Take note of the people responding to your post..

Be extremely careful when investing in highly-speculative tokens that promise huge gains. They are almost entirely a bunch of scams. The amount of rug-pulls the past year has been astounding.

All the devs for all of these projects, however, all spread good intentions on social media. Whether these intentions were actually good is irrelevant. The fact is, investing in these obscure alt coins is more like gambling than investing.

This is a prime example of why non-custodial wallets should be the norm. While custodial platforms are still important, it kills me to see how many people have not informed themselves of how to use one.

If you have an opportunity to secure your own funds and not rely on any intermediary, why not take it? Or at the very least learn how to.

You should change this title to "Man Lost Everything to a Gambling Addiction". Which would be much more accurate.

People don't realize every type of investing is a form of gambling and can become very addictive. I find it interesting when the price begins to crash hard, you will see depression and suicide hotline numbers posted all around Reddit in the crypto forums.

It certainly would not be good.

Not only would governments begin a massive smear campaign against him/her; if they were able to prove they have access to the 'massive' bitcoin wallets that belong to Satoshi, this could send the price tumbling due to the shock in supply. Many say the price already factors in the millions of lost bitcoin.

You say almost all areas of human activity. Could you give a few examples?

I understand that blockchain tech has its uses, and can certainly be used outside of transferring value, but the alternatives to such uses already have a more efficient solution. While I could see a few extra use cases that pan out, it will certainly not be in "almost all" areas of human activity as you put it.

As of the past couple of years, blockchain enthusiasts and futurists alike have been flaunting the "plethora" of real-world use cases for our new-found blockchain technology.

Dozens of articles have been written in an attempt to convince the public that blockchain tech is the future for everything:

20 Real-World Uses for Blockchain Technology
The Growing List of Blockchain Uses
17 Blockchain Applications that are Transforming Society

The problems is, all of these "use cases" are done more efficiently when done outside of ANY blockchain. Blockchain technology, while capable, is not meant for anything outside of transferring value from Person A to Person B. Blockchain's only purpose is to provide an accurate, decentralized ledger that enables individuals to transfer value without the assistance of an intermediary.

This is all it was ever intended to do.

Naturally however, in the name of making money, people will try to find a solution to problems that weren't problems in the first place. You will find that many of these use cases are almost never attributed to bitcoin's network. They are almost entirely attributed to different alt networks aiming to be the worlds next "internet". They stretch and contort their blockchain's capabilities to make it seem like they will be the foundation of society as well as the backbone for businesses.

To be clear, I am not saying that blockchain's aren't capable of carrying out these use cases. I am saying that in a world where every dime matters, blockchain technology just isn't efficient enough (in comparison to it's non-blockchain alternatives) to carry out these uses on a global scale.

Regardless, next time you see a headline or a post touting a new "use" for blockchain tech, look at the alternatives and decide for yourself if our current system is more/less efficient than what the blockchain has to offer.

I sold about 400 SOL at $4.

Needless to say I lost out on a pretty big profit. I was paid in this SOL for a boat part for my buddy. Wish I would have kept that for a bit longer.

Google Chrome is literally the least privacy-respecting browser there is. I hardly find speed to be a reasonable tradeoff for your personal data.

I really hope you look into the browser you are using and opt for a better alternative.

I'm not entirely sure what this is supposed to mean. Viewing images and/or videos is not the only use for a browser.



I would not need to have privacy-enhanced browsing when using a company computer. I'm strictly talking about a personal device for personal use.

So if you've read the important parts of the privacy policies for services such as Coinmarketcap and Coin Gecko, you probably know they are able to use and sell every bit of information you give them for nearly any purpose they see fit.

I have a particular distaste for companies that are willing to share data for the right price. Not caring who they sell it to.

Are there any privacy-focused portfolio trackers? I only hold bitcoin, but using a calculator is getting a bit old.

These don't have to be web services. An open-source program would be fantastic as well.

Source: Crypto Miners Not Leaving Kazakhstan Despite Chaos

Bitcoin will always be viewed as a store of value, but its theoretical role as the global medium of exchange is just that, theoretical. I have mentioned several times on this forum that government bodies would never allow their future CBDC to not be on the menu. It's important to remember that bitcoin also has a long way to go development-wise before it can even dream of taking on that role and the volume of transactions that come with it.

Hashrate junkies always claim this when the price goes down in relation to a drop in hashrate. They love to say that the btc price follows the hashrate. You could also blame this dip on the very hawkish FED we are seeing right now. You could even say this dip is from bitcoin not hitting the 100k mark by the EOY, making all the paper-handed "hodlers" sell their bag.

"Always use someone else's money."

It's been said for ages now. Using someone else's capital to fund investments is always the safest way to go. This is nothing new and people will continue to do this as long as there is money to lend. (Which there always will be.)

For years, Tor and a hardened version of Firefox have been my go-to for any web browsing. Tor is used for any site that requires javascript, hardened Firefox instance is used for everything else.

I recently came across this website that compares the privacy tests for each of the most popular browsers. What stood out to me was how many tests the Brave browser had passed. Out of the box, it seems Brave is much more privacy-focused than what Mozilla produces. I wonder how this would change if Brave was compared to a hardened instance of Firefox described here.

Has Firefox lost its status as the privacy-focused browser? What browsers do you guys use on a daily basis?

Playing in high school, football taught me how to control and direct my emotions. More importantly, how to direct those emotions into productive activities.

As a kid, I would struggle with this, and would constantly express my emotions in unhealthy ways. High school football was the best thing that could have happened to me. Learning healthy ways to deal with strong emotions is a life skill that many take a lifetime to learn.

It's a terribly centralized service (as many are) and is not the privacy titan they assume themselves to be. They do, however, supply you will a few tools to enhance your privacy. Obviously, these features are not active by default which raises its own concerns.

If you want to chat via encryption, you have to activate secret chat with the person you are messaging in order to generate keys. If you do not activate this, your messages will only have TLS encryption which telegram can readily read. Telegram also gives you the option to connect to a proxy such as a Tor proxy which can rout your messaging traffic over Tor. Again, this is not a default setting so it will require the user to activate.

Overall, it's an okay service. If you use it the way it's supposed to be used, you can achieve a degree of privacy. Anonymity, however, will not be achieved.

It's important to remember that they banned bitcoin all together not because of power consumption or any environmental concern.

China banned bitcoin because they fear the open network that is bitcoin. If it can't be censored or manipulated by them in one way or the other, they want nothing to do with it.

Michael Saylor has a very philosophical stance on bitcoin.

If you have listened to the Michael Saylor Series, you would know that his appreciation for bitcoin comes from a lot more than just number go up technology. He views bitcoin as something that is supposed to take over gold because of its smarter/faster/stronger properties. He explains that bitcoin succeeding is simply a force of nature. The human desire to have something that is superior to another.

If they can do it by satellite, they can most certainly do it by radio.

As long as you can broadcast the necessary information to complete a transaction, you can transact bitcoin in just about any way. Hell, if there was a server designed to listen for bitcoin transactions using morse code, and you could input all of the necessary information, you could theoretically transact this way.