In my opinion, fiat is to blame for everything, as usual. Cryptocurrency was created as a means of payment and an alternative to conventional money, but what happened is that cryptocurrencies are not used as an alternative to fiat, they are used to exchange it for fiat. The crypto community itself is to blame for the fact that they started to interact with fiat more and more, thus attracting the attention of regulators more and more. Cryptocurrency has a phenomenal idea and concept, but people are not yet able to fully appreciate it.
That's certainly true, mate. It has always been about the money. Not about believing in cryptocurrency's underlying tech to change our world for the better (by eliminating the middleman). If people began using crypto as an alternative to Fiat, things would've been different now. Banks would no longer be relevant, as the majority will switch to the decentralized economy. Unfortunately, this is only be a pipe dream. That's because both banks and governments won't allow decentralized cryptocurrencies to take over the world. Otherwise, they will lose power/control over people's financial lives. Considering that people only care about making money with crypto, we should expect "meme" coins to rise like there's no tomorrow. The rest will go all the way down the drain in an instant (except BTC, ETH, and LTC). I'd say Litecoin is a very undervalued coin, especially when it has a limited supply of only 84m units. It's fast, cheap, and private (with the optional Mimblewimble privacy feature). Best of all, its blockchain network is decentralized and censorship-resistant. LTC is tried-and-tested, unlike many newcomers on the market today. Who knows if it lives alongside BTC for generations? Just my opinion  |
|
|
|
Those who are making this kind of prediction have no idea about the bitcoin market and its behavior. What they are seeing is its enormous historical growth, which provokes them to fantasize about a price that is far away from reality. Sometimes they make comments like this to get media attention and followers who share similar sentiments. What is more important than price is adoption which isn't happening as expected.
Of course. It's all about generating publicity. No one can tell where Bitcoin's price will go because of its unpredictable nature. Just because BTC went up in the past, doesn't mean the same will happen again. There's no guarantee BTC will reach $1m in the near future. All we can do is speculate with the hopes of seeing our predictions come true someday. Remember, it's not about the price but rather the utility of any given cryptocurrency. Bitcoin is by far the most decentralized and useful cryptocurrency ever created. It could last a lifetime if it keeps delivering as promised. I can't say the same about other cryptocurrencies (altcoins) that are untested and subject to failure. Especially centralized "shitcoins" like Solana, XRP, and BNB. With or without $1m, don't expect Bitcoin to go anywhere soon. Who knows if it becomes the world's standard unit of account in the future? Just my thoughts  |
|
|
|
Unless if it's tied-up to a "real" real estate property, then that could be at least something with value after acquiring it. Also, if the land or digital real estate was rented for multiple purposes like in Web3 games, then the owner himself would reap the rewards as passive income.
As the NFT hype already died down, it's now critical for them to regain their value by introducing new real use cases that would specifically solve a real world problem in the long run.
Although there are NFTs that are on demand due to being tagged as airdrop or retroactive "multiplier" like the previous Aptos airdrop for just minting an NFT, it's only good for short or mid term.
Real estate presents long term, but the NFT real estate industry is still a long way to go as of today despite it's huge potential to work in the digital era.
I was thinking more of virtual property, rather than linking ownership of a real property (Real Estate) on the Blockchain. It's like you own a piece of land without actually owning it in the real world (if you know what I mean). This would go great with the metaverse. From what I can tell, there's a lot of interest/demand into virtual property. It could be a result of massive hype, though. We should give the market more time to mature to see what happens. If the content/data linked to your virtual property is preserved on the Blockchain forever, there should be nothing to worry about. Otherwise, this will become a passing fad. No one can predict the future, so lets hope for the best. |
|
|
|
The cryptocurrency market is very manipulative. Now there is a huge price increase and there is no certainty about what caused it. Many people are talking about the approval of bitcoin etf, but this news or a week ago. No one knows exactly why the price has risen so much now. But it could happen that it could fall just as quickly.
