Too soon to call it the end of fiat money as we know it. There certainly is a problem from banks printing more and more money each day though I can't seem to find any direct correlation of both from each other, even though it has been pointed countless of times that bitcoin's rise may be attributed to the fall of cash in the next 2 years or so. Also, the governments and banks would surely not let their toy get beaten up that easily and will surely find ways in order to revive it. We are too far from a cash-less society for as long as we don't take up the initiative to use and receive bitcoins and crypto whenever possible.

I can attest to this. There are some cases in which the average fee needed is ridiculously high to have a transaction confirmed within the next block. Also, fees are designed for priority purposes, and not necessarily confirmation purposes, as over time, some miners would likely pick up your transaction even if the fees are somewhat low from the average fees paid by other users. If you are in a hurry to have your transaction confirmed within the next few minutes, in order to gain certainty and confidence, pay the optimum/recommended fee posted at a certain amount of time.

It's always a battle of movement on either sides, and one is always better than the other depending on how the market would turn out. Anyway, knowing that we held $3000 strongly despite the valiant efforts of the bears, I don't think we will be seeing $1000 anytime sooner even if the breakout towards $6000 failed. There's just a lot of pressure from the buying side recently and I don't think the selling orders will be able to overwhelm the bulls for the next few weeks to come.

Network growth is inevitable IMO, considering that we continue to attract a lot of people in the field. Also, more and more services are sprouting from all directions that dabble with bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, and that's also one factor I see for the growth of the network. While 4 txs/sec is ridiculously small on payment processing standards, it's a good start considering that the network had almost no outage or interruption whatsoever, and that's what matters most IMO.

No, BSV being de-listed on Binance does not affect the whole crypto-sphere nor bitcoin directly. Perhaps the community of BSV is disappointed on what happened and are looking for ways to recoup their losses but I don't think everyone will pour their money directly into bitcoin with just that said event. Needless to say, this isn't an enough catalyst for us to be taken back to $6000 by next week; we need a lot more than an altcoin being removed from an exchange. The unfolding of events is quite interesting though, and no major market movements were seen right after the news echoed on different sources. Movement remains sideways, though with a high potential of breakout considering that the sell orders are outweighed by buy orders by a significant amount.

I don't think we can easily stretch out into $1-M in just a short span of time. $50K is already a daring and elusive target to reach, what more if what we're talking about is in the millions? Perhaps it might take a couple more decades before we reach it, or may not reach it at all in our whole lifetimes. But unlike any other bitcoin bulls, this guy clearly admits that it's only his subjective opinion and should not be taken seriously at all. Highly optimistic, but doesn't lure people into false hopes and I think that's what every prediction should be.

It's a great move, although the question is how long would they be keeping it like this and how would those taxes be useful for the said town in the long run knowing so well that only a handful of merchants, services, organizations and entities are willing to receive bitcoin in exchange of what they're offering. Somewhere along the way, they would be needing to convert these into fiat and I sure hope that they have OTC markets set-up for that in order to not disrupt the flow of the market. I just hope that they also encourage businesses to receive bitcoins in exchange of their merchandise and services, too, for it to have a wider use-case and not just limited into paying taxes because I'm pretty sure the interest for buying directly with bitcoin is already skyrocketing by now.

In our books, this could easily fall as fraud, though I don't know much about the Russian law and whether this could fall under the favor of Mr. Argakov. or the bank. Altering the contracts in to one's favor without the consent of the other party involved is already something fishy, though in this case it should be reviewed by the banks and knowing that this has been a practice of theirs for the longest of time, Mr. Argakov just found a loophole to exploit and make something out of it. Should the banks read the document before signing it, they could have saved all the hassles and all the negative publicity, but it seems like their legal counsel is not doing their job properly for it to come to this. It's an odd and silly case, but it just shows a weakness banks have when it comes to dealing with things like this.

Immediately go on and report it on localbitcoins for his account to be frozen. Payments are held on escrow until both parties released funds on both sides, and escrow wouldn't be completed or finished until both parties finished the transaction or the transaction is cancelled per se. The only thing you could do is to report immediately, provide documents/proof that this happened and hope for the best. Also take note of the seller's bank account details.

If the seller already received funds and something happened on his end, he already is liable and obliged to give you the part of the deal if your funds are from credible sources, otherwise you already can take legal action from that point forward.

A signed message from one of 'his' known addresses shall do the trick, though he always diverts the attention of the media from the said option that he has, thus proving that he really isn't ready to do such. Also, it has been proven numerous times that he really isn't Satoshi due to the inconsistencies and lack of technical knowledge, or perhaps a limited one, on things related to bitcoin. I admire the person's ego and guts to state a lie straightfaced, though I don't admire the person nor am impressed in his cunning at all.

