Approval of the Bitcoin ETF is not really a must for us to see a bullish season, but it would be a contributing factor should it happens.

The Bitcoin ETF is geared towards having an investing instrument backed by actual bitcoins targeting institutional investors to ensure we have enough players in the market which actually translates to higher coin market cap. And bitcoin etf is also expected to boost the confidence of many for us to see a more stabilized price growth.

Yet, a bullish season can take effect without Bitcoin ETF as we saw from last year, it is not mandatory but could raise the bar higher.

Indeed awareness is a contributing factor for the crypto economy to take a leap. But add to that utilization, without which, value decreases.

Increasing market activity through constant utilization really helps to boost the economy of crypto. The more people use bitcoin as a means of payment makes it more valuable and the more valuable it becomes, the more demand we will witness. And for that to happen, establishments as you mentioned will really help pave the way. It is through the general acceptance and utilization that the market will strengthen and stabilize.

That is why i always start telling people i know that bitcoin is a system of payment before dwelling to the trading and investment aspect, should they be interested.

I sincerely believe that technology is not created to squash another, nor destroy it. Yes, i am not discounting the fact that quantum computing might break bitcoin's security but i doubt it will be intended to do so. Besides, there's a lot of intelligence poured unto the security dynamics of bitcoin that it was able to convince tech experts that it is nearly hack proof. The cryptographic keys it utilizes are not really of a simple matter otherwise, it would have not survived this much time. People are crazy smart and greedy, there were certainly a lot of attempts to decrypt bitcoin wallets and even attack on the blockchain was surely tried but none succeeded. I'm sure even a quantum computer could not help as the bitcoin core continues to develop and address vulnerabilities such as what you have noted.

HODL when you can, why not. At the end, it is your welfare that you look after at, not anyone else's.

But come to think of it, hodling poses a serious problem too. Hodl for too long and you might end up in a bear trap. Unable to withdraw your investment since you will lose substantially more instead of gaining even just a bit.  As you said, you have been hodling for over a year now, how much did you invest for your bitcoin? I'm pretty sure you could have gained a lot already should you decided to sell during last year's ATH.

Now you will be forced to hodl on an extended period and wait for the bullish season (luckily it seems it's about to start soon). So for me, i'd be wise should i decide to hodl.

$20,000 is a good amount of money, and putting it on an investment is surely a bright idea. I understand that you are among those risk all or risk none person since you decided to pour in the whole amount for bitcoin investment instead to approportionate in other investments that has a guaranteed annual return of investment.

Really hoping that you explained well the nature of bitcoin to him. Indeed, we are all hopeful for a bearish season to start soon but nonetheless, there is really no telling how good or bad things can get. This part must be crystal clear to him, the risk you took was necessary to succeed big but could also lead to an epic failure (knock on wood it doesn't).

But somehow i think you're in for a good return since your expectation is an annual ROI, there's a better chance that the market would be way stronger come 2019.

Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto was pretty confident on the unlimited number of times one can generate a bitcoin wallet address, he even said, "generate all you want!" He was convinced that the same wallet need not to be used twice.


Though i'm really in no position to engage on the debate of bitcoin address against generic variability. All i know is that one person can have a multitude of wallets as he wants, that's pretty enough for me. #winks

And this is a realization of what the elders would usually say "be careful who you listen to."

Selective hearing of course is not so ideal, but life changing decisions must be based from those who knows the market and has been on it for quite some time already. Their expert opinions does matter. Press release from those who have not proven sound financial judgments are better off put aside. As i usually say, we are all entitled to our own opinion but it does not make ours the right one and the same goes for everyone else. Be picky if you must, filter news according to reliability and trustworthiness. It will sure help one to carry on towards the greener side of the pasture.

The issue of scalability with bitcoin is a genuine concern since blocks are limited in size and frequency wherein on average can only process 7 transactions per second, a low throughput considered by many should bitcoin becomes mainstream.

Luckily, this issue is being addressed already for a couple of years now. Part of the solution is the Lightning Network. Its some sort of a cache that allows transactions to take effect while still being recorded on the blockchain (sounds a bit unsecured but the nodes are already out there and has been carrying transactions). Yet if i am not mistaken remains to be in test mode. But is a good solution nonetheless, retaining full control of both payee and recipient as if there were no web service that meddled in between (again, a bit like anti-bitcoin but works anonymously just the same).

So i guess scalability will not be much of a problem in the future as the core and developers know what is missing and is not gonna allow other cryptocurrency to take the lead without a good fight.

The concern on ICO demanding KYC is real. There is indeed so much threat that comes along with it. But i do believe that not all ICOs are requiring KYCs, and if it does, the option is really in our hands whether to proceed supporting, contributing or investing in them.

The only reason i can guess as to why the KYC is being imposed was to comply with regulatory requirements of the governing country from which the ICO originated from.

So if you really don't trust the team behind the ICO, one can always walk away from such.

To be honest i am fine with the online wallet paired with a 2FA enabled mobile app (perhaps the method being free appeals to me much).

Hardware wallets are good too. Some people prefer this method of securing their bitcoins but comes at a cost, and at times, hefty too depending on the features and brand of reliability too.

But should you like to try it out, there are some considerations to take. Primarily, how do you plan to use it? Is to for mere storage? Or you want to use it for frequent payments? Varieties of hardware wallets are there. I suggest learning more about hardware wallets before buying one and pinning down how you wanted to use it.