It's all because of the hype surrounding the spot Bitcoin ETF approval by the SEC. As far as I know, nothing has been confirmed by the agency. It could decide to delay the application again, leaving us all in suspense. Once this happens, market prices could go back to the $25k - $28k range. The real pump will happen once a spot ETF is officially approved by the SEC. That, combined with the halving event of 2024, should lead BTC towards a new ATH. I hope we'll have enough time to buy Bitcoin at a discount before it's all over. There are a lot of companies invested into the cryptocurrency after all. With surging demand from institutional investors, it's very likely Bitcoin will reach $100k soon. This is all speculation, so lets hope for the best.  |
|
|
|
If there was really nothing suspicious about the service mentioned in OP, government must not have taken action against them. When something gets out of hand, then it becomes necessary for government to take action and this is what happened in case of chipmixer.
Everything is always "out of hand" when it involves crypto mixers. After all, governments don't want people to enjoy financial privacy. Now the US Treasury wants to target crypto mixers with the excuse that terrorists will be using them for money laundering. You can read all about it here: https://www.wired.com/story/us-treasury-crypto-mixer-hamas/. Isn't Fiat more attractive than Bitcoin for criminal activities? You can see there are other intentions besides preventing criminals from using a crypto mixer. With heavy pressure from the government, it's likely centralized mixing services will cease to exist in the future. At least, we won't be left "empty handed". Non-custodial (decentralized) mixers will ensure people get the privacy they deserve without fear of censorship or prosecution. As long as developers stay anonymous, no government will be able to stop people from using these services . I wouldn't be surprised if governments decide to hunt privacy coins next. Who knows if someday it becomes "illegal" to use a privacy-oriented cryptocurrency? |
|
|
|
Probably the censorship of Tether or Circle is not great so far and they froze not many addresses. By the way, I haven't seen any freezing of accounts with small amounts. But probably as soon as CBDC appears, Tether and other stablecoins will have a serious reason to introduce serious censorship.
They are hunting down illegal activity in the timebeing. But be aware these stablecoins can go too far if governments pressure them to do so. You could easily get your funds frozen even if you weren't doing anything wrong. Just like how banks are doing today. I'd never trust a centralized stablecoin because of this. Tether, USDC, and the likes are all subject to the single point of failure. Crypto is all about decentralization and censorship-resistance. We should do everything possible to adopt solutions which follow crypto/Blockchain tech's original vision. Not all the other way around. Wasn't Bitcoin created as an alternative to Fiat currencies (which are empowered by banks)? Then why bother bringing banks into the game by adopting centralized stablecoins? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
This is the human nature mate. They only care about is profits. They don’t treat the price fall as opportunity. When the price falls they should treat is as a chance and should buy the high value coin in low prices. Nevertheless, coming back to OP’s concern, then supply and demand plays the important role for making the price of coin go up and down. When the demand is high price goes up, and the reverse happens when demand is low. All this happens due to the fix supply of Bitcoins.
Not only prices move according to the rules of supply and demand, but also because of what happens in the real world. Certain factors (like rising inflation rates, wars, government regulations, etc.) could impact market prices for Bitcoin (either negatively or positively). The crypto market is still small, so expect wild fluctuations in price. As of now, BTC has reached the $30k milestone. It could be the result of a rumored spot ETF approval by the SEC. If the US regulatory agency gives the "green light", it's likely the market will turn bullish. That, combined with the halving event of 2024, should help BTC reach a new ATH. We must grow our BTC holdings before this happens. Who knows if we'll never see prices below $25k ever again? |
|
|
|
Monero's combination of RingCT and Confidential Transactions is widely regarded as one of the most powerful privacy solutions among the options listed. RingCT conceals transaction amounts and sources, whereas Confidential Transactions conceal transaction quantities. The usage of ZKPs by Zcash provides robust privacy, although it has been chastised for optional visible transactions and lengthy trusted setup processes. Grin's Mimblewimble provides strong anonymity but lacks certain of Monero and Zcash's sophisticated capabilities, such as private quantities. Monero's emphasis on privacy by default and comprehensive privacy features make it an excellent alternative for people wanting the highest level of financial privacy and anonymity.
