I wouldn't count on the ETFs anymore for major price boost. There seems to be no development in that area even if Trump gave his positive remarks regarding the ETFs. Another delaying tactic, it seems, and they have been doing the same things recently, only to turn down the ETF after the extension period has expired. Surely traders will capitalize on this, and it might turn bloody in the next weeks or so.

Much to our dismay, no matter how many reports are published removing bitcoin from negative allegations, most governments would simply shake the reports off and just do their own thing. Even before bitcoin existed, terrorist groups are funded with fiat, and what's even worse is that these terrorist sometimes get advanced weaponry that can only be procured with special licensing and deals, etc. It's quite impossible to see someone selling weapons for bitcoins at a huge volume, and there aren't any official reports stating that bitcoin has been used for terrorism and the likes. Money laundering and fraud, yes, but terrorism?

Sadly though, bitcoins aren't used for money transfers but rather as a form of investment. While that doesn't seem too bad, people fail to see the practicality of sending money through bitcoin which will cost them significantly less than your traditional wire transfer. Also, one thing preventing people from using bitcoins for.money transfer is the amount of time and effort it takes to acquire bitcoin. While getting approved for KYC isn't that hard, it still consumes time and the ever fluctuating value of bitcoin gives people the hesitation of using it. There are a lot of factors as to why people haven't switched yet, and it's not exclusive to the amount of fees they're going to pay for a facilitator.

Employment rate and the minimum wage is the difference I mainly see between a developed and a developing country. High employment rate with a high minimum wage supports employees and in turn, returns huge tax for the government to work with. Employers caring enough for their employees often turn out to be productive and profit big, and it's just a chain reaction from there. Most of the time, developing countries are plagued with capitalists that don't care with the well-being of their employees, and no matter how many jobs a capitalist create, if the rate of wage remains stagnant and not compensating the employees well enough, it wouldn't mark any progress and would hinder the growth not only of the employees but also the economy as well.

Even without cryptocurrencies, the world is already in shambles and is sometimes supported by lawmakers and fiat. Terrorism was active even before the advent of bitcoin, and how do you think they were able to perpetrate their schemes? The human society is already a crooked and nasty place to belong even before paper money is invented, so the assumption that crypto created evil and waves of hate is just plain wrong. It [crypto] can be used as a medium of exchange for illegal arms and the likes but it will never be the cause of terrorism and violence.

With the increasing number of people engaging in cryptocurrencies in China, it is no doubt that they will produce such form of ruling concerning it, and one fine thing they did is acknowledging blockchain records since it cannot be forged easily and cannot be tampered in any way. Fraud and money laundering is still an issue in today's crypto world even though formal regulations have been set into place to address the issue. If you can't mitigate or lessen the number of frauds made concerning crypto, then find a way to use blockchain records to apprehend fraudsters and violators. A great move from China, and other countries should review this ruling since it will be a really good thing in apprehending those violators that think crypto is a safe haven from money launderers and fraud.

P2P lending platforms have been around for almost 4 years now, and even in this forum we have a dedicated board for the sole purpose of lending. It might boost the economy, but the way bitcoin is designed, it will be the lending parties who will benefit from such boom and not the whole economy itself. Given that bitcoin has no central authority which can lend the coins to those who need it, there really is no point in creating a generalized lending platform. Perhaps users can just go to their local bank and ask for a loan rather than ask to borrow money from complete strangers in the said platform.

Bitcoin was a prominent currency used in an online blackmarket platform called the Silk Road which was completely shut down in 2014 after its operators were caught and was sent behind bars. Let's face it, bitcoin as a currency will be used in illegal trading and schemes no matter how much we campaign against it. It's money, and even fiat is not safe from such schemes, so does bitcoin. There are a lot of dangers residing when you use bitcoin but it's still up to the end-user whether they'll use it for such or not.

Saw this awhile ago on one of the local games in NAASCU. Directly involved ba ang bitcoin cash sa mga local games? One of my friends asked me what the hell is bitcoin cash and after quite some time explaining it, medyo nalito siya pero gusto niya yung idea ng decentralized currency kaya now, nagreresearch siya tungkol dito. One thing I like about this is it brings cryptocurrency closer to students by asking what is it, and hopefully mag-research sila lalo regarding the said topic as our society is gearing towards a blockchain-powered systems and services alongside cryptocurrencies being recognized in the world.

It's just amusing to know that a local collegiate league for sports is somewhat connected to a cryptocurrency, but the connections with it as of now is kind of unclear to me. Next time, susubukan kong itanong kung anong connection meron ang NAASCU sa BCH

Unfortunately, that's what not most people look at. Most people in the bitcoin community nowadays look for the higher highs than the higher lows. Personally, I think a higher baseline on things is what actually makes every push possible and changes the overall sentiment of the market. If we continuously break the lows of every period, we are actually heading towards disaster since the price can't hold itself every time it dips. For the ETFs, since Trump expressed his 'approval' on the matter, it might or might not help ETF presenters gain the votes they needed but nevertheless, it's still a good try.

