This is so because there literally are a few places to spend bitcoins and if there were really numerous places in which one could use their bitcoins to, believe me people would use it from time to time. Right now the focus is on speculation since that's the most active part/aspect of the coin, but once value is ridiculously high, see how people start to use their bitcoin on things and take advantage of what's served in their plates. Maybe not now but within the next few years or so.

Buy orders has since thinned out on some exchanges but support for crucial parts of $8000 remains in place for the time being. 10 weeks in a row are we in the green territories and sure enough, a correction is very likely within the following weeks, though the sentiment of the market remains very bullish at this time. Still that does not mean we should be confident as a single move could shatter $8000 at any given moment.

They effectively reduce the total availble supply of bitcoins in the world thus making each remaining bitcoin in theory. As what we perceive, rarity is almost always tied with value, so less available bitcoins = higher value per bitcoin remaining. We might not see the effects of such yet in the market knowing that we still have 4 or so million bitcoins left to mine and will take the next 120 yrs to mine them. Also, bitcoin is still heavily effected by speculation, and perhaps will continue to do so until such time that its value goes through the roof that people would just keep it rather than risk losing it in trades.

This is the awry truth, but numbers don't lie and we see that on the blockchain and exchanges. People use bitcoin but just not as a currency, so the headline is somewhat inappropriate to describe what bitcoin really is (and the whole article as well.) Also, given the highly speculative nature of bitcoin, it's just common sense that merchants and services would be avoiding it to use as a payment method. Most want to take profits directly and only the large companies can take in such gamble, so yeah.

Community still decides ultimately, and I believe that Core will come up with a rather nifty yet temporary solution for the non-existent (yet) scaling problem that a lot of people have been bringing up from time to time to question the ability of the Core devs in handling bitcoin development. Also, a lot of promising fork proposals have been brought up to the table and so far, none of them proved to be the best one that solves the problem most people are bringing about, so yeah, this Bitcoin FS thing might go down that route as well.


How exactly would big blocks solve the scaling problem for bitcoin? Other forks have attempted the said approach to no avail...

$40 for a transaction is just ridiculous unless u have lots of inputs on that. Better yet, give us tx record or it didn't happen. Straight transfers from btc to btc address wouldn't be flagged by anyone, and AFAIK exchanges only flag trades that are made by accounts with no KYC, or have limited KYC verification on them. You could have used P2P exchanges (LBC) to facilitate the trades to avoid ridiculous fees if that's what you're avoiding. Honestly, there are ways to prevent what you have just experienced, but yeah, for the most part and for the uninformed, using bitcoin to transfer huge sums of money is rather a pain rather than just using fiat and banks directly.

Stricter regulations won't save crypto. Admit it or not, no matter how tight security is against scammers and money launderers, they can still find a way to get bsck and do their nefarious activities all over again. It's a part of the community already, and the only way to combat this is to educate people harder against some scams in the making. Always remember that prevention is better than cure, and for crypto, the cure is almost impossoble to acquire once the damage has been done.

It often does not go that route, though there are similarities in the market movements no doubt. However, charts alone cannot exactly determine whether we'll be seeing the same movemnet that we have had in the past three years, the period in which the bull run was prepared and actually happened. Right now we are seeing a strong support for the bulls as it takes on regaining $8500 territories, with the selling side somewhat thinning compared yesterday, which is a good time to push IMO. Bitcoin has been in a crazy ride since April, and let's hope June does not disappoint.

Trump hasn't issued a clear statement regarding his personal stance on cryptocurrencies. He may have done so in the past but you know this man, he only talks the talk but never walked the walk. He never implied that he liked the idea of crypto in his tweets or statements either. Also, the man is a capitalist at best and a banker at heart, so he might have seen bitcoin and crypto as money milking machines but never the revolutionary tech they are.

Rhe US is the only nation I know of wherein the government is actively hindering the growth of its own citizens and its domestic policies as well as international relations by imposing things that they see fit (especially during Trump's admin). Right now, the G20 regulations aren't final yet, and the said standards won't be headed thankfully by the US but Japan which is a more capable country when it comes to crypto regulation. Government intervention is a painful yet needeed compromise to ensure that the growth of the scene is sustainable with less of the criminality. We don't know how this would pan out, but hopefully it sides on the interests of traders and not the governments this time around.

