefits sometimes elusive online. But if costs skyrocket, are we better off online? Let's chew on this, friends. Do the pros of Bitcoin ATMs justify the price?
|
|
|
The chances of these 1.7 billion creating a Bitcoin wallet and buying Bitcoin is 0.01% as they don't have enough resources to atleast open a Bank account in their respective country. The requirements to open a Bitcoin account is a mobile with Internet service and then you also need adequate knowledge and experience to operate with Cryptocurrency which is a far high ceiling as compared to a normal Bank account. Impossible to get this audience.
Actually, the people in the rural areas are basically not too inclined with technology. Some do not even have that taste for modern technology as they are too akaic in their thoughts and dealings When it comes to technological innovation not to talk of when it involves bitcoin. I believe this is where the work needs be done. Sensitization and awareness is what matters in every nook and crannies in the society. Like you have said, knowledge and experience matters when it comes to dealing or having bitcoin in mind and it is very important that anyone going into it must have the knowledge of what they are about signing up for. Lastly, as a result of the low standard of leaving, it would be very difficult for most rural dwellers to afford an android phone not to talk of internet service supplies so as to enable them follow up. Let me use my country as an example. The rural areas are characterized with poor electric supply, no internet supply, poor communication network you can mention lots of anything that has to do with technology in this modern day world which are lacked in the rural areas. That is the situation or condition of the rural areas in my country so you could imagine the lapses and the task at hand. Pondering over tech resistance in the sticks is thought-provoking, yet sparks a rebuttal. Is rural folks' tech-unfriendliness an "archaic" mindset's offspring, or a consequence of scarce infrastructure and wealth gap? Schooling country folk about Bitcoin or any tech wizardry isn't just about consciousness - its a Gordian knot tied with socio-economic threads. Sure, mastering Bitcoin is key, but can they afford and access such tech marvels? Your mentioned tech rift - no power, web, or comms - isnt your nation' copyright, it's worldwide. How will Bitcoin tackle these barriers? Are we putting the tech horse before the infra-cart by parachuting AI into tech deserts?
|
|
|
Struggling with Bitcoin transaction costs? You're in good company—it's a universal issue. Walking the line between profits and client rapport—it's a high-wire act.
Ever thought about SegWit? It curtails transaction heft and fees. Might not be a silver bullet, but it's a pathway. Thinking about alternative coins? That's your play, leader. Bitcoin and blockchain glitter with potential, but they're green. Bitcoin's tenacity and incessant innovation spark faith.
Steering customers towards the Lightning Network? It's an uphill climb due to complexity. But, how about dangling a carrot for its usage
|
|
|
There was a time when 4 years look like an eternity to me, that was when I am young, even for a year to go by looks like it's going to take forever, but when I grow older I realize that years are nothing when you have a dream and you are pursuing that dream, years will flew past you like it's nothing.
If your friend believed in this dream then it's possible that things will go his way, what we most lack is faith is what we do, if your wife or lady get pregnant and give birth to a baby, you have a responsibility and brother, it's going to feel like yesterday when your baby turn 10years old, time can be very deceiving if you don't have faith in yourself.
It's true that in the next 16years anything can happen, but he is alive and that's all that matters right now, if things are going to get ugly for Bitcoin, something new will come up first and we will know what the future of Bitcoin is looking like.
Time, aint it the ultimate illusion? As kids, its slower than a lazy Sunday. Then, boom! We age, and its off like a SpaceX rocket. Dreaming big can make time feel as irrelevant as a flip phone in the iPhone era. Engulfed in a passion project, decades blur into a TikTok video. Yet, your faith-time link, though lyrical, isn't a perfect hit. Faith, crucial as the WiFi password, isnt success's lone key. In the Bitcoin galaxy, faith is paramount but navigating its roller-coaster ride demands savvy. If something nasty knocked Bitcoin down? A reality check, indeed. Still, blockchain - the decentralization, transparency, immutability - would survive, like memes in the internet age. Lets zoom in on these evergreen aspects, not Bitcoin's swinging fortunes.
|
|
|
<..snip..> This and many more is the reason behind my current confidence in Bitcoin's ability never to let me lose if I hold for a long time. Indeed knowledge is power, because knowledge can save you when money failed, because knowledge failure is a lifetime problem but money failure in terms of investment is temporally and if I wait I will soon be in profit again very soon, that is what past records have shown and proven.