Zcash eliminated the need for a trusted setup with the introduction of the NU5 network upgrade. The developer team decided to take this route instead of switching to ZK-STARKS. ZEC is now more decentralized than ever with the upgrade and the removal of the "founder's fee" (which was a sort of tax collected from miners to fund the project). The cryptocurrency is aiming to become a full-fledged PoS blockchain network in the future. This will set it apart from Monero, Grin, and the likes. But I hardly doubt adoption will increase, especially when governments are against privacy coins. They've spread false propaganda/misinformation to prevent as much people as possible from getting into such cryptocurrencies. I believe both Monero and Zcash have strong privacy methods, but none can replace the other. After all, each method has its own advantages/disadvantages. Which one to use would depend entirely on your privacy needs. As long as the aforementioned coins stay decentralized, nothing should be able to stand in their way. Just my two sats. |
|
|
|
Up to this point, gold and jewellery holds more validity when compared to BTC, although Bitcoin has witnessed rallies during times like the COVID pandemic or certain war-related events. However, these surges may be attributed to the effects of volatility. Gold has proven to be more stable "for the time being." The world still places its trust in gold as a hedge of value, possibly owing to its more mature age compared to Bitcoin. As long as Bitcoin has not achieved widespread adoption and remains vulnerable to manipulation, it cannot rival gold.
...
In terms of features, it's clear that Bitcoin surpasses gold. Transferring an equivalent of $10 million in wealth is undoubtedly easier using BTC compared to gold. Yet, the traditional mindset of past generations persists: "Visible assets are the valid assets." We are still awaiting the moment when Bitcoin is universally recognized by nations as a more valuable asset one day.
For something as established and well-trusted as Gold, it's going to take quite a long time before people switch to Bitcoin as an alternative store of value. Mainly, the new generations will adopt it quickly. We can see the world is slowly shifting away from the Fiat standard as countries open their doors to crypto/Blockchain innovation. El Salvador was the first country to adopt BTC as legal tender with many more to follow soon. Once Bitcoin becomes a part of our lives, many people will trust it during uncertain times. This could take decades before it becomes a reality. I have no hurry to see BTC reach a new ATH, as long as it works as intended. With spot ETFs on the verge of being approved, as well as subsequent block reward halvings, you can bet BTC will become more valuable over time. You just need to be patient. Maybe Bitcoin will get to live alongside Gold for generations? |
|
|
|
I actually somehow agree with the fact that the people who are openly opposing Bitcoin might actually be buying in secret but just can't let everyone know about it but they obviously see the potential that it has and they know that their investments will surely earn them a lot of money in the future. So they might be opposing the idea in the public, but they must be adopters themselves as well, this is mostly about politicians and government officials.
It's obviously true that they can't actually stop Bitcoin from existing no matter what they do, all they can do is ban its usage and make the adoption lose pace but that isn't going to stop the movement and Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies will keep growing over time even if the pace gets slower that wouldn't stop the overall growth in the long-term.
Of course they are. Smart people won't let the public know they're investing in Bitcoin. That would bring unwanted attention from the government. As it's said in the real world, "keep it secret, keep it safe". Politicians, the elite, and anyone else you can imagine are buying up Bitcoin like crazy. Even if they're publicly stating their "hatred" against the cryptocurrency. It is said that some countries are using BTC to avoid sanctions. They wouldn't be doing it if Bitcoin wasn't decentralized. With how solid the cryptocurrency has been since day one, we can say it's truly unstoppable. Governments will eventually give up as they find it's impossible to take down the revolution. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em". Who knows if BTC will live alongside Fiat (CBDCs) for generations?  |
|
|
|
It's very possible. If you use bitcoin for P2P transfers, you don't need any censorship and AML checks, but as soon as you try to use bitcoin as a means of payment in traditional finance, your bitcoins can easily be censored. Mass Adoption will not happen without the global integration of bitcoin into traditional finance, i.e. banks, stores, services, etc. Bitcoins may well be censored when interacting with these entities.
That's the main selling point of Bitcoin. You can use it freely without background checks, or credit checks of any kind. No one can confiscate or freeze your funds at will, because of the way BTC was designed. With stablecoins, it is different. An issuing company (middleman) takes control of the distribution and supply of the coin itself. Smart contracts are coded in a way where the creator can simply add addresses to a "blacklist" if transactions are deemed suspicious. This feature makes stablecoins centralized and prone to censorship. It's like entrusting your money to banks. You don't see that coming with decentralized stablecoins such as DAI and USDJ. Developers can change the code to "comply with regulations" if they want to, but there's nothing stopping the community from creating a fork that puts enphasis on decentralization and censorship-resistance. Despite the inherent flaws of centralized stablecoins, don't expect them to disappear anytime soon. They will continue to gather widespread support from banks and governments worldwide until they become "a force to reckon with". It's in "Wall Street's" best interests to keep stablecoins alive for a long time. As long as we have one decentralized cryptocurrency (Bitcoin), nothing else matters. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
A bad example is contagious. Many people are absolutely unable to analyze and have no opinion of their own, so it is easier for them to listen to someone and repeat after them. Various opinion leaders take good advantage of this, gathering such an audience around them. DOGE is more speculative, while Litecoin has a strong fundamental and utilitarianism, but in the crypto world utilitarianism is valued much less than the opportunity for speculation, which is why various junk coins are so often growing in value on the crypto market.