I don't think so. The market might be overcrowded with useless alts of bitcoin but in the end, people know what to choose, that's why bitcoin still has the largest market cap of all the cryptocurrencies in existence. Also, most experts and giants in the field are acknowledging bitcoin more than any other coins, which gives traders confidence on the coins they picked, hence why the volume is still large even though some coins are gaining traction. As for the legal side, many countries are starting to draft their own regulations and laws regarding bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. Japan is a fine example of bitcoin's legalization, and other countries would sure to follow suit.

This has been done on the FIFA World Cup in Russia but as far as reports go, there wasn't enough interest for it to get significant attention. It was a nice take at publicity stunts but unfortunately it doesn't have the traction it needed. I'd say online shopping and the likes would certainly give a massive boost on widespread adoption because we obviously lack places to use our bitcoins. It would be way better accepting bitcoins as payment on the regular rather than sporting events which happens onlt a few times in a year.

Perhaps readying down the line once he loses the presidential elections?

Well I think this is another gimmick of the present administration to convince the people that they are all in for progress, while the SEC commissioners don't really care at all. Traders are eagerly waiting for just one ETF approval and I'm pretty sure the price will go nuts, but in reality even without ETFs, bitcoin can move forward though we have to admit that having such added into the economy just boosts the thing even further. Hopefully though this goes as planned and as advertised by the Trump administration, while a part of me don't really believe into it at all.

Back in February when the news first surfaced, the Mt. Gox trustee admitted that he dumped several thousand bitcoins on December which contributed to the fall of bitcoin's price from its ATH down to $10k, and now this? The string of 'news' appearing lately that is related to the Gox fiasco is somehow getting inconsistent with new reports almost every day. If they still want to return the money to their creditors, they should have already without making a big fuss about it. It seems that the same guys behind the Gox event want to recreate a new business and this reimbursement thing is their method of getting some sort of publicity.

Trend or not, we've been in a similar situation yet the price remains stable and strong. It would be worrying if the price dropped to $5000 levels again but it seems that it wouldn't be going that route. It's just the same old volatility coming into play within the bitcoin markets that should not be overthought, given that it's occurring naturally and regularly. There are many countries that are on the process of recognizing cryptocurrencies as somewhat legal on their nations (India, for example, which has its case adjourned again) and I think that's more important than overthinking about regular price swings in the market.

Interconnected blockchains can be a thing of the future in the banking and finance industry. It can also be used by governments for storing information that oftentimes need a lot of time and resources to pull up. With this interconnected blockchains, time and money would be saved, plus it will give more transparency and credibility to whatever it is in the ledger since everyone contributed, everyone knows who contributed and everyone knows when something was added, so the openness factor of such a system saves everyone a ton of things.

Knowing Russia's on-off stance regarding cryptocurrencies, I wouldn't be too optimistic on this report. It might appear as strongly positive now, but once it goes on into scrutinization, see how it falls apart and slammed hard, as was the case for Russia in the past 4 years or so. Unless the man himself (Putin) signed this proposed bill, this wouldn't come into play and won't materialize.

The RBI discourages people from using banks to obtain/meddle with bitcoin and other services directly linked to it but not necessarily banning it wholly. Perhaps this is for the preparation of their new state-issued cryptocurrency which I think they want full support with.  There's really just a whole lot of opposition on bitcoin in India, especially on the ranks of the RBI. But once they saw that there's a huge benefit in accepting it, especially the services, there's no doubt they will accept it and use the tax proceeds to run the government.

Knowing that Goldman Sachs is still down for any future bitcoin plans is already a huge help in gaining confidence from the investors and traders. Someone as big as them expressing genuine interest over bitcoin is enough to calm the anxious investors, though the FUD about them abandoning bitcoin kinda hurts the market for a while. Or perhaps this is another ploy for them to generate profits, we'll never know.

At this point, anyone with a serious influence on the global financial scene has the control over the market sentiment, and Goldman Sachs clearly has the spotlight for now.

'Public interest' is yet another excuse the SEC has come up with in order to mask their real agenda as to why they keep on rejecting and suspending ETFs and ETNs irregardless of how good and how clean the presentations are. It looks like they are having fun toying with companies and institutions, the reason to which is still unknown. Realistically though, the bitcoin economy doesn't need any of these, but knowing how eager some institutional investors are for these things to come into life, it's a great boost for the economy, I'd say. The SEC is the final gatekeeper before any of these come into fruition.