I must say, I admire your courage for purchasing BTC before you actually studied it. Normally. potential investors would first study and research the market before they commit to an investment. Though the price of BTC has went down and somehow stabilized, this should not discourage anyone from attempting to invest in this space due to its sheer potential in the future. It depends what you mean by "actually study it": bitcoin's purpose is pretty easy and straight forwarding to understand, and you don't need to be a financial expert or have some sort of financial degree to realize that countries keep printing money out of nothing, so inflation will be worse and worse every year. If you get those two points you are ready to buy bitcoin. Then you can go deeper on all the other related topics, especially the more technical ones, but in my opinion you don't need to know everything about bitcoin in order to buy it. Are you trying to emphasize that buying bitcoin is to fight inflation and it's a good store of value to help us fight inflation? What if a person doesn't know too much about bitcoin and buys bitcoin for $69k? Will it still be an inflation hedge since even bitcoin was hit hard when inflation peaked in 2022? If we want to invest in bitcoin, we need to know everything about bitcoin, there is no way that investing in bitcoin will yield good results without knowing too much about it. Bitcoin is very risky because of its volatility, if you don't have complete knowledge about it, how can you deal with its volatility? I grasp your viewpoint. Bitcoin as an inflation shield oversimplifies its complex essence. Like any asset, Bitcoin's tied to a tapestry of influencing factors, inflation being just one. Buying Bitcoin at its peak- say $69k - could be a risky ride, given its price swings. It's a solid rebuttal to Bitcoin as an unshakeable inflation fortress. A broad grasp of Bitcoin, not just its anti-inflation prowess, but the tech, trends, and pitfalls, empowers wise investment. A sprinkle of realism and a dash of caution is the recipe for Bitcoin success.
|
|
|
I know that many other centralized exchanges may declare bankruptcy - but let's ignore this for a moment and assume that these companies gets back in business would you patronize them? Would you still do business with them? I know the whole talk of move your bitcoin off centralized exchanges but we cannot denial the fact they that they still play an important role in the crypto community.
I see no reason why if you are not a trader and just an ordinary person who just wishes to hold his/her Bitcoin to leave it on a centralized exchange, and moreover an exchange that have once given a red flag of bankruptcy, because for the fact that they did informed it's traders to withdraw their funds within a certain period of time shows that they never meant to scam anybody nor run away with anybody's fund. So if they happen to come back and can prove themselves to be trustworthy, I will give it a second try but with caution. Embracing an exchange that's danced with bankruptcy - its either impressive faith or... a high-stakes gamble, eh? Your confidence hinges on the assumption that they offered a lifeline for fund withdrawal, signaling no con game. But lets hit pause. These entities filed for bankruptcy once. Isn't that a glaring sign of operational blunders or market stress they flunked? Yes, centralized exchanges grease the wheels of liquidity. But arent cryptos about breaking free from central control? Feels like déjà vu trusting the big guys, doesnt it? And future bankruptcy boogeymen? Ready for another mad rush, another heart-pounder? Recall, history can repeat itself. Pining for centralized exchanges is natural, but maybe caution's the real hero here.
|
|
|
Normal people like me will never subscribe to youtube premium, why do we spend money on Youtube premium only to avoid gambling ads ? By the way, even if you somehow do not see the gambling ads, there may be other ads that will be shown to you by youtube. So in any case, unless you have paid and opted for the youtube premium, you will have to watch the youtube ads.
Anyways if the gambling sites are paying youtube to display their ads, we have to cope with it because this is another form of marketing by the casino's.
