Well, I bet there are people who don't really know and are not interested in what Bitcoin is really about, even though they use it. These people are profit-oriented, they come from other areas where they traded something they did not care about and focused on how much money they can get is they sell now and buy then. And this is unfair because Bitcoin is so much more than that. I used to not care about the price myself, Bitcoin truly was new form of money for me. Then I started saving up in BTC, and this is how I got to care and even focus on the price. Considering this, I appreciate that the op is reminding us that it's not the purpose of it. Although Bitcoin is not doing very well when it comes to mass adoption and real possibility of being used in places like grocery stores, so it's natural that people are turning to its other aspect.

Halving is half a year away. It can be a trigger of higher prices, but it's not going to be here anytime soon. So maybe focusing on something that's happening these days is a good idea. I got a question about Starbucks, though. I remember reading articles a while ago, that Starbucks accepts Bitcoin when you want to pay with it, but does not publicly admit it. So this is not the first step of this company towards Bitcoin, and moving to Bakkt will probably give more fame to Bakkt than price ups to the actual Bitcoin market. I think in this sense Bakkt is kind of like Libra (not affecting the market directly). So taking this into account, maybe halving is something to look forward to, even though it's months away.

Wait, what..? You can't be seriously talking about an account that has less than $1k followers and a prophecy which somehow got popular for real... We don't even know this person and whether this person actually knows anything about Bitcoin and price dynamics... And the predictions are way off already, right? To me, it sounds like a random person making random predictions. Guessing the first one was just a lucky thing that happened. I don't think these predictions are realistic, not on the market we have today. Unless, of course, Asuka is Satoshi and planning to do something big with those Bitcoins to push the price forward somehow, I don't know. And I like Evangelion, for that matter.

Thanks! I agree that it's better to do something than nothing. And although I almost never encounter websites which I strongly suspect of scamming people, when I do I don't really know what to do with them. At least making a fast google report is a good start. I got to say, though, that the difference can indeed be minuscule. I report offensive content of Facebook from time to time, and even though sometimes there is very clear hate speech there, Facebook always writes that it does not think this content is against the company's principles (so nobody obviously looks at it, it's an automatic reply). But if many people report the same website, it would probably make a difference.

It's a good thing that you are warning others about a bad website. Yeah, the money is gone, but our mistakes make us wiser, right? They help to learn to be more careful next time. I was also scammed once, and although it was not a big amount of money for me, it was painful, but helpful in the future. It's a shame that these online fraud reports don't really do anything. When I got scammed, I did the same thing, and so did many other people scammed on that website, but nothing was done with it. The website got down shortly after the scam, though. And not fighting those who keep scamming others is not fair. Or maybe they are fighting, but there are just too many of these websites.

I don't know, in my country, although democracy here is far from perfect, there are official petitions to the president as well as to the parliament, and if they reach a certain amount of people who sign them over a certain period of time, they are officially considered by the authorities and an official response gets published. They can be pretty effective. Anyway, making cryptos legal sounds like a good thing, this will mean protection and safety for people who're doing business with it. But as for taxation, I think the most logical with is to apply a progressive income tax to cryptos, just like to other forms of income. I hope that if cryptos become regulated in South Korea, that'll be the choice of the authorities. But we gotta understand that the govs cannot pretend like people are not using cryptos forever, they have to regulate them in some way. So it's better to push for favorable regulations rather than for no regulations at all, I think.

I think this part is upsetting. African countries are indeed known for incredible rates of corruption, political instability, many people starving, severe human rights violations. Survival is something that's difficult there for many people. And if they see gambling as a way out, it can be even worse. Because gambling, in general, is not a way of earning money. It's a way of losing it, for the sake of something else (being involved in the game, experiencing certain feelings, being entertained, socializing in a specific way, etc.). IMO it's something that should be done by people who can afford to do it. If a person who does not always go to sleep without feeling hungry is putting basically one's last money on gambling, this is a kind of thing that makes gambling a very negative phenomenon in the eyes of many people, because it leaves people completely broken. So hopefully, at first their life will get better, and then they'll start gambling.

