Altcoins don't just follow in bitcoin's footsteps, but also multiply this effect many times over, especially when it comes to falling. If bitcoin falls by 10%, altcoins can lose 30-40%. There is a flip side to this effect as well. When bitcoin grows by 50%, altcoins can grow by 200%, but they also quickly become cheaper after such growth, so you need to sell quickly, otherwise all the price momentum will disappear as if it never happened.
Of course. Altcoins usually have higher fluctuations in market price. That's the reason why they're a much-riskier investment than Bitcoin itself. If you know how to play your cards right, you could make a lot more money with altcoins than Bitcoin alone. Most people like altcoins because they bring new features not found on the main Bitcoin blockchain. Not to mention, they're a lot cheaper than BTC. Like I've said before, a promising altcoin is one that's not driven by hype but delivers as promised. Active development, innovation, and most importantly, real use cases is what makes an altcoin a solid long-term investment. I'd say ETH, LTC, ADA, and BNB are the "best of the best" in the crypto market. The rest are pure junk. This is my own opinion, and not investment advice. I'd advise you to do your own research to help determine what works best for you. As long as you don't turn greedy by putting all of your life savings into crypto, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts  |
|
|
|
Well, it does sound like an unrealistic feat to achieve, and even if it actually happens, we won't really be alive to witness that, maybe our children or our grandchildren will be the ones witnessing such greatness. However, I personally like thinking about things that are possible and that can actually happen within a span of my lifetime only if I live until I'm very old since death is an inevitable thing and we never know when is our time to go, it's all so sudden.
So, what I feel is that we might see Bitcoin hitting $500k to $1m within a span of maybe 2 or 3 decades or maybe before that if global adoption takes a higher pace and countries and governments start legalizing Bitcoin and allowing everyone to openly use Bitcoin for whatever they want without any issues apart from the regulations and taxes and stuff.
BTC "has done the impossible", so I'm certain it'll be worth $1m decades from now. I'm happy with BTC being worth at least $1m, as long as it makes me wealthy. Like I said before, market price is not the only thing that matters. Usability is the key towards long-term success of any cryptocurrency. And I'd say BTC is a lot more useful than Fiat itself. The only issue is the high fees and slow confirmation times. Fortunately, we have the Lightning Network to "save the day". I have a feeling everyone will be dealing in satoshis once BTC goes fully mainstream. That's because the price of a Bitcoin would be too high to bear (utterly-expensive). If Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto hadn't made BTC divisible to 8 units, things would've been worse by now. Just keep buying and holding Bitcoin to see promising results in the future. As long as BTC stays decentralized, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my opinion  |
|
|
|
There are bitcoin ETFs in Europe and Canada, and they are not very popular. Many experts say that the spot Bitcoin ETF will be accepted in the US, but the prices in the market are recouping these events earlier.
Bitcoin has a chance to cost even $ 100,000, but manipulators will not do it instantly, and on pumps and dumps they will take a lot of money from hamsters.
It seems to me that the market is being manipulated by big players (mainly investment companies and whales) for their own interest. Not even the announcement of an ETF launch had a positive effect over BTC's market prices. The aforementioned entities may be keeping prices low before the BTC halving takes effect. After that, market prices will "pump" like crazy. I'm very confident BTC will reach $100k soon, especially when there's huge interest in it. One thing for sure is that a lot of the big players have been accumulating BTC like there's no tomorrow. High demand and low supply will keep prices high for a very long time (hopefully). No one can predict the future, so lets hope for the best. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
To be clear Bitcoin has had smart contracts from day one. In fact Satoshi introduced this way of using Smart Contracts when he created Bitcoin then others expanded it in their altcoins.
These side-chains are introducing Turing complete smart contracts.
Also RSK is not new, if I'm not mistaken it used to be an altcoin back in 2013 and then they took the idea and turned it into the concept RootStock RSK in 2014-2015 and the chain launched in 2018. None of it has anything to do with Taproot though.