Yes this is true. Anonymity is not an innate attribute of bitcoin transactions, rather, what we have is pseudonymity where you are not required to have your wallets linked to your real world identity.  In fact, our wallets and transactions are open for public viewing. One can checkout a wallet's balance and transactions it made. Not so anonymous isn't it?

But it was part of the design for the consensus to be effective. Yet, we are not required to declare personal identification to create a wallet. Thus, even Satoshi Nakamoto himself suggested to use as many wallet as you can to take advantage of this pseudonymity.

As others have said, there are other crypto platforms that can offer you the much anonymity you are seeking for. Have a look at them, it might be a sound option for you

I'd say it has a lot to do with the fact that bitcoin paved way for the cryptocurrency to be born.  The vote of confidence is undeniable with bitcoin no matter how atlcoins re-invent themselves as a cryptocurrency and packs a few more power punches with them.

Truly, lots of other coins and tokens exist in the market that offers better specs and services than bitcoin, but their following is not enough to move out of the shadow of bitcoin more so after bitcoin peaked its all time high. Besides being the first cryptocurrency ever, bitcoin also proved it can be a worthy investing instrument. Just imagine the value it holds right now and all the speculative forecasts of the coming years. Bitcoin alone was able to capture the trust of many as it stood the test of time with value that grown into epic proportion.

We now have altcoins mainly because people first believed in bitcoin. And with that, i humbly think that bitcoin deserves that worth over other cryptocurrency now and in the future as a gesture of appreciation and gratitude.

Point well delivered. As much as the blockchain technology is ideal to deliver the much needed data in an immutable stage, the hands the ply on it remains far from being incorruptible. We might simply find the developed technology at the wrong hands for manipulation since farmers are well not into tech.

Educating the farmers might be a colossal act in proportion, and knowing farmers of the old, all they ever care of is a good harvest, they would much more appreciate technologies that would enhance their crop or speed up their farming routines.

Actually blockchain gave us the gift of pseudonymity, how we interact with that gift is really up to us.

But since exchanges had to comply with government regulations for them to operate, a part of that pseudonymity is lost, and we have to give in since we are in need of such service. Should you really want to avoid disclosing any part of your real world identity, one can opt not to convert their bitcoin into any form of fiat currency.

An article once said that transactions can be made really private by choosing to spend your bitcoin via gift vouchers. But as for the establishments that facilitates this option, none was mentioned. Perhaps a quick google search can end you up with a few results.

I do believe that banks became irrelevant when the peer to peer consensus of the blockchain proved to be just as efficient and secured compared to that of a banks'.

Nonetheless, i think banks will continue to be an integral part of the financial system of any country. As we all know that both banks (centralized) and cryptocurrencies (decentralized) have their own advantages and disadvantages.  More so at the current stage we are in. Blockchain may be as promising as it may sound but establishing, developing and migrating on this technology is more costly than the conventional centralized database infrastructure. Perhaps the best scenario we will see in the near future is that of banks utilizing the blockchain technology.

A lot of people are already into this type of purchase/transaction. In fact, you will see a lot of classified ads that sells stuff for so and so bitcoins.

Though i somehow feel more comfortable seeing prices in USD as a peg instead of BTC. It feels that we, as a consumer, is on the losing end when buying items priced in bitcoin since the price can fall or peak at any point of time. So a little conversion here and there would not hurt i guess. Let prices be in SD then simply calculate the corresponding bitcoin amount according to the current price market.

As many would suggest, hold your bitcoin and wait for the price to peak at your expected value. And in the event when price of bitcoin is really down the hill, consider buying what you can afford. Most people will take advantage of this situation, why not do the same.

But should your finances dictates that you already need funding and your bitcoin is your last resort, selling it out in response to your current need will be a smart thing to do too instead of falling in debt. You see, bitcoin is here to help us not to be of burden. Be brave enough to hold during crisis but be smart enough to wave the white flag when the holding will do more damage than good. I'm sure you get my point. Best of luck.

One can never rule out the effect of news (good or bad) when it comes to bitcoin. As much as we i want the price of bitcoin be ruled by market activities, there is a significant amount of influence that mass media dictates on bitcoin's price, just as much as any investing instrument experiences.

Speculation will always be an intrinsic part of bitcoin, our trust and interest will always flactuate depending on the crips and quality of the news revolving around our favored cryptocurrency.

Though i believe that the time will come that no news can affect the strength of bitcoin in the coming years. Soon we will see how steady bitcoin can become as it provides us with reliable technology and system of payment.

You see, the current cryptocurrency market situation is part of the cycle.

Market expert finds it but natural that after an all time high, the price will be due for regularization where the price had to seat somewhere it is considered to be acceptable by the market. And truly, though we find and deem the current market situation as bearish, the price of bitcoin remains valuable considering the previous year's cap.

So i guess we still have a lot to be thankful for as the current market price remains to be valuable inspite of failed bullish runs.

I think that your concept of bitcoin being pumped remains speculative in many form and is something i really don't like dwelling into. Yes, indeed, as market experts say it, there are lots of indicative factors that pumps are being held to influence or manipulate the price but if this stays true then what do we really have?

Imagine a market controlled not by actual market activities but by pumps and dumps? Will it not make bitcoin a mere instrument of profit for the able? That breaks the confidence and trust of a free market. Perhaps this concept makes it difficult for bitcoin to thrive continuously.