Only people who have a lot of money use youtube premium let alone just don't want to see gambling ads, one very bad way is to use extensions on the browser to block ads on youtube, even though using brave browser is safer than ads on youtube even though it doesn't really respect creator content but to be honest gambling ads are very annoying if displayed there because it will confuse people who have stopped gambling and then want to gamble again. One of them is using another browser to prevent and block ads if you really want to feel safe using YouTube, so far brave browser offers to block ads so I feel comfortable there even though brave browser is also annoying because now it displays annoying ads on the main screen too but at least it's not a gambling ad. but if you are a gambler for me you will not mind gambling ads. Its an angle that puts the value of money against the value of ad-free content consumption. As for ad-blocking extensions, I second your opinion that they dont fully support content creators' revenue streams. However, it's worth considering that they offer a semblance of control over content that isn't possible otherwise. While the Brave browser is an effective tool to block ads, it is not free from faults, as you have rightly pointed out. The line becomes even more blurred with the influx of disruptive ads on the main screen. Your point on gamblers tolerating gambling ads could be a controversial one. It might imply that the nature of the ads we tolerate is a reflection of our personal interests or inclinations.
|
|
|
~snip~ But taking too much risk by implementing someone else's strategy is one of the wrong ways for me. I admit that big wins will come for someone who dares to take risks, but the problem is that the strategies given by other people are sometimes not right. If this fails it will be a valuable lesson but I prefer to use our own strategy with lower risk. It doesn't matter who "invented" or told you about the strategy. It's all just maths in the end and the expected value of gambling is negative, no matter what you do. This means that in the long term, if you keep betting, you will lose money. The only way to win against the casino is to stop forever after you win a large enough sum that covers all your costs, but the probability of that happening is extremely small. And after a gambler wins that big they are usually very excited and continue betting until they lose it all. Its interesting how you've boiled down the complexity of gambling to a matter of mathematics and probability. Your logic is sound; the house always has the edge, and the expected value of gambling is indeed negative in the long term. However, could it be that your perspective is too deterministic? Gambling also involves elements of psychology and human behaviour that may not be so easily quantifiable. The thrill of the game, the intoxication of risk, the hope against hope that the next bet will be the big win—these are factors that motivate people to gamble despite the odds. That being said, your advice about quitting after a big win is statistically sound, yet ironically, it is this very thrill of winning that keeps the gamblers hooked. Its a paradox, isnt it?
|
|
|
`
If we look solely at the stats, we might criticize or think that he is overvalued. However, man, the Warriors definitely know what they are doing, and even if you ask an expert, they'll say that Green is truly one of the major reasons the Warriors achieved their previous championships. I would say that Green is the obvious leader of the team. Without him, this Warriors team might struggle and wouldn't be as fun to watch anymore. The Warriors face a true dilemma. Losing a lynchpin like Green would tilt the scales, yet the fallout can't be ignored. Meeting Green's terms could stir the pot, especially around Thompson's paycheck. The honchos must think beyond cash—team camaraderie and chemistry hang in the balance. It's not just about one superstar's deal, no matter how game-changing they are.
|
|
|
But at times, some people could be so rich through gambling, yet they must either gamble with a high amount of money or took a huge chance where luck merely shone on them.
Instead of gambling been a source of steady income, it can only be a source to acquire you wealth and make you quit looking for a steady income. For gambling to be a spruce of steady income it means you have to be certain of an amount of money to be earned daily, weekly or monthly. Gambling can't be used to replace jobs, you'll stress yourself if you force yourself to win everything you bet when you don't win you'll go into depression. We don't have to depend on gambling for steady income instead we should have a steady income and can use gambling to support. That steady income will make you relax when gambling and you won't be pressured to do something that might give you loss instead of profits like chasing after your losses or over betting with huge capital just to make up for the other bets that you have lost. Get this - your stance on gambling not being a stable moneymaker is solid. It's the essence of chance, peppered with a pinch of luck. Tagging it as consistent? Like catching a cloud - futile. Got the risks right, too. Relying on gambling for bread and butter? Fast track to Worry World when the winning streak stumbles. Downward spiral into despair, losing chase, and shaky finances in view. Yet, dont nix gambling outright as a wealth generator. It shouldnt be plan A, but with a planned game, shrewd money management, and an ironclad mindset, it can beef up your income. Treat gambling as amusement, funded by play money. And don't forget, the house always packs a punch.
