considering how many people bought between 10-18k before the january crash,
the climb back might be difficult and maybe it would lead to a lot of people selling off to break even?
although it shouldn't really cause a crash to 150b.

I think we're safe for now, there's not much reason to fall to 150b?

#Proof of Authentication
Telegram: @q_bus

That's true, and I sure hope you are right.
I just figure the part about banks actively manipulating the crypto market in a way that would drive "regular investors",
and definitely driving away regular people from using it. A lot of people got burned in the january crash.
They might see btc is on it's way back. What if, the same thing happened again? How many times can a crash happen before 'regular people' aren't interested anymore?

By 'regular people' I mean in general less technical interested people who only see it as a way to earn money, not caring or understanding about the technology.
Will bitcoin just keep coming back stronger and stronger, if this was the case?
At some point even the most hardened cryptofans probably would grow tired of the uncertainty in such a market, and no longer view it as a store of value?

I'm not sure, I'm just hoping crypto manages to break through to real world adoption, but I fear that there will be many challenges on the way,
and with what's on stake, I can't see why banks and other entities of the kind, would simply let themselves get buried. 

while you are right on that aspect, I'm more referring to the general market, if banksters control the price, they can potentially just make it be so unsteady that noone would use it?

Proof of Authentication
Telegram: @q_bus

If they see it as a threat, is that not a good reason for why they would be manipulating bitcoin?
for example, by dumping tons and buying back lower they'd get more power as well as damaging the reputation/possibility of being a currency?

anonymity is hardly a valid point for bitcoin now?
I read that 15% of the bitcoin code is written by satoshi, which either way is irrelevant since 'anyone' can contribute code?
I'm not entirely sure how github works for example but it's clearly there who's contributing what, is it not?

That's fair, I think that at some point a large part of all the various cryptos today will die out because they don't really have a reason to exist in their current form, and hopefully we can then continue with the important parts of crypto. But, in a way, bitcoin going from $0.000x to $10,000 was maybe in a way, bad design, because money is then the primary reason for why people get into it?

That's a good point, but wouldn't that also mean that whichever crypto would replace bitcoin would therefore already be "controlled"?

Proof of Authentication

Campaign: Telegram Airdrop

I find this quite positive actually, hopefully it can put some rest to the aggressive conflict between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash.
Roger Ver seems to want to appear as a saint, but he's making many shady decisions that will mislead new people..

I'm not very technical competent, and I will gladly listen to anyone who wants to explain anything.

I'm trying to think of why Bitcoin has to be the coin that lasts into the future.
The primary reason I can think is due to it being the first, and therefore it's in a way more scattered?
Any new mineable crypto could quickly and easily be overtaken by a major entity who could then potentially control the majority of it,
which would be problematic for a decentralized currency.
And a pre-mined crypto could never become the largest.

Of course due to Bitcoin being the most used and largest crypto, as well as being the #1 trading pair,
there's currently not a lot of genuine reason for everyone to transfer to another currency, even if for example speed is improved,
since to be fair, the majority of people are just holding their bitcoins and in general there's not that much need for speed at the current point in time?

However, nothing is very certain and I'd gladly hear more reason as to why Bitcoin would remain the largest.
Seeing the conflict between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash is really toxic for the community and adoption at a whole,
I'm not convinced why there could not be something which incorporates the best of various platforms(smart contracts, privacy etc all in one?)

It's difficult to imagine adoption on a global scale that somehow would involve using many various currencies to achieve different things,
even if there were a 'layer' on top to simplify it.

One argument I heard tho is that any up and coming crypto technology can theoretically be added into any existing crypto, so therefore,
it's hard to challenge Bitcoin, since being the largest, new technology can just be added on top, therefore making any up and coming crypto redundant?

One problem I'm not fully understanding is how centralized it actually is, seeing this picture:


While I understand that the miners making up the pool can stop mining, is this still not a threat to the network if the three largest pools could collaborate for control?
Partly considering the majority is chinese (less decentralized geographically(not sure if relevant)),
but they could technically ruin the network at any point?

If they were to support bitcoin in the long run, they'd also support their own doom.
We don't need banks where we're going, at least not in the way they exist today.

Banks keeps people's money, and make money off of it.
They can print money out of thin air, loan it to people, and get more money back.
They have no place in a crypto economy.
And in the end, it's still the people who has to cash them out when they enter into a crisis.

But it's clearly something the banks(and indirectly, those in power) wants to keep going, so I can not imagine that they'd roll over.
However, it takes ages for the bank industry to do stuff. It's like all the banks agree to keep everything equally shitty and therefore they don't really compete with eachother, as most choices are the same.

It's undoubtedly easier to just hold than to trade.
However, if you are good at trading, there's obviously a larger profit there, since you could just trade to increase your stack in whatever crypto you were supposed to hold.
it's also easier to lose if you are trading than if you are not.

however, if you find a good project, and you don't know much about trading, it's probably wise to just hold.

Could you elaborate? This doesn't make much sense to me 

You can sell crypto on like paxful for gift cards, those who pays with gift cards generally pays like 30% over market so you could gain a lot on that.

REQ(Request Network) is also making it possible to pay using any crypto or fiat, and the receiver receives it in any crypto/format he wants,
and REQ handles the conversion, also with minimal fees. Their mainnet is live but there's not much adoption yet!

I made a thread due to this with some alternatives/how to protect yourself:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3389925.msg35512209

Seeing as the world governments has opened their eyes for crypto,
and now cracking down on ICOs, exchanges, and crypto in general..

I fear that crypto already has been breached, and is controlled and manipulated by the 'banks'.
Since crypto is theoretically unstoppable, instead of fighting against the system, they could simply have obtained a large amount and
can keep the price controlled, and never allowing an outbreak bad enough to damage their system?

with 'banks' I'm referring to the banking industry/very rich people in general, who one way or another
profits from the current economical model, often by being middlemen, or 'earning money from nothing'.

By ruining the reputation of bitcoin/crypto in general, the average person would likely never touch it.
If p2p currency ever was adopted worldwide, it'd be a huge change for the current economical model, which of course, many top players wants to prevent.

What are the things that could happen? What are the alternatives?
Creating a new currency wouldn't work, if we assume that the banksters would be aware of it and therefore they could get a controlling part of it.
So we're 'stuck' with bitcoin, and can only hope that the coins itself are spread enough to not be controllable?

I think we have to assume there is some type of "big banker" control of crypto.
It can't possibly have gone unnoticed in the industry for all these years?
Some big fish could've easily swooped up a huge amount at some point.

It's a bit concerning, if we're all in a way playing into their hands..!

That's great news! I hope this happens in more countries.
US taxes each single transaction, even crypto to crypto?
that's absurd.

I hope other European countries will follow at least, otherwise, there might be a risk of people actually leaving for more crypto-friendly countries!