I think it's great that you are using Sportsbet for betting. This way you can at least be sure that if you win, you'll get your money, reputability is very important. I can also see that you're having a bright period with great bets, but isn't paying for university with the money from betting too risky? What if one day you start losing? If you're very good at sports, I guess it can be a regular source of income, but if you're focusing on certain general patterns of betting rather than specific context and details about the teams, I am not sure if it'll last for long. Just don't forget to actually use the money you're winning and not investing something that is too much personally for you. I wish you the best of luck!

But if one needs to download the thing anyway, why is dexgames different from other games? How is it different from other decentralized apps? Heads or tails is not a very common crypto game, I agree, but it's not the only place that has it, and dapps have been popular for more than a year at least. Or is there something I don't get here? I agree with safari88 that downloading something does not feel comfortable. If there were a way of playing online, on the other hand, it could be interesting. So if there is a technical chance of making an online version, I think you should consider making it. Good luck!

It's good that you use objective data from an independent source for this game. The whole idea is quite catchy, it's engaging to follow the price dynamics and bet on it. But I am not sure I understand how it's PvP bets. Is it, like, whose prediction was the closest to the truth? If so, is there a certain range into which another player cannot enter? I mean, if one predicts that the price will be, say, $9300, can another player bet on $9305..? Or how does this prediction game work? And by the way, why is it just PvP, why not player versus what really happens? Say, the player says the price will be below $9k. If it's truly below, the player wins. If not, the player loses. Maybe these questions are irrelevant and I just don't get how this specific game works. Sorry about that.

I don't know anyone who could afford to bet that much and who would in the right mind make such big bets. It's not possible to prove or disprove it, though, right? It could be just a fancy image to attract people, it could be a rich gambler actually spending that kind of money on gambling or it could be #3 which seems most plausible to me. Real bets, real wins, and losses, but made by a person who works for Yobit one way or another (so transactions are real, but the money is not really won or lost by anyone). This would be the most logical thing to do because this would allow Yobit to have proof that the transactions really happened (just in case). I don't like Yobit, so I would not gamble there anyway.

I agree with these points, but I'd like to add another thing as well. Not all of the projects that failed intended to scam people, I am sure of it. Some projects did, others were pretty terrible from the beginning but had the teams that believed in them. There's another category of projects that already allowed their investors to profit the hell lot, it's just that it was back in 2017, and investing in them in 2018 was too late. But speaking of profits and projects, it was not really supposed to be their main aim. They all had their use cases like special platforms, devices and stuff like that related to them (I'm talking about the top altcoins now). And whereas over the hype around them, they allowed people to profit a lot in the early days, many failed to do what they intended to do. And no wonder that after such failures of even those that seemed to be the good ones, investors are not interested in such stuff anymore.

IMO this view largely overestimates the power of the governments over Bitcoin. Yes, transactions are public, so while transactions that go through bank accounts are usually only available to specific users and the bank itself, whereas a Bitcoin transaction is available to anyone who wished to see it, basically. However, while you cannot have a bank account without verifying your ID, you can have as many Bitcoin addresses as you wish without disclosing any of your personal data. And while the government can push to require KYC where Bitcoin is used, there'll always be an option to remain hidden by using another wallet.

That's a good thematic topic considering Halloween! I am not afraid of losing access to my wallet, because I know how unlikely that is, and I prevent myself from losing it by choosing Blockchain.com with 2FA. As for the market going down to nothing - well, it would be really sad but also very unlikely. And we've seen major sudden drops already, so it won't be something totally new. Moreover, no matter how low Bitcoin falls, there's always hope of recovery. Now, the last thing is something that I fear the most. Every time I open my wallet, I sort of expect to see zero balance, I have this anxious anticipation as the page is loading. But then I luckily calm down seeing that everything is where I left it, so to speak.
Since it's Halloween, let me tell you a scary story that really happened, and I was a part of it. So I am sitting at my home and doing whatever I needed to do. It was in the morning, I've just recently had breakfast, and it's a weekend, so I don't have to go anywhere. Suddenly, I receive a call from a friend of mine. He asks me to come over as soon as I can (I live nearby) because his email that's linked directly to Bitcointalk and Blockchain is hacked, and he's having trouble accessing his Bitcointalk account and very afraid to open the wallet where he basically has all of his savings. I come over, we think what sort of stuff the hacker already has access to and what can be done about it. We figure out that it was probably hacked automatically, and the hacker has not seen the results of the program's work yet, so there's time to save stuff, but we gotta do it fast. We start by changing the email to which the Bitcointalk account was attached, then we deleted the data which was in the messages on the hacked email, changed the password using a back-up email, and made superhard password to every account. Everything ended well, he did not lose anything. But at the beginning, it felt like this was the time to say goodbye to Bitcointalk legendary account as well as potentially to the savings. When I came home, I changed all of the passwords to my emails and accounts which were weak to stronger ones.

