Come on, guys. Let us be more consistent the next time around and not just post for the sake of posting.

eaLiTy is saying that if there is a major global recession then the entire market will bleed and nothing will escape that. And then he goes on saying that the entire market starts falling. But then he suddenly isolates Bitcoin by saying that Bitcoin is not going to have the same issues as the rest of the market. But then he wrapped it up by saying that there is no safe market when there is a major global issue. This man is joking.

And you are responding with another joke.

Recession is normal. It happens to the market. There is always a cycle in the market and recession is part of it. And even if you wish that it will not happen, it will still happen.

Recession will happen but there will always be recovery that comes afterward.

I should have responded to your OP seriously and properly until I read the entire thread and end up with this fake drama.

You two are like foolish puppets here.

So we are now doing away with that ineffective click bait and shifted to this kind of play? In which some newbie is asking something and another newbie will respond with a foolish suggestion of something that hitherto unheard of and the OP will then respond again heaping foolish praises such as lines starting with "I really like" and "It's one of the best platforms" and "i have never seen such a reliable platform".

You fools, better luck next time! Ciao! 

Was your manager using segwit rather than the legacy addresses? I guess that was a factor. Another factor would be the transaction fees. If your manager used the minimum fees, then you cannot expect your transaction to be processed faster than it could be if the transactions fees are higher. There is competition in the network, as you might be aware of. The higher the transaction fee paid, the faster the process since it will be prioritized over those who pay lower fees.

As regards lightning network, we will have to be more patient about it as the development about lightning network is still very limited until now. And the design of lightning network is for smaller day to day transactions. This is generally for stronger adoption in terms of daily purchasing transactions. For now, we have to be content with what Bitcoin has to offer. If you compare it with altcoins, that is a discussion on another page altogether different from here.

The title seems to say that David Marcus is the CEO of Coinbase. I thought that is what this thread is all about.

David Marcus is not the CEO of Coinbase, for clarification's sake. Marcus is part of Facebook, particularly the messenger unit of the social media giant. I can remember David Marcus, in one of his explanations about the libra project, for his famous remark that basically tells people that they don't have to trust Facebook to support or trust libra. It is because libra is not Facebook as Facebook is not libra.

Coinbase, in one hand, is of course behind libra because libra and Coinbase share the same world which is the crypto world.

How many days or weeks have you been observing the charts and whatever patterns they may have created?

It seems that your rank or your post speaks a lot of your inexperience and yet you try to make a good prediction out of what is happening today. If you think that ETH at $200 or $500 or even $1000 will cut the downtrend, you are very wrong. The downtrend is part of the life of ETH and all other cryptocurrencies except the stablecoins. There will always be downtrend. It occurs every now and then. It cannot be erased from the future of ETH nor of any coins.

No no, let us try to widen our perspective a bit more. This view is even myopic as far as my observation is concerned.

Truly, the scam projects really pulled down the reputation of the ICO market. That made the investors think twice and most even decided not to proceed investing, thus the fall of the entire market.

But let us also be aware that of the projects that are not scam, probably 90% will not succeed. This is not just all about the scammers. This is also all about the projects that are introducing nothing new, nothing innovative, nothing disruptive to the market. Many of these are mere copies of existing projects. They are not coding new inputs.

Together, they all caused the market to crumble down and shoo investors away.

There is no winning for as long as Bitcoin's value solely depends on its brittle reputation as a store of value. Gold is something whose value is sealed for eternity. Bitcoin cannot be like that. In fact, if we truly think of it a little bit deeper than most of us, without bias or prejudice, Bitcoin came from nothing and such is the very reason why it will also be gone. In the next 50 scores, or 10 decades, or the next couple of centuries or millennia, we do not know. What we know is that Bitcoin, too, shall pass.

Becoming a currency is an awesome feat for Bitcoin but it will not keep it forever wanted and utilized.

If the central banks of other countries that are seem to be working fairly are greedy and therefore bad, how much more of a central bank of a totalitarian country ruled by Maduro?

Your fear of Bitcoin's volatility that might adversely affect the Venezuelan nation shows that you seem to care. I bet you are an outsider at that. Well, Venezuelans should start feeling the same. Their country is totally in the hands of someone who seem to be not in his right mind. And I doubt that their central bank is independent enough to act based on what it deems right and best, if it still has that sense. If it has a bank asset manager, the man must be a mere puppet.

There is actually no need to exert much effort looking for it. If a shitfork happening to a shitcoin (please read as Bitcoin SV forked from Bitcoin ABC or Bitcoin Cash ABC, DEF, XYZ, blah blah) is making news all over the community, it is impossible for a Bitcoin shitfork not to make the headlines.