Bitcoin Core is for those who wish to create their own node and help the network. Also, it requires you to run your machine 24 hrs a day in order to not get a lot of backlogs for syncing. SPV wallets like Electrum, IMO is the best all around, lightweight wallet that can accommodate the actual needs of a regular/normal bitcoin user. Its security is also good as long as the machine being used by the user is secure to the core.

I coupdn't tell which is better, but certainly one is always the lesser evil than the other. These three things excel in their own respective field and therefore have their own different uses. Speculative, I'll stick to bitcoin. Storage of value, gold. Fast transaction with physical stores: fiat. It all boils down to how would one use each in different scenarios, and if you think about it, not one of these is ever above all the three as they have their strengths and weaknesses.

It's not only the speculators at fault in here but also the lack of places and platforms in which we can use our cryptocurrencies. It's as if crypto is specifically made for speculation and not as a medium of exchange per se due to the fact that there are more exchanges available compared to the number of merchants accepting bitcoin fully, which, to me is a ridiculoudly small number given the amount of growth bitcoin has seen in its almost 10 years of existence.

People will value the deflationary side of bitcoin than using it to actually buy something, and other people will do the same causing a stagnation in the economy and a completely new purpose for bitcoin: wealth generator and not cryptocurrency.

I've done two transfers from a sportsbook directly to Binance, and that was 3 months ago. Never encountered a warning from their supports or have received any emails regarding the said transfers. Normally, exchanges who do have a problem with such transfers are those compliant with the Wire Act as stated by squatter, and if you look deeper into their ToS, it doesn't state anywhere that they are compliant to the said law.

Or better, ask their support directly. And move this to Service Discussion or Exchanges section.

It is better for the market to be that way so as to avoid manipulation since different platforms have different and independent market movement from one another. Also, this lessens the risk of a lot of users losing funds in an event of a hack. Imagine if a single exchange were to lose a ton of its holdings in a single sweep, the users would be the ones who would suffer the consequences. Even if new exchanges popping out are offering no new features at all, they at least help spread the coins out there, so it's definitely okay too, provided that these exchanges abide by the laws in order to not pull off exit scams easily.

People put the price on anything they see, and the government together with the system helped us believe that what they are minting and printing carries value and could be exchanged for goods. Value is only perceived by Man, estimated and appraised usually by checking whether it is of use to them or not. As time goes by, this idea of valuation proved to be somewhat inefficient and inaccurate (different places pose different values of a similar item), and by then Man started to devise something that will fall under a certain standard to solve the valuation problem.

Bitcoin is no different. It started to have value since people put a price to it, and it only keeps on going since that is what people think while in reality, it's just a bunch of codes put together to create a working system. Value is a perception and a man-made concept, so arguing which is valuable and which is not is somewhat a pointless debate.

In developing countries, this is exceptionally hard considering that those who may wish to get a hold of such a financial service are either in deep debt, too poor to offer a collateral or mostly scammers using fake identities to later default on the loan. Fast cash is accompanied with high interest rates and a short repayment term, so while the idea sounds promising, it just wouldn't work on developing countries and would only worsen the state of those people who don't know how to handle their finances.

I think I'm gonna have to file my copyrights too just so I won't miss the party these guys are having right now. But seriously this just shows how inefficent and incredible the US copyright office is. They can literally just handout the copyright to anything and earn that measly $35 for the paperworks. For sure, legal consultation + court proceedings in the event of a dispute is already anticipated by them, that's why they easily give the copyrights to literally anything without verifying the claims.

Kudos to Wei Liu anyway for making CSW look like a fool!

It failed on some aspects but succeded in most parts. Bitcoin effectively disrupted the financial scene, helped the unbanked gained some footing on the uneven playing field of today's economy, redistribute wealth (kinda) and a transfer of value. We might not be having little to no fees in sending bitcoin here and there, but compared to banks, bitcoin is still faster and cheaper, especially when sending in large amounts from point A to point B.

There should be some form of threat that whales bring no matter what market they operate in. Knowing that they control a bulk of the market's share, it is easy for them to control the price at will if the moment is opportune and everyone is willing to play with them. Idk if that information from the site you referenced is true and verifiable, but the only truth I know is that there are times in which whales are to be commended and there are times that they should be avoided, simply due to the fact that they have lots of money.