 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 »
|
|
This will be fun to look back on no matter what happens.
|
|
|
|
|
It absolutely could happen. But if it did, it would be near the top of a bubble and it would probably be wise to cash out a large portion and look to buy back at a lower price.
|
|
|
|
|
How are newbies able to sell?
|
|
|
|
segwit and good news, don't make me laugh  segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception bitcoin needs bigger blocks A larger number of end users isn't what makes a coin decentralized. Visa has millions of end users. What makes a coin decentralized is how many miners and nodes there are. The bigger the blocks, the fewer people that can mine or run a node, the more centralized it becomes. That's why people don't want JihanCoin. |
|
|
|
|
Just as it is with slowing velocity and liquidity crunches, this type of effect counter-intuitively makes the price go up, not down.
|
|
|
|
|
Small sample size, but numbers have flipped in the last 24 hours (37% SW vs 31% BU).
|
|
|
|
|
It'll be a total shitshow. The two warring factions will get coins on both chains, so they'll all start dumping on the chain they don't like while alts take over.
|
|
|
|
The BU guys seem oblivious to these hazards, since they only focus on the properties of their half of the chain. Two competing chains vying for the title of the One True Bitcoin would be horrendous. And I was sitting here thinking the coin denomination was bad. |
|
|
|
It wouldn't matter if BU was the greatest code ever written. The consequences of a hard fork would be disastrous. |
|
|
|
|
It does not need to be changed at the protocol level. But adoption rate would probably improve if two things happened.
First, there needs to be better, smaller, catchier names for the smaller units than "millibitcoins" and "microbitcoins". Names that don't sound inherently fractional. Especially the millibitcoin, as it currently approximates to dollar parity.
Second, apps need to use these smaller names with these smaller denominations by default.
Unfortunately, this is one of the downsides of decentralization. After the conventions were decided at the beginning, they've since been impossible to improve upon.
|
|
|
|
right now it is only a matter of time before kuwakduck makes a new topic saying "bitcoin is flawed and will dump to $100" just like he has been saying with his main and alt accounts for the past years.
No, no. The greatest thing about derpduck is that the floors of his dump predictions keep getting higher. One day he'll be saying the failures of bitcoin will cause the price to crash to $1100. Maybe even $3000 one day LOL. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin reached over $1200 and the mainstream media news channels/sites have not said a single word about it. Only small hobby/less professional news sites have reported about Bitcoin having set a record price. False. https://youtu.be/6yWhZ1r04n0 |
|
|
|
What is the possible maximum amount BTC could reach in the future?
Some predict 10,000$ in 36 months, but is this the 'final' ceiling?
What could be the maximum targeted price?
$10,000 in 36 months looks like a huge spike to me. I suspect that we could rise up to $3000, before corrections kick in. I hope I am proven wrong and we bound past $10,000. After all, I plan to hold till the next halving.  Could take more than one spike, 36 months is a long time. |
|
|
|
|
Just woke up and looked my price ticker say $1193. First thought was "that's not nearly as big a correction as I would've expected."
Then I looked at the charts.
|
|
|
|
but sadly it seems like this board has changed from speculation to guespeculation lately where everyone says "i guess price will go to $##"
TA is a pseudoscience anyway. |
|
|
|
It looks like it's very much up in the air as to whether it will be approved or not. That is, the SEC doesn't know, let alone the rest of us. They are giving it a serious look, which I view as long term bullish either way. It means that Bitcoin is growing up, and an ETF in one form or another will likely come to fruition soon. At the very least, the SEC seems to be trying to make it work, while still remaining careful. In fact, if they reject this one, it will probably be for a valid reason within the ETF itself, rather than due to any flippant or hostile attitudes toward Bitcoin. I've heard the case that the Winkle ETF may not properly handle the hard fork, so if something like that causes the SEC to balk, that's actually good for us. I understand and agree with you, but I've my bets on the following : 1. The COIN ETF will be approved. 2. There will be no HF, either Segwit then a 2MB HF as been "agreed upon" in the HK meeting or we will use another scaling solution like Lumino. I see that as a likely outcome as well. |
|
|
|
It looks like it's very much up in the air as to whether it will be approved or not. That is, the SEC doesn't know, let alone the rest of us. They are giving it a serious look, which I view as long term bullish either way. It means that Bitcoin is growing up, and an ETF in one form or another will likely come to fruition soon. At the very least, the SEC seems to be trying to make it work, while still remaining careful. In fact, if they reject this one, it will probably be for a valid reason within the ETF itself, rather than due to any flippant or hostile attitudes toward Bitcoin. I've heard the case that the Winkle ETF may not properly handle the hard fork, so if something like that causes the SEC to balk, that's actually good for us. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, no one wants to say "millibitcoin".
It has surpassed dollar parity. It's overdue for a catchy name.
|
|
|
|
|