It's very unfortunate to see crypto heading into the wrong direction. What was once driven by utility, is now driven by hype/speculation. This situation diminishes innovation, as developers won't care about anything else other than making a quick buck out of investors' own pockets. You can see why Dogecoin's resurgence in popularity brought a wave of worthless "meme" coins into the market. Such coins often have more attention than Litecoin or even Bitcoin itself. Despite this, I believe there's always a place for Dogecoin due to its inexpensiveness and blazing-fast settlement times. For serious transactions, you can use Litecoin as an alternative to Bitcoin. For micropayments, tipping, or even gambling, Dogecoin is a much better option. If the aforementioned coins stay decentralized, they should be able to last for generations. Just buy, "hodl", and forget about the rest. |
|
|
|
I haven't used decentraland myself but have read about it and I am planning to dive in when I have got spare funds. It has value because it works pretty much like real one, and there is also aspect of profit that people speculate on. Being based on ethereum, it gives people sense of security on their assets. I found this post information explaining decentraland informative, you might too: https://influencermarketinghub.com/decentraland-real-estate/It's an interesting concept that's yet to find its place in the mainstream world. Just like people thought "Magic Internet Money" (eg: Bitcoin) wasn't going anywhere, the same happens with Digital Real Estate and NFTs + RWAs. This is the future whenever you like it or not. It's going to take some time to get used to it, especially when Real Estate has dominated the market for years. But change is inevitable. It's likely new generations will embrace the tech for a fully-digitized society. Decentraland and The Sandbox are just starting to blossom. So hold on tight as this is going to be a wild ride. Who knows if buying virtual land now will make you rich in the future? |
|
|
|
I'm sure that's not the case. All people have already forgotten about the FTX crash and continue to keep their funds on other CEX. If we look at their reports, there are more than 50 billion dollars stored on binance. Long before FTX there was MtGOX.
Exactly. The FTX collapse is history. People forgot all about it, and moved on with their lives. CEXs will still be around with us for quite some time, since they're the main "gateways" from both the crypto and Fiat worlds. Governments can keep track of illegal actvities involving crypto thanks to CEXs. With DEXs and privacy coins, it's almost impossible to do that. These solutions are widely unpopular due to their steep learning curve. Not everyone is willing to learn and take responsibility of securing crypto funds. CEXs are easy to use, cheap, and fast. It's this reason why they're still afloat. I've read rumors of an "FTX comeback", so things might turn in the right direction soon. Who knows if the defunct exchange turns into a hybrid platform (centralized + decentralized) in the future? |
|
|
|
I think that should be obvious to everyone. Money Laundering involves doing something with money from illegal activities. Mixing is a tool and has nothing to do with illegal activities. It's a tool that can be used by anyone, including money launderers, but has nothing to do with money laundering itself. Just like if you own a knife that doesn't mean you committed murder, though you could use it for murder.
It's just like the Internet. People can use it for both good and bad things. There's nothing governments can do about it, other than enforce the rule of law whenever possible. Instead of hunting down crypto mixers, governments should hunt down people using these services for illegal activities. Not doing so tells us there are other intentions. We all know governments want to destroy crypto (or at least minimize its impact on the mainstream economy) because of its decentralized design. Especially anything that has to do with privacy. When they can't track or control financial activities, that's when you become a threat to the corrupt system empowered by banks. I believe the future of crypto mixers lies in decentralization. The more non-custodial (decentralized) mixers there are, the harder it will be for governments to stop people from obtaining true privacy. I'm yet to see how it's possible to stop criminals from using decentralized mixers for breaking the law (money laundering, tax evasion, etc). KYC/AML is not the answer to this. We can't predict the future, so lets hope for the best. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Campaign has been paid.