Bitcoin's limited scripting language cannot be used to create complex smart contracts like AMMs and tokens (such as ETH's ERC-20 tokens). What I meant was BTC's ability to become a "Turing-complete" smart contracts platforms like Ethereum. With the aforementioned sidechains, it is now possible. This won't affect Bitcoin's level of security because everything happens "off-chain" (on a separate network). I sure hope developers don't integrate smart contracts into the main blockchain, or it will be complete disaster for Bitcoin. Consider how ETH is having trouble with the ultra-high fees, flaws/vulnerabilities from smart contracts, and slow processing times. I believe BTC should only be used for financial applications (sending/receiving payments) for its own good. Ultimately, the community will decide the best path forward for the project. As long as decentralization/censorship-resistance is preserved, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Back to POW? I doubt that.
Not PoW, but rather a hybrid consensus algorithm (PoW + PoS). That would make a divide between network consensus and block production. Stakers will only earn rewards, but they won't be able to have a say over the future direction of the network. That would make ETH decentralized again. Or Vitalik and his team could introduce a new reputation-based consensus algorithm where users get to vote who gets to produce blocks and earn rewards (like DPoS, or even RDPoS (Randomized Delegated Proof of Stake) which is even better). With Vitalik out of the picture, I doubt ETH will remain the "innovator" in the smart contracts space. You can see how Apple is not the same company it was once Steve Jobs died. Of course, someone else will take Vitalik's place in the future. But if the project doesn't solve its centralization issues beforehand, it will be game over for good. Who knows how ETH's market prices will react in the long term? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Ever since ETH adopted PoS, things have been going into the wrong direction. The network is as centralized as ever with a few big players controlling a large portion of ETH's supply. On top of that, the vast majority of nodes are running on top of Amazon Web Services (AWS). If developers don't do anything about this, ETH will become as bad as XRP in the future. My biggest concern is not only this, but also Ethereum creator Vitalik Buterin. The project is too tied around him. So if he dies (God forbid) or something bad happens to him, you expect ETH's market prices to go all the way down the drain in an instant. It's likely ETH will become worthless after this. What do you think? Is the endgame for ETH approaching? Will it be possible for ETH to become decentralized again? Or is it already too late? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. |
|
|
|
I've seen this new movement of adding smart contracts functionality to Bitcoin using sidechains. Ever since Taproot was implemented, developers have been working heavily on this. We now have Rootstock (RSK), and Stacks as sidechains which provide smart contracts functionality to BTC. This could be game-changer as it'll make Bitcoin similar to Ethereum in every way. But even better because of the BTC blockchain's higher level of security. Sometimes I wonder if smart contracts are even necessary on Bitcoin, since we already have a plethora of smart contract platforms with their own use cases (Ethereum, BSC, Cardano, Cosmos, etc). Bitcoin was meant to be used only for financial applications. Adding smart contracts would complicate things even more, opening the path for vulnerabilities/flaws and whatnot. What do you think? Is it a good idea for Bitcoin to have smart contract features? If not, why? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much. |
|
|
|
As the title says, do you think Coinbase will launch its own coin/token for the Base network? If not, why? Considering that Coinbase is one of the world's largest crypto exchanges, it could directly compete with Binance's own Blockchain network dubbed "Binance Chain" (with BNB as its native token). The momentum is building for the Base chain, especially when it has the backing of the Optimism Foundation. If Coinbase doesn't launch its own token, it could lose the ability to collect fees from the network and profit from it. Maybe the reason for this is because they're afraid that the SEC might accuse them of launching an "unregistered security"? It would be nice to have an airdrop where early adopters of the platform get rewarded for testing it. What are your thoughts? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Grayscale is about to launch a Bitcoin ETF soon. They've recently won a lawsuit in court against the SEC. Other companies (eg: BlackRock) are considering doing the same. If these large-scale investment companies join the "Bitcoin train", do you think market prices will "pump"? How would this positively affect BTC in the long term? Do you think it's possible the cryptocurrency will reach $100k if ETFs are approved by the US regulatory agency (SEC) before the halving of 2024? Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. |
|
|
|
It will be always in the hands of Bitcoin, especially on ETF things, we already hoping for other altcoins while Bitcoin still has no ETF approved.