|
|
|
`
Right now most chances Harry Kane for any other club then England is not going to happen because Tottenham is already asking for the price which is not acceptable for any other club in this all situation most chances he will stay here in Tottenham or Manchester United will be doing something as they are also looking for the central striker. But in last few weeks, we also have rumors about Vlahović which is looking for the another club and right now Real Madrid and Bayern Munich both are looking for him but currently nothing is clear because things will be clear in next few weeks without any doubt Robert Lewandowski is bog lost for the Bayern Munich, but now they need to look forward and most chances they will find solid replacement as well. A switch from England for Harry Kane? Tottenham's sky-high asking price suggests a no-go. It's a money mountain many buyers shy away from. Rumor has it that Man Utd needs a spearhead, but will they foot the bill? That's the million-dollar question. The Vlahović gossip, and Bayern Munich's Kane courting, certainly spice up the tale. With Lewandowski's goodbye, Bayern's jonesing for a solid striker. Can Kane step up to Bayern's challenge and offensive prowess? The jury's out.
|
|
|
Bitcoin as the currency of the future? Not too far-fetched. I'm on board with your Bitcoin being Anti-FUD theory. Its weathered numerous regulatory tempests and panic purges, yet it perpetually rebounds
However, I find your "whale-proof" Bitcoin assertion slightly doubtful. Despite a sprawling global market, the big fishes do frequent this sea. Their presence can cause market ripples, triggering erratic price fluctuations. This facet demands a closer look.
You hit bullseye regarding the roadmap. Bitcoin has progressively opened the gates for borderless transactions, placing it as a serious contender for the global currency belt
But one piece of advice, lets not trivialize the road to universal endorsement. Given Bitcoin's fluctuating nature and enduring trust issues, its likely to take more than a generation for widespread adoption. Its a waiting game. The future's a wildcard, and time holds the key.
|
|
|
Tools like Blockchair give a rough sketch of Bitcoin halving, based on current mining rates and the 10-minute block addition rule. But, lets not carve these estimates in stone; they're mere projections, not exact truths. Mining speed sways due to a host of elements like network complexity tweaks and overall mining might. So, while these tools sketch an outline, pinpointing the exact halving day, let alone hour or minute, is a shot in the dark.
As Bitcoin and blockchain enthusiasts, we should understand foundational principles, rather than leaning entirely on prediction models. These forecasts, while handy, arent fail-safe. They're as precise as nailing the next raindrop's landing time
|
|
|
~snip
Sometimes, people who are very passionate about something (for example, bitcoin) turn out to be overly persistent and assertive in agitating the subject of their passion. The point here is the excitement that a person experiences from delight and awareness of future prospects, if we talk about bitcoin. Such a person wants to share this knowledge with his friends and relatives in order to help them share valuable information for the benefit of their loved ones. But most often, these impulses are met with indifference or distrust of loved ones who don't perceive this information with similar enthusiasm. Because of this, there is a certain dissonance in the views. At this point it is better to stop and not try to convince them that bitcoin is the solution to all their problems and a ticket to a brighter future. I tend to think that there is no need to agitate and try to attract more new users in bitcoin, as in some kind of sect. I believe that when people themselves are ready, they will find a way to get information about it. There is enough information about btc around, whether it is in the news, or promotions carried out by enthusiasts. I want to say that bitcoin appears in the news background quite constantly and I hear from people who are far from bitcoin mentioning about it (heard about BTC for a long time, but they are not in a hurry to try it). So, many of our people around us have heard about bicoin more than once, but still they are in no hurry to study it in more detail. If they were interested, they would have taken a step in this direction long ago. Talking to friends like " buy BTC - get rich" is the dumbest way to talk about bitcoin. You are indeed right in saying that only a personal example is the best way. Less words - more results. And then, when you have something to show, others will start asking questions. It is this