Received. All good. Thanks! |
|
|
|
It's not Bitcoin that's trying to be censored, it's the governments that are trying to censor it. But yes I get your point.
But it's simply impossible regardless of all these AML checks, KYC, strict regulations, etc. If Bitcoin is not accepted at McDonald's for example because the government orders it, it's not Bitcoin that's censored but McDonald's. If a McDonald's branch resists and accepts Bitcoin, then Bitcoin can be used. It's because Bitcoin can't be censored.
This isn't the case with USDT and USDC. Their users can't use their tokens even if they want to because they're censored. Nothing like this can happen with Bitcoin.
Exactly. Bitcoin can be used regardless of government censorship because of the way it was designed (decentralization). Stablecoins like USDC and USDT are more like credit/debit cards which can be censored at will. They're starting to look like CBDCs. I don't like the fact that these centralized stablecoins are used by "De-Fi" protocols. It greatly defeats the entire purpose of crypto/Blockchain tech. We should change the name from "De-Fi" to "CeDe-Fi" (Centralized/Decentralized Finance). Truly-decentralized finance would only use censorship-resistant alternatives to help eliminate the middleman from the system. Despite the downsides of using centralized stablecoins, don't expect them to go anywhere soon. They will become bigger and stronger than ever, as long as "Wall Street" keeps supporting them. Who knows if they will become the new CBDCs everyone was talking about? |
|
|
|
"Silver wins battles , Gold wins wars " and Bitcoin wins in both of them so the current rise of Bitcoin is no coincidence and in my opinion we slowly transit towards bull run. Will it get a big spike in price until the last year ? I doubt that , however , I won't be surprised to see price above 33k by the end of the year.  I'm sure Bitcoin will reach a new ATH soon. The upcoming halving event, and companies buying like crazy (Blackrock, Fidelity, Microstrategy) will help BTC cross the $30k range faster than you could imagine. You can buy BTC at a huge discount and sell it for a profit once the market pumps again. Gold rises during times of war, but it doesn't experience high gains as Bitcoin does. It remains relatively stagnant for long periods of time. When you invest in Gold it's to help preserve your capital/purchasing power. Not to get richer over time. By leveraging between the two assets (Bitcoin and Gold), you'll be able to achieve peace of mind. These are uncertain times we're living into, so expect the unexpected. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Which is better - zero-knowledge proofs or ring confidential transactions privacy technigue ? Both do the same.
I think Monero is more easy to use, send, receive - no problem. Zcash you can only send, receive to shielded addresses, if you want privacy.
Why would Monero be much easier to use than Zcash? I'd say XMR is harder to understand than ZEC because of the way it's designed. It uses three keys instead of two used by coins like Zcash and the others (Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc). ZEC only has shielded addresses, whereas Monero has a public key/address, a spend key, and a view key. If you want someone else to view your transaction history, you'd need to share your view key to do that. Using only the public key won't suffice. It takes quite a bit of understanding to get your way through the XMR blockchain. And it's even worse with Mimblewimble coins such as Grin, BEAM, and Litecoin (yes, Litecoin added said privacy feature some time ago). I think that's one of the reasons why privacy coins are very unpopular. At least, there are plenty of options to choose from. As long as R&D for privacy/anonymity continues, we should have nothing to worry about. |
|
|
|
I'd go with Litecoin. I have more experience with using it compared to Dogecoin and I've rarely touched meme coins before. It doesn't help that as you've said, it's supply expans infinitely. I also don't really like how the market went up all of a sudden beforehand all because of Elon and his shenanigans, probably the number one reason why I stayed away from it like a plague. Seeing as the case has died down though I might check it out at some point later.
That's certainly true, mate. Dogecoin's success is concentrated in Elon Musk himself. Almost everyone follows the man's advise when investing into DOGE. Talk about "decentralization". On the other hand, Litecoin creator Charlie Lee decided to step down from the project to make it more decentralized. There's no one to follow, other than the community itself. We could say Litecoin's price is driven by utility instead of hype (speculation). The cryptocurrency (LTC) is often used to test new features before they're integrated into the main Bitcoin blockchain. With a limited supply of only 84m units, Litecoin has a high chance of becoming "Silver to Bitcoin's Gold" in the future. It's very undervalued to say the least. Hopefully, people will notice its true benefits resulting in a massive pump in market prices. Who knows how far will LTC go? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
