Poloniex asks for verification if you need to withdraw more than $2000 worth of Bitcoin per day, which is definitely not a volume that any normal small-time traders would reach, even on a professional level (obviously $2000 per day is well over $700,000 per year).

My main tip is that when you see that the price of something is rising significantly, don't buy it.  Most of these pumps are very brief and will collapse before you know what's happening (with some very well-marketed exceptions such as Dash).

It's very unusual for people to suggest downloading eBooks on open file uploading sites.  There's no reason why I would trust that this is not a dodgy file, especially considering that there are so many virus ads surrounding the supposedly legitimate download.

Regardless, I know that I would never download it anyway even if it's free, because I know that if you're an honest investor you won't claim to double your investment in a week, which is completely impossible by legitimate means.

Nope, this isn't happening.

Bitcoin's support is clearly quite strong at around $1100 at this point, it has been fluctuating over that point and even remained pretty much consistently over that point after the ETF which was impressive.  I think unless the threat of a hard fork becomes too prominent, Bitcoin isn't going to drop back under $1000 in the near future.

If it did though, that wouldn't be much of a problem at all, because Bitcoin has been under there and done very well for a long time.  Maybe it'll even reduce the volume of transactions and remove all the unnecessary pressure on the scaling debate from all this hype recently.

Experts can make Bitcoin related predictions but none of them will ever be entirely right.  Some supposed experts thought that Bitcoin would die after the 2013 pump, but now it's smashed the ATH from then.  Bitcoin price prediction is never easy, and trading is never easy.  Traders might make a profit overall but they have to live with the knowledge that at any major point what they're trading could hugely collapse (especially if they're too reliant on Bitcoin) and they'll have lost most of their income.

That said, as long as traders have a few different things that they're trading and have some savings in case the worst happens, it's fine that it's an unpredictable job because it's still very profitable.

I don't think you really understand what SegWit or BU actually are.  BU will result in a split because that's what it's supposed to do - the new version of the network is incompatible with older versions so those running old nodes will still use the old Bitcoin while others will run the BU coin.

With SegWit there would not be a split (although there might well be a move from some people to altcoins if they strongly disagree with it), as SegWit is compatible with earlier versions.

It's very strange of them to decide to block this one specific exchange.  There are several other exchanges which people could use but it's clear that if a banking service is this blatantly trying to crush their opposition all the Bitcoin users will use another bank even if it doesn't directly concern them for the concerns of the whole community and because of the blatantly authoritarian nature of this bank.

If you want to make a proper profit from mining altcoins, you need to be prepared to convert your coins into the more stable Bitcoin regularly and switch between lots of different altcoins depending on what the profit is at the time.

It's viable, but don't put in all of your money because any investments into altcoins are inherently risky and you should have a backup source of income, preferably as a job in real life as a means of stability.

Well the best pools are those that charge relatively low fees (e.g. Jonny's pool which I understand is about 0.5% with the transaction fees shared), and also either mine blocks often enough for you to have a reasonable income, or will mine them often enough in the future.

Generally if you're mining you don't expect to have a really serious income, which is why it's okay for some pools to not mine blocks for a few months at a time, so moderately small pools can be OK as well and therefore the main factor you should consider is the fees.

You can find the Bitcoin Wiki's list which will help you to find the best pool for your needs.

No, it's impossible.  It doesn't matter whether Bitcoin is anonymous or pseudonymous because the pseudonymn is different for every transaction in most cases, or at least different for every new sender.

All you would be able to do is search for the revenues of specific sites by talking to them and trying to deduce the percentages based on a sample size and its relevance to the market cap.  It wouldn't be accurate, but it would be as close as you could get.

That was clearly rounded, the point is that the value of Ethereum can never come close to that of Bitcoin because there are far more coins.  This changes the way that we should look at Ethereum because the only relevant thing we should consider about Ethereum is its market cap, not its price.

For BU to be activated, 75% of the mining power needs to support it.  If this were the case, the chances are that BU would have a majority of support and therefore that your previous coins would lower dramatically in value. 

The value of new Bitcoin/BUcoin will also drop dramatically temporarily due to those who do not support and the fear/sometimes FUD of a hard fork.

This is just pathetic.  So many exchanges that work in a conventional way and don't dictate everything that you have to do.  Bitcoin exchanges need to meet the aims of Bitcoin and not attack a community which nearly always values their privacy.

Coinbase is terrible to exploit traders and limit so many aspects of their accounts.  It's a shame that some people who use it don't care enough about their privacy to refuse to give their documents, which is the only thing that could stop this.

With online wallets, Blockchain is definitely comparatively secure and offers a lot of good security options for people who need it.  Fees from the actual wallets are always very low compared to the transaction fees paid to Bitcoin miners and you can never compromise the safety of your Bitcoin for the sake of penny pinching.

This isn't strictly true.  Most cloud mining services are scams as they often suggest static payouts and do not explain block difficulty - this means that they are essentially Ponzi schemes claiming to invest in Bitcoin, which they obviously do not.

However, cloud mining sites are not inherently Ponzis, it's just that they are very hard to trust due to the lack of available verification.

You need to understand what Ponzis actually are though.  Ponzis might pay out at first, they will just turn scams as they pay out with the investment of later investors, which is why you need to avoid them so well.

But if you're talking about usually and your tendencies, that's just suggesting that there are certain periods when you're more likely to be in the mood.  So I suppose most gamblers don't actually schedule their gambling, they just do it when they feel like it besides reasonable limits.

To be fair, it's pretty funny.  If anyone actually invests in this thing, they deserve to lose their money, but I hope they can have a good laugh in the process, especially if anyone invests in them who doesn't actually see the name properly or notice all the lies on the site.

Most of these sites invent some vague crap about what industry they're in and don't give any details about the actual investment, but at least this site is ironic enough.

To be fair, the price was comparatively stable from 2015 and most of 2016.  It's a strange phenomenon that the price is so crazy right now.  You don't need any certain to speculate, hence the subforum. 

I would say that the threat of a hard fork, regardless of whether it's well organised or not, is always going to make the price struggle a little bit.  There's also the FUD about Bitcoin in general and the rising prices of altcoins, but I think that most investors are secure enough in their investments.  The price has even had a slight rebound since then, it's not consistently going down.

But since the amount of money you own is significantly less than the house, if you continue gambling forever you will eventually lose even if the house had no advantage at all over you. 

The problem is that people never just stop forever.  They might gamble once, make a profit and leave, but someday when they have a much larger amount of money, they're likely to come back and throw it all away, hoping they can get away with it.  It's possible to control but it can be hard.

Well I would never actually call it dead until it was literally worth $0 (unless fiat currencies collapsed altogether and the two were incomparable, which is extremely unlikely).  If it was under about $150, I would sell it and leave, but I think that the word "dead" is used too commonly and it takes away any genuine meaning for when things are dead.

I mean, do you actually understand what a Ponzi scheme is?

"a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a non-existent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors."

The earlier investors in Dash and other altcoins, even the scam ones, are not given payouts, they still trade them as is the point of Poloniex.  Therefore none of them are Ponzi scheme nor scams in the sense that you describe them.

Regardless, Poloniex does not use bots, it's only Poloniex users that sometimes use bots to enhance their trading, as they sometimes do on other exchanges as well.  This is nothing new.