To begin with, the 95% thing is very popular, but it's not clear whether it's backed up by strong research indicating that it is indeed the case. Surely, there are many people who lose money in this area, but is it really 95%? Moreover, it seems that this number is related to those who trade on Forex or something similar. Cryptocurrencies are not a part of it, and I bet trading them is very different. I agree, though, that trading altcoins is probably very difficult, especially nowadays. Although I doubt that lots of other things people trade actually have their use cases... Trading is very similar to gambling in skill-based games. It's still unclear whether it's more about luck (or, in other words, a successful person belonging to those who have a very low probability of existing but still exist, because there're lots of people altogether) or becoming a professional.

I like the first three points, they seem wise and helpful. They are oriented towards limiting trading in such a way that it becomes simple, leaves time for other things and prevents affective decisions. I think that there should definitely be the golden trading rules of never spending more that one can afford to lose and buying low, selling high in this list, though. And since it's a forum, mainly dedicated to Bitcoin, it pains me to see #4. Maybe it's because Bitcoin is just not supposed to be traded, but I think that people dealing with Bitcoin should have a personal connection with it, believing in it and worrying about it. Otherwise, they disrespect a great innovation and use it as if it were some useless asset on the market.

I am having problems even with this first point. Inflation means that the coin's value is decreasing. One needs more of the coins to buy the same stuff as in the past. Alternatively, it can be described as an increase in the price of goods and services. To make it more evident, let's say that in 2019 the price was 0.01 BTC, and in 2020 it's 0.015. This is inflation. Now, if this devaluation does not occur, why the fees to incentivize miners have to be high? And high in comparison with which fees? Higher than if there was inflation? I fail to see how these two are related. And I can see that it's not just me struggling to see why it is so. So could the op or you elaborate on that?

Well, to be fair, more than interpretation failed if we talk about Bitcoin as money being sent directly from one person to another. We have exchanges where we trade, we have some wallets that can also be considered intermediaries (all of them, maybe...). And if Bitcoin was not meant to solve the problem of poverty but can help to solve it, there's nothing wrong with that. But you're right that blaming Bitcoin for not doing that is wrong (who is blaming it for that, though?). Saying that people who blame Bitcoin wrongly for volatility would be a more difficult case, though, because one might argue that for something to function as money is should have relative stability.

Perhaps, the author meant the debates around regulations. Do we need the authorities of various countries to impose regulations on cryptocurrencies or not? It's a difficult question because if we are pro-regulation, the second question is how far can we agree for it to go in return for safe (100% legal) usage of Bitcoin.

I agree that there's no need in decentralizing the forum, but I think it's possible theoretically to have a decentralized forum with moderation. For one, moderation can be automatized (auto-deleting posts with certain words or posts which were reported to moderators X times). Another way to go around would be to decide the banning cases by voting or something like that.

I wanted to say that that's old news but even one of the articles you've posted dates back to March 26th, 2019. There've been talks about faked trading volumes, and it seems problematic to solve this problem, even though every transaction is recorded on blockchain... I think the problem is that there are too many addresses, too many transactions happening at once. And while even coinmarketcap has been accused of publishing lists based on faked volume data, it's not like we have anything better or can offer a solution that will solve this problem once and for all. This data can't be trusted, but then again, does it matter that much?