|
It just felt normal, actually. Also, it's not really a steep drop but rather a mild and normal one that happens every now and then. Considering that I have my coins for the long term, it doesn't bother me whenever there are negative price changes. If the wallet permits, I buy during these dips and try to get a lower average on my holdings so as to get the maximum leverage when the run starts. While my coins are sitting idly, I'm trying to get as much cash as I can to buy more and more coins in the side for holding.
|
|
|
|
I suppose the main problem is that there still exist ICOs that simply don't give a shit about negative trust and will allow those users to take their free shit-tokens (that are generated out of air at no cost) just so they can spew their site over the forum.
This. The incentives of most people buying an account is to get on-board a signature campaign--especially about ICOs that are probably alive for only a few weeks. There are no restrictions on how should a service do their business here in bitcointalk, so irregardless of negative trusts and poor post quality, services would still accept accounts for the publicity and only that. Perhaps prohibiting account sales should be imposed on the rules? |
|
|
|
|
Making some money on the side but not that hefty as compared to last year's gains but still, a profit is a profit. I'm trying to distance myself away from the alts for a little while as they seem to be even more unstable and unpredictable compared to bitcoin. What I'm doing is just buying on the lows and whenever it pushes, say 3-5% of my initial entry, I'd take it and wait for another few weeks or so. This has worked well for me, despite the fact that I'm not earning much from this trading scheme.
|
|
|
|
|
Such rash decisions made by the government. Instead of limiting the channels in which the government could profit, why not amplify it and accept cryptos then collect tax afterwards? With a bunch of cryptocurrency enthusiasts in India, it is in no doubt that most will probably be abiding by regulations and laws as long as it supports their interests regarding crypto. There's really something in India that fascinates me due to their strictness involving bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.
|
|
|
|
|
Ahh no, we're not even reaching Paypal-level transactions in the mean time, so scalability is not an issue and certainly not the biggest, if anything. With the move to SegWit, we are already experiencing fast transaction speeds, lower than before tx fees and overall improvement in the network. I'm more concerned on the state of bitcoin's economy rather than the actual protocol itself. Devs have done a great job in getting a solution for a rather nonexistent issue.
|
|
|
|
So this "receipt" is just a piece of paper and it's value is backed by bitcoin and guaranteed by some bank? Wow,such a great innovation.Such receipts already exist and they are called fiat money(the only difference is that they aren't backed by anything).  I guess that Citibank will try to file a patent about this shit.... What's even worse is that when you lost your receipt, you also lost your possession to these coins. Who's insane enough to entrust cryptocurrencies in banks that are experienced in handling fiat money but not in cryptocurrencies? I'd rather trade those and keep it in my wallet all day rather than entrust it with a financial institution whose beliefs differ from what cryptocurrencies impose to its users. If the details are too vague and the terms are somewhat one-sided and in favor of the bank, why would I do such a thing in the first place? |
|
|
|
Seems John McAfee will eat his cock on TV after all...
Seems like it, but apparently he adjusted the date of his predictions. At this point in time, would you really believe anything that McAfee states regarding cryptocurrencies? Bitcoin plunged, breaking the $ 6550 level, but not in a good direction, the BTC / USD plunged, dropping $ 342 in just 35 minutes.  Electronic money analysts have predicted that bitcoin prices are about to break from the price of $6550 , and those projections become real early today. Unfortunately for investors , the motion has not happened to the good afternoon. This is completely contrary to the hope of breaking the $6k8 threshold to reach a short - term increase. After a brief hike to $ 6,700 in the week. Bitcoins are stable between $ 6,550 and $ 6,600 today. However, not long before 1:00 UTC, BTC/USD fell from $ 6,594 to $ 6,252 in just 35 minutes. Bitcoin is priced at $ 6,288 on Bitfinex, down about 5%. I wonder if this reduction will make investors more worried about Bitcoin in the future as the market continues to fall? Some investors could have cashed their bitcoins out to offset some of the losses they incurred after a slight decline in the Dow. Or perhaps, they just wanted to cash out after the long stagnation of the price between $6550-$6600. There isn't a huge reason for the price to move that much and with all the months this has happened, I don't think it is somewhat special anymore. |
|
|
|
|
IMO this shouldn't be the mindset. You can still ride the waves even without any clear bull signal arising, Averaging the price of your buys still helps in a bull run, and believe me, it even helps to lower your entry without losing too much bitcoin in the process. 'Signals' to me are nothing but mere noises often causing more confusions in the market. Buy whenever you can, and try to set an average entry point to ride the seas even if it's rough.