About a country like Brazil does LTC as legal tender without Bitcoin? I don't think so, Bitcoin is always a good and best cryptocurrency to be a legal tender right now.
Bitcoin first, then Litecoin and the others. For what I know, this is a slow and steady phase that could take years before we see promising results. I'd suggest you wait as the best is yet to come. With subsequent block reward halvings, LTC should be able to reach far beyond $1k in the future. Unlike many overhyped altcoins, LTC has been proven to "deliver the goods" without sacrificing decentralization/censorship-resistance. It's a tried-and-tested Blockchain network that serves as experimental grounds for the main Bitcoin blockchain. Usually, new features are tested on LTC before they're integrated into BTC. Whereas BTC is often slow and expensive to use on a daily basis, LTC is all of the contrary (fast and cheap payments). I'm confident LTC will make a comeback, staying true to its name of being "Silver to Bitcoin's Gold". Who knows how far will the cryptocurrency go? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
I'd say never, because Bitcoin is not fiat with enforced tax. You pay tax on your profits, tell me when is your fiat generating profit for you?
Fiat is slavery. Bitcoin is not. With Fiat, you're subject to the rules of the government and the central bank itself. They enforce taxes on nearly anything you could imagine. With Bitcoin, that's not the case (although you're required by law to pay taxes on your crypto income). What's only deducted from your balance is a network fee that is used to support the miners. There's no such thing as "free lunch", anyways. Without fees, BTC would be highly-vulnerable against spam attacks. If the OP takes a "deep dive" into Bitcoin, he will realize it's more than just a currency. It's revolution. The tech underpinning Bitcoin will radically transform our society in ways that were never imagined. It will enable a future of self-sovereignity, privacy, and decentralization. Who knows if BTC ends up beating Fiat as the predominant currency in the world? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
That's exactly what this is about. Crypto trading depends only on the funds invested. The technology itself is of little interest to anyone, so we are witnessing a frenzied growth of absolutely useless and dead coins, which are of no use to anyone except trading, as they have no utilitarian function. In fact, such events have a negative impact on the industry itself, as new investors see not a developing market with the introduction of cryptocurrencies into everyday life, but a kind of big casino, where all sorts of useless funk is played and a lot of people lose money on it, and then this project steals from itself, as in the case of PEPE. After such events, what would be your opinion about the crypto market if you were a newbie?
This is bad because it makes crypto extremely-centralized. Not only that, but the variety of useless coins makes the whole industry look like garbage. I guess crypto needs more time to mature before it can be taken seriously. With upcoming regulations, the number of scams and useless projects will decline. The ones that will ultimately win are centralized exchanges. That's because they hold all of the cards to move the market in their favor. Newcomers into crypto will get "rekt" as their investments go all the way down the drain in an instant. After all, they're only thinking about getting rich quick. Who knows how the crypto market will grow 5-10 years from now? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Yeah, that would be a good thing for many of us because when the of Bitcoin goes low in value then most of us will try to accumulate as much as we possibly can. I'm sure that BlackRock is also thinking about the same thing and if they get any success in reducing the price of Bitcoin then it will be a best opportunity for us to accumulate a lot of Bitcoin. Bitcoin will go up in value after that and then no one will be able control the growth of Bitcoin.
Let's not forget that governments also want to reduce the price of Bitcoin. Either because they hate it, or because they want to buy more coins at a discount. The ones that will ultimately win are those with a lot of money to spend on this nascent industry. I'm talking about governments, rich people, banks, and investment companies like BlackRock, MicroStrategy, and Fidelity. They can manipulate the price "behind the scenes" for their own benefit. If you're smart enough to avoid being fooled by these entities, you'd buy and "hodl" BTC no matter what. With deflation in mind, it's highly-likely Bitcoin will keep reaching new ATHs for the forsseable future. Who knows if someday BTC turns you into a filthy-rich person? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
If they close these exchangers, they will open others. The main thing is that the exchange does not connect various fiat solutions and other centralized products, then no KYC exchange will be afraid of. P2P without fiat will live a long time and represent those islands of privacy in the crypto industry, which the connoisseurs of anonymity, decentralization and privacy need. Exchanges themselves provoke regulation on their platforms when they add USD, banking products, payment processors and other services from the world of centralized finance.