moment that will be the best to talk about btc. In general, I believe that it is not entirely right to try to change other people's lives. First, change yours for the better. Start with this. Otherwise, it turns out that as soon as they learn about bitcoin, people are in a hurry to advertise it to everyone around. Your words stir my thoughts. Does Bitcoin alone trigger strong responses among our circle? Is it our vigor or the topic itself that ruffles feathers? You propose news presence should quench curiosity, but what if the news is distorted? As Bitcoin aficionados, isn't it our duty to dispel myths and portray a rounded image? Aren't we failing our dear ones by letting them tackle Bitcoin's intricate universe solo? While peddling Bitcoin as a "strike it rich" tactic is misguided, I reckon we should champion its tech. We need to enlighten our circle about its potential and discuss its risks without bias
|
|
|
In my optinion any redistribution scheme is a terrible idea. You were given a finite deflating amount of coins, trustless and decentralized. It's your responsibility to safely store your wallets / private keys. If you can't do that, you loose your coins. Simple as that. And others coins gain a little bit more value as the amount of active circulating coins decreases.
Why should anybody care how long UTXOs stay dormant and for what reasons. It's not your business. Bitcoin is a proposal and an offer different from traditional fiat and so far it's pretty well working within its technical bounds. My understanding is that you can't and shouldn't force UTXO holders to move their coins for whatever reason. It's not your business.
Debatable are schemes where coins are actively burned (proof of burn is worst) or sent to addresses which to utmost certainty don't have a matching private key known to mankind (still worse, too). IIRC things like CounterParty or similar burned a 4-figure amount of bitcoins. While I don't find burning coins particularly charming, it's again not my business.
What if I told you the decentralized, trustless aspect of Bitcoin doesnt necessarily negate the necessity for a collective responsibility? Its true. Bitcoin, in its essence, encourages independence and self-regulation. However, imagine the potential for a more robust, resilient network if we cared more for each other. I'm not suggesting we distribute lost coins or even force the movement of dormant UTXOs, rather, can we not strive to create a safer space for everyone? Burning coins, on the other hand, is a complex issue. It’s like sending a spacecraft into a black hole. Its gone, contributing nothing to the economy. Could this be a valid criticism? Yet, as you stated, its not really our business, is it? At its core, the beauty of Bitcoin is its adaptability, pushing the boundaries of traditional financial systems. Let's hold on to that
|
|
|
~.
In short, if you disagree with the view that economics is not the backbone of everything in this world. What will be the backbone of your life? I want to ask if you have no money in this day and age, how would you survive? Our lives have a lot of things that are necessary, not just money, but if you don't have a stable economy, you have nothing in your hand, even your family, wife, children, and friends will not need you. I think it is MoralitySince you're assuming something that isn't true, I won't be able to give you an answer as to how that would work out, but I'll mention that I still have money, though not too much, and not too poor to pay for it treat them as something to put first. Remember that the fact that you work and you get paid is fair, so what kind of work does it have, I think you will figure it out for yourself when a farmer does what they do to support them, raise their own livestock to provide food and share it with everyone you can imagine. I do not deny the importance of money in today's life, but it is clear here that we have made a difference between perceiving money as a tool people and people as a tool for money. Cash, its just a tool, right? And arent humans beyond mere cogs in this vast financial apparatus? A thought-provoking notion indeed. Bitcoin, like any cash variant, is an instrument. But it's a revolutionary one - decentralized, trust-free, and a potential democratizer of finance. Doesnt that impart a "moral" edge to it? The Bitcoin miners or blockchain innovators - arent they performing purposeful tasks, not merely chasing the greenback or, in this context, the Satoshi? Isnt this a stride towards prioritizing people over mere financial exploits? As we integrate these technologies into our monetary system, perhaps we're not just trading tools. Maybe we're remodeling the entire workshop.
|
|
|
|