|
|
|
|
|
Crypto and fiat cannot symbiotically exist, especially in running a country's finances. Perhaps bitcoin can be used as a reserve currency, but that's it and nothing more. There's just too many risks involved in incorporating crypto into an economically stable country. In countries like Venezuela though, we see how bitcoin helps them in a way for their needs and for spending. Maybe in countries that are struck but hyperinflation this idea might work, but for the rest of the world, it wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, bitcoin has the ability to do such since its protocol is designed to do such, and is complementary with blockchain that displays records of transactions and proofs that something happened within the network. It can be incorporated to fiat but up to what extent and how 'deep' would the transaction records be is the question. Imagine having a whole network catering a whole country's transactions from a day-to-day basis, involving brick and mortar stores as well. That's a lot of tracking to do, and a lot of storage space needed IMO. I'm pretty sure counterfeit fiat and bank notes are already being monitored by the banks, and people are also keen on inspecting the money they receive so I think using blockchain tech is not necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Google Ads don't affect people's perception and sentiment towards bitcoin in any way. Also, it's not as if Google is the representative of the masses for this particular issue, so why would it make sense in the first place? It's also worth noting that during bull runs, people rely on Google to find some quick info regarding the coin, and see for themselves what they think about the crypto. Personally, I think the headlines and mainstream news are affecting people's mindset on bitcoin more than Google ads do, since most are still believing anything what these news anchors say. They still believe the credibility of CNN, BBC and the likes over something posted on the internet.
|
|
|
|
|
Thr climb to $19k and bitcoin's resistance against bears to cross $5800 is what I think strengthen people's belief in the said crypto. Also, tjhey have realized that news nowadays don't affect the cryptocurrency; it's just the market who decides what happens to the price with or without any news, whether it be good or bad. The recent flood of news on ETFs haven't really affected us in any way, while a few months back it was 'everything' for bitcoin. It is a sign that we're progressing and doing something good all along, and hopefully it continues and bring us better results.
|
|
|
|
|
There's Japan for that, though it seems that South Korea is already progressing much faster than Switzerland and Japan. It would be great if there's a boom for many brick-and-mortar shops to accept bitcoin but apparently it's only investment funds and the likes that are progressing in SoKor, but not much in real-world utility such as physical stores, goods, services etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Checking bitcoin prices too often promotes anxiety and mental stress, especially if you are invested and you are relying on bitcoin to make up most of your money. Best thing to do to avoid such is to just keep yourself busy and do things you need to do in order to distance yourself from checking the price. Seriously, there's no need to always check the price if you're not a full-time trader since the price will only give you anxiety and you can't do something about it, as you only hold coins, not toss and turn them.
|
|
|
|
|
Why would anyone take responsibility on price movements in a global free market? If we are to point fingers though, this would be the big fishes in the ocean who's making huge ripples in the water when they do something. Most people tend to follow what they do, and as such, it causes a huge domino effect in the market. The minnows are only carried by these ripples, so these huge ass investors are mostly to blame, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps we've already reached that? $5700 was the lowest we've been for 2018, and we have tried to break it but to no avail. It's not easy to claim that that would be the lowest point we can see ever, given that the market isn't sleeping and stopping in creating trades for people. I've been more interested in the lowest we could get rather than the highest point we might see this year since the former would be the solid baseline in which we will all be moving from. I'll expect higher highs if the low is really @ $570₩.
|
|
|
|
|
It does not directly point out your identity, though there are some people who specialize in snooping 'taints' which leads to identifying a certain person who might have posted the address somewhere. Besides, the goal of the blockchain is to provide a ledger of transactions that is verifiable and can be viewed at any time, while still providing some sort of privacy and anonymity to those who are involved in the transaction. If we are to make the blockchain private, how sure are we that everything is credible and how are we going to check transactions when we need to?
|
|
|
|
|
In the first place Satoshi didn't want to use his 'power' to affect the network as he wants the community to come up with solutions of their own and let consensus pave the way for a better bitcoin. As what he always says, bitcoin is free from any central authority, and the community can always create what they think is the better version of bitcoin, hence why forks occur. Also, any 'head' of a coin somewhat gets the 'authoritative' status and any remarks/comments they make has a huge effect on the coin and the markets as well, so it's better for any coin to not have a central figure IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
There's just too many attack vectors present on emails that makes it hard to use as a medium for sending cryptocurrencies. Also, wallets are already doing a great job in handling crypto-transactions so the need for a third-party service to handle such is not necessary. 'Perfect security' is what most services advertise themselves to gain attention, though in reality they aren't needed at all since everything works well on crypto without them.
The tech can be used as an excellent layer for encrypted emails, but for sending crypto? I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
|
Normal fluctuations in the market tend to occur frequently, and this one is no exception to that. It is possible that some traders saw a window of opportunity and bought bitcoins up until it reached $6600, and now it's down to $6550, confirming that it's nothing special and just another random movement in the market. Many times had the price crossed $6600 and even further but still, not impressive unless the rise is continuous and will not lose its footing for only a few hours/days.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