Exactly. Governments can't enforce regulations if a crypto exchange doesn't have Fiat trading pairs. That's because they don't have jusridiction on cryptocurrencies without a central authority (decentralized). You don't see governments cracking down on crypto-only exchanges these days (as far as I'm aware). I think DEXs and P2P exchanges with no Fiat pairs will most likely succeed in the long run. This means being able to buy/sell Monero using only crypto (zero Fiat). As I've stated before, we have plenty of options to get access to Monero without middleman. Everything needs to stay open source and decentralized, so people will be able to enjoy XMR without restrictions. I don't mind about Monero being an unpopular cryptocurrency as long as it does the job it's supposed to. You can see why it's still the #1 privacy coin in the world. Who knows if Monero survives while others (Zcash, Grin, Beam, etc) go all the way down the drain in an instant? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Such a scenario may happen, but I do not think it will gain widespread and massive adoption. Considering the true value derived from such hard assets is the physical form, it should not be excessively digitalized. The contrasting problem is what difference it makes with assets that derive their value mainly from digital things/computations like Bitcoin. if it is built to make and own things easier, it would be dependant on the policy and regulation that governs the digitalization of assets, in which consumer protection is truly essential.
With governments eager to have control of everything, we should expect physical items to become a thing of the past. You see, it's much easier to restrict/conficate a person's digital possesions than physical ones. This, of course, would happen in a government-controlled "Blockchain network". CBDCs are right around the corner, so it might not be long enough before digitized RWAs become a big hit. Expect digitized RWAs to develop on decentralized public blockchain networks, before they migrate to centralized blockchain networks (controlled by central banks and governments). This so-called "De-Fi" is nothing but "experimental grounds" of what's coming next. Who knows what the future holds for our society? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Its all about usecase. Centralized services like FEDNOW and the others want a centralized scalable DLT solution. Im actually very disappointed with ETH since its move to POS. I fully expected ETH to scale like all the other POS chains have..instead they chose the L2 path to scale...the whole point of switching from POW to POS was scalability....which hasnt happened on ETH. Also "ETH Vitalik: Centralized USDC could decide the future of contentious ETH hard forks. Speaking at the BUIDL Asia event in Korea, Vitalik Buterin said that centralized stablecoins like USDC & USDT will become significant deciders in future hard forks.5 Aug 2022" ETH isnt as decentralized as it used to be and if for whatever reason Vitalik ever decided he was going to leave ETH...that could be the end for ETH. Financial Businesses need cheap , fast and high throughput and some would prefer centralized options on top like the FED, For people all over the world want to use a decentralized cryptocurrency Bitcoin BCH is the cheapest and fastest option...if they just want to hodl and store value they can do that with btc. Hashgraph is the obvious choice because of its high-performance and cost-efficiency. It's certainly more scalable than both ETH and BTC. If "FEDNOW" turns out to be a huge success, other banking institutions and companies will join the game. This means a higher-priced HBAR in the future. I feel sorry for ETH as it chose centralization on top of everything else. Not only that, but it's shifting its focus to L2 like you've said. This is not a long-term solution to fix the "scaling problem". Why do you think BTC introduced the concept of "block weight" after it adopted SegWit? That was to scale on-chain to avoid future bottlenecks (although it's still not enough to meet the demands of everyday users). BTC essentially increased the block size limit, although indirectly. I guess HBAR will "eat ETH's cake", with its on-chain approach to scalability. Who knows if becomes the third-largest crypto in market cap soon? Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Monero is an almost completely anonymous coin and therefore it is prohibited for circulation in many states. This coin is often used by people in criminal and other dark deeds. Therefore, it is always under the close attention of states and their law enforcement agencies. Such coins have no future in civilized states, where some control over the movement of cash flows is considered the norm. Of course, Monero will always have its own circle of users, but that is why it will not be a very widespread cryptocurrency.