You will certainly hear of it before you even make an inquiry.

Because they are more of rumormongers and gossip peddlers rather than news writers and reporters. But is it something new? News used to be reporting what is actually happening without bias, interpretation, speculation, etc. That is not the case nowadays. 

If it's insulting to credit libra with bitcoin's bull run, it is more unimaginable to credit it to some foolish FOMO created from nowhere.


Is that really what ran in the mind of Satoshi when he created Bitcoin? You know what, there is this hint in me that says the followers of Satoshi are too hostile while the creator himself was amiable.

Extremely profitable is an exaggeration. And no amount of exaggeration like that could convince the members of this forum who have been here for a long time.

Mintmine is not the first of its kind, and it is certainly not the first one who took this endeavor. Do you know what happened to all those projects in the same category as Mintmine? They all failed. So if it is indeed extremely profitable, it should not even be made through an IEO. Take a look at the history of AX1 or of Envion and you will know the history of this kind of attempt in the market.

How about cutting all these unnecessary suspense and mystery and post it here already?

If you are unsure if it is allowed or not allowed here and you are lazy enough to read the forum rules, then make the post. You will know if it is illegal inside this forum if it is deleted or if your newbie account is banned. Either way, it does not have too much of a risk on your part.

You are beating around the bush too much already. And I guess you know that people in here are more or less interested to make withdrawals with your all-caps ANONYMOUSLY.

And where have you been lately? This controversial project has been around and never left the peering eyes of the media. Before, the controversy stirred by this big project, was focused in the US only. And then it went as far as Europe and countries such as Germany, France, and others have said one or two remarks on it. Mostly, feedback from these governments are on the negative side, but then it has never been halted. There will be postponement for sure but a project as big as this will not just stop for good.

1. If the reason is “cartel-like” ecosystem then maybe a kind of regulation has to be adopted to make sure there is no such potential. The possibility of monopoly is real since Libra is gathering together some of the richest companies in the world. It could affect free market and healthy competition. But there is no need to halt the project.

2. If the reason for halting is that the project is “based on relatively new and unproven technology,” and that cryptocurrencies are “uncertain and evolving”, this is not enough. It has already been demonstrated that cryptocurrencies and the technology that they represent are very viable in our modern world.

I cannot see a very valid reason why Libra project should be halted. The way I see it, this is their real reason:


This is just an excuse of the fearful chiefs:

There is not even a word there that supports your title. You have made a long opening post and yet it does not have anything that will explain why Cardano will be able to recover from the majority of its loss in the previous bear.

Your news source is not a link nor an article. We cannot criticize nor support whatever it is that is written in there. But if its content is summarized by your OP, there is nothing special in there. Cardano may recover as the majority of other altcoins but I cannot say why it will make significant strides. Any altcoin needs new development to attract new investors.

And all this time, we laugh at those who are asking "when moon?" LOL. 

Telegram channels kick them as annoying. Admins ban them for asking such stupid question. Memes are harsh against them.

And now, what? Bitcoin is indeed going to the moon, after all. 

NASA, when moooooon?

Those articles are very short and they are basically saying the same thing. That the Chinese government is not at all in a hurry to tokenize their national currency or that they do not have any timeline for it. In other words, this will come much later than what is being peddled in the news.

On your question, yes. But, again, this is going to happen at a much later time. But then we all know how the future of currency goes; it is going to be digital. So, if by tokenize means shifting into a digital currency, that will eventually happen all over the world.

What?! Really?! Is it that urgent to take the bait and click on the link? 

It is true that crypto supporters, especially the newbies, should learn to take a pull-back as an opportunity to buy at a discounted price, but you don't have to say things as if your article is the one and only source of enlightenment people could have.

That is certainly the wrong way to catch naive fishes here! 

Is there any possible way for Bitcoin, for example, or cryptocurrency in general to become fully legal without undergoing regulations? If there is, that would be the best way. However, there seems none. Whether we like it or not, if we want crypto to be fully adopted as a main currency, going through regulations is the only way.

Regulations could really be good or bad. You are citing examples of the bad side of regulations. But it could also be good. It means accountability, for example. Or proper taxation, or security. 

There are a number of projects in the past that are good at the start, complete with everything, responsive to everyone's inquiries, active inside and outside this forum, great team, and all but ended as bad as the shitty ones.

I can still remember I was one of those who helped promote nousplatform through signature. I always check the project before I join them. That is my practice as I do not want to end up with nothing after all the efforts are done for several months. The project looked really great. They have a great team, they are joining roadshows, etc but still they ended up along with the failed projects. It is always hard to pick the right ones.