This was implemented before albeit being a short-lived stint since regulators from EU and US stopped debit card providers from using bitcoin as means of loading up the said cards. I'm pretty sure once the regulations have been aptly reforged, reconstructed and passed, the rise of bitcoin debit cards would again start. It definitely works, as I have been one of those guys who used such service in the past, and it was pretty good, too!

Ahh, the future of e-Commerce and digital payments: not necessarily bitcoins and cryptocurrencies but perhaps bitcoins and cryptocurrencies. The CEO doesn't specify which type of digital payment is he referring to, and so that hardly made any statement, if anything, on the IMF meeting. For sure, many people like Jeremy are wanting to ditch the paper in order to further their interests in the digital payments space, and in order to do that, they need to convince the IMF and other figures that the blockchain is the real deal. Nothing new here, just an investor presenting his presentation to the board of regents in order to convince them that it is the way to go. This would not affect bitcoin or any other cryptocurrencies in any way (at least for now.)

It's just a normal market reaction to not do a push after the FOMO and hype has died out. We have tried to cross the $5500 resistance but it was immediately met with sell orders and we have seen ourselves tumbling down back to the low $5000 support levels. I highly think that we will remain grounded to $5000 in the next few weeks since there's no reason for a breakout anytime soon. As I've said before, the market conditions are still bleak to support a full-blown bull run and the recent rise just happened due to someone intentionally buying $100-M worth of bitcoins in different exchanges, at once.

A 2014 meme and an utter boredom on the monotonous life that I have been living back then, waiting from paycheck-to-paycheck. When I first saw that Dorian Nakamoto meme in 2014 regarding bitcoin, I was curious to see what it is, and have found out that it's something that can be used to buy stuff online, or the "magic internet money" as what I regarded it back then. Oddly so, a discussion that explains how it works led me to here, and have made my account after being satisfied with the information I gathered, Little by little, I learned about how bitcoin works and how it could potentially help me in the future and so I'm here.

True. Here in the country I'm currently staying, my account was banned and my funds are on hold because I haven't submitted my banking details, where the funds come from every month and the nature of my trades. It truly sucks that AML regulations be that tight when I'm only trading not even a thousand dollars on my account, and knowing that I'm not even in my home country is what really grinds my gears. They wouldn't be able to come up with a generalized AML regulation that will work country-to-country and that's for sure.

I'm nothing against integrating the basics of cryptocurrency and financial system in education, but as early as primary and secondary levels? I don't think so. It's better to just teach them the basics of respecting each other with their indifferences and raise them with virtues rather than expose them on things that could corrupt them along the way. In Japan, the reason that that country is so orderly and so progressive is because of the discipline, respect and virtues instilled into their people during the primary school. Teaching kids about financial systems and disruptive tech won't amount to anything given their limited understanding of the matter.

A brief and instantaneous leap doesn't necessarily signify an upcoming bull run but it does give you a glimpse of the current market sentiment and where it could the market be heading in the next few days/weeks. As for the move on April 1st, it seems that it stimulated the market to produce a little FOMO and do something that will instigate a push, although it was short-lived and we have since stagnated on the levels where the push lost steam. I'm pretty optimistic for the next couple of weeks, though the recent movement of over 40,000BTC, which was the same coins that was bought on April 1st is somewhat intriguing and worrying.

That seems to be odd, though it certainly triggered a lot of sells for today. Earlier this day, bitcoin was still trading for over $5200 and we have drooped under $5000 for some time until returning to the said range. Idk why would a whale be exposing himself in the open if all they want to do is just move funds around. They could have used some discreet methods of moving their funds from A to B without causing such a stir--or maybe it was planned all along. Anyhow, some traders have already reacted to the said event and could have been much worse if those coins were dumped directly into exchanges.

Perhaps banks think that people are still looking for security in their assets and only bank-backed projects would ever give them that. For most financial services, the banks have always been there to 'help' the average Joe into solving his financial needs, and so with this thinking, the banks are somewhat superior, and with the hype created by cryptocurrencies they can easily ride their way to new profits. I don't see any practical use for bank-backed cryptocurrency as they are still cryptocurrencies all the same, albeit being centralized and controlled for that matter. Also, compatibility with other banking services is what's the only thing I see for these type of cryptocurrencies, nothing more.

Just a thought as well, if this would be the aftermath of large-scale industrial mining, shouldn't nations which house a lot of miners mandate mining farm operators to plant a tree, or at least help plant one per machine that they are using? Not a very bright idea but people should be doing this if they really want to help. Sure we can always switch to the cleaner and greener type of algorithm (PoS and other stuff) and use renewable energy sources to power up the machines, but that would take long or perhaps be more costly to the end of operators, so why not use conventional energy methods, but in turn they need to plant a tree to at least lessen the impacts of their operations?

Idk, not the brightest idea out there but surely one that's worth considering and noting anyway.