Wouldn't criminals prefer cash instead of crypto? I doubt Monero is used for criminal activities, especially when most criminals are not tech-savvy enough to understand it. The fact that XMR can't be used for offline transactions, is a dealbreaker to many. Just like BTC and the others (while it's possible to perform transactions offline, you'd need to connect to the Internet at some point to confirm it on the Blockchain). As I've said many times before, Monero is widely-unpopular because of government misinformation and false propaganda. Strong opposition against privacy coins, have led exchanges to de-list Monero from their platforms. After all, governments don't want people to enjoy true financial freedom and privacy. This is only the beginning of a rocky road for Monero. I wouldn't worry about this, as long as the cryptocurrency stays decentralized and private for everyone. Who knows if it will outlast many of the altcoins being traded across exchanges today? Just my opinion |
|
|
|
It is also possible although the chances are slim. but before we see each bitcoin reach $100 million, we will have to go through a severe recession at that time. and I wonder how we can deal with that situation, let alone our bitcoin investment. don't forget America is the number 1 power and USD is dominating the world. The collapse of the USD means that our economy will also experience the worst. so expecting the USD to collapse so that each bitcoin is worth millions of dollars is no different than expecting the worst economic recession in history.
The US economy needs to be in a point where there's no room for recovery. Only then, BTC will hit the $100m milestone. But that won't happen during our lifetimes, because the USD is still going strong (although weakening at a slow and steady pace). I'm fine with BTC reaching at least $1m, as long as it makes me rich. Of course, utility is more important the the price itself. BTC is already making strides as a Fiat alternative for the unbanked. If it keeps progressing, we might see it become the official currency of major countries worldwide (El Salvador took the first step of adopting BTC as legal tender). The more popular BTC becomes, the higher its market price will be in the long run. Who knows if we'll be dealing with sats once the LN becomes a big hit? No one can predict the future, so lets hope for the best. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
Everything is promising if BTC goes up, so instead of waiting for BTC to go up why not invest in something that is clear and certain buy BTC with DCA Method. Most people who like to invest in crypto now get too many expectations and like to try to take something that has just been born (shitcoins) and sometimes they are not sure where it will end up. I think, just a waste of time just look at the chart and the price in the end.
Altcoins usually follow Bitcoin's "footsteps". To experience major changes in market prices, BTC must go all the way to the moon. I'd say a promising altcoin is one that delivers as intended. It's not driven by hype, but rather concrete results. With real use cases, an altcoin could retain its value for long. I'd choose altcoins that are focused on decentralization more than anything else. That's because they have a high chance of surviving the tide. ETH is one of those altcoins (although it's becoming centralized), alongside LTC and ADA. Don't make the mistake of investing into an "overhyped" coin with an uncertain future. I'm talking about "meme" coins (Dogecoin, Shiba Inu, etc) and Solana. No one can tell how the market will react to mainstram events, especially because of crypto's unpredictable nature. As long as you don't invest more than what you can't afford to lose, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my opinion |
|
|
|
Litecoin is doing well. Death of litecoin is exagerated. Litecoin is silver to bitcoin's gold. This is powerful user case.
After bitcoin and ehtereum, litecoin is very likely to be 3rd possible choice to be adopted by U.S. institution investors with spot ETF in USA.
Litecoin getting adopted by institutional investors would be "the bomb". It will increase market prices at a very fast pace. That's if institutions decide to make the move. Maybe BlackRock and Fidelity will launch Litecoin ETFs in the future? If these entities have a successful ETF launch for Bitcoin, I don't see why not. Grayscale recently won the case against the SEC to list its very own Bitcoin ETF. This is a very good sign for crypto in the US. With a friendly-regulatory environment, LTC won't be cheap ever again. I think this is the golden opportunity to buy coins at a huge discount. I'm very confident LTC will rise to $500 within a few years from now. That said, the sky is the limit to how far Litecoin will go. As long as it stays decentralized, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
