In order for Bitcoin to be more stable in its price, it is necessary that people use it primarily as a means of payment, and not as a speculative means of accumulating value. Then the demand for it will be balanced by the supply. Until this time, Bitcoin owners are trying to mainly hold it in the hope of a significant increase in its price. Because of this, the demand for it is growing, and with negative news it is rapidly falling. However, its decentralized nature will always contribute to its high volatility.

If bitcoin continues to be decentralized by its nature, it will always have high price volatility. It will not behave differently, since its price will always be determined by the ratio between supply and demand, and they will never become stable. All other factors are essential to the stability of the bitcoin price, including a decrease in supply or other circumstances that cannot affect.

Here, first of all, you need to decide what the expression "if bitcoin is accepted" means. If we mean the legalization of cryptocurrency, including Bitcoin, by the states, then even if it happens in all states, citizens will have the right to choose which means of payment they can use. At the same time, most of the world's population will use paper money all the same, especially in rural areas. Over time, something may change, but it will not be soon.

Cryptocurrency will never be the primary means of payment and will not be able to completely force out paper money from circulation. The public should also not be forced to use a particular type of payment instrument.
Venezuela now holds a special position in this, where President Maduro ordered state bodies to pay pensions in the local cryptocurrency El-Petro. Let's see what retirees will do.

In this case, the decentralized Unit-e of these American scientists should be something special and have new qualities, and not just have some improvements. It is very good that the specialists of several respected institutions of higher education have joined forces to improve the decentralized cryptocurrency. The scientific approach to the problem is somewhat different from the approach of practitioners and, as a rule, ends with certain achievements.

This video call idea for KYC testing is technically not feasible in many cases for many potential investors and headhunters. I think that the ICO project, where the video call will be entered, will not collect even the minimum amount, regardless of the prospects of the project itself. The easier it is to invest in an ICO project and bounty hunters participate in it, the more likely it is to succeed.

If ethereum would not exist, a similar coin with such functions of a smart contract would still appear. Maybe a little bit later, but such a coin would exist anyway. Maybe, on the contrary, there would be another coin that would not allow fraudulent ICO projects to appear in such a threatening size. However, to dream about this is useless, we have our own reality, which will not change.

I think that the cryptocurrency market will grow well  a maximum in the second half of the year, and not at the end. Although no one can predict exactly, this market is too unpredictable.
As for Bitcoin, now I don’t get too carried away with it - I don’t see any improvement in it for a long time. And popularity is a changeable thing. I still think that ethereum will be in demand in any case, given the large number of tokens that appeared on the platform of this coin. I still collect tokens that I earn in bounty campaigns ICO. I hope in the future they will bring a good profit.

Of course, ETH should be kept further. This coin will still show its new features after January 16, when the planned improvements will be implemented in it. In addition, other improvements are outlined in October. So this coin will continue to improve. This is a sign that it will maintain its competitiveness compared to new coins.

Now, unfortunately, in this very long bear market, many have learned the opposite lesson: coins and tokens should be sold at least partially, if there is a possibility of making a profit. However, in general, the decision must be made, given the prospects of the project itself of this type of cryptocurrency. Each cryptocurrency has its own characteristics and circumstances of growth and decline, and there cannot be a single approach here.

The ethereum mistrust theme was created about two years ago. Ethereum all this time is working and developing normally. What other proofs are needed that this is an absolutely normal and promising coin and will always be in demand, since almost all ICO projects are carried out on its platform.
As for ethereum forks - ETCV and ETN, they turned out to be a fraud, which nobody expected at all.

First, not a single ICO team is willing or able to provide information about which regulatory act gives them the right to require bounty hunters to undergo KYC testing. The legality of this requirement is dubious to this day.
Secondly, the KYC verification procedure, if it is considered legal, should be carried out simultaneously with joining the bounty ICO campaign. In any case, the right to pass it at the initial stage should be granted. In most cases, it now turns out that bounty hunters are allowed without any problems before the ICO project is advertised, and after the work is completed, walking around the circles of hell begins. Information about the KYC inspection is hidden, then a tight deadline for its passage is set, the procedure itself is not regulated and has a number of contradictions and cannot, as a rule, contain all the national specifics of the requirements for the documents provided. In general, we spend a lot of time and nerves and, as a result, we may be unlawfully denied for any far-fetched reasons and we don’t get any earned tokens.

Bitcoin is legal in those countries where it is not explicitly prohibited by specific regulations. As a general rule, any business activity is allowed if there is no special prohibition regarding it. National laws may contain other features of the application of this general rule. In any case, everyone should be interested in and know the current laws of their state.

I see so far the general dissatisfaction of the EU regulators with the existence of cryptocurrency and there are no concrete innovations. It is not even clear what these regulators are proposing. They are unhappy that EU banks began to use cryptocurrency. Let them write specific rules of cryptocurrency circulation, but over the years only one talk. The activity of ICO has long been in need of regulation, the protection of the rights of investors and other participants in the cryptocurrency market, and the elimination of mass fraud in this activity. Instead, they seem to deliberately do nothing to discredit the activities of the ICO and the cryptocurrency as a whole.

No matter how hard we try to choose legitimate and promising ICO projects, there will still be a chance to get into fraudulent ICO projects. In some cases, distinguishing a fraudulent ICO project from a non-fraudulent one is simply not possible.
I have hope in this regard only on the regulation of the activities of the ICO by the states. Only they will help us to avoid fraud in the activities of ICO.

Not everyone has the technical ability to use a video call, and this will mean that the ICO team will lose both investors and bounty hunters. That is, if someone introduces such an innovation, they risk not raising the necessary funds. Therefore, let them do it, maybe those who want to check KYC will then diminish. Now such a test for bounty hunters is a big problem, as it just takes a lot of time and nerves. In addition, many bounty hunters can not provide some of the required documents, such as proof of residence at the place of registration or a certificate from the bank. If such a KYC check is carried out at the end of the ICO, they, it turns out, work for free. Therefore, a KYC check should be conducted at the same time as joining an ICO bounty campaign.

You obviously lured something, as bounty hunters cannot be considered Investors in ICO projects, since they don’t invest any money in any form. They receive money in the form of tokens, that is, in fact, ICO teams are investors for bounty hunters. In other words, ICO teams are our customers. So who should be tested by KYC before whom?

Your statement that checking KYC for bounty hunters is legal, because this way multiple accounts are eliminated on the forum is also wrong. To be legal, such actions by an ICO team must be based on a law or other by-law. Can you name which state requires the ICO team to conduct a KYC audit against bounty hunters or is this an initiative of the ICO teams themselves? The ICO teams violate our right to the confidentiality of the individual with such a request, and if this is only their initiative, they act illegally, abusing their rights because they violate our rights.

Yes, unfortunately, this is true. A stranger has very few opportunities to verify the project and its team. You go on the Internet, and there almost all the information about such a project is only from the ICO team itself. Therefore, in order to fundamentally improve the situation with fraud in ICO, we need government regulation of ICO activities. If the ICO team is checked by the relevant state authorities and, moreover, the collection, or even better, the targeted use of the collected funds, as provided for in the prepared rules of ICO regulation in Russia, then fraud in the ICO will practically disappear.

Postponing an ICO, that is, suspending it until better times in the cryptocurrency market, is not the best option. Investors and even bounty hunters usually begin to doubt such a project. In addition, many unscrupulous ICO teams deliberately suspend their ICOs in order not to pay bounty hunters in the future. Many suspended ICOs do not resume their activities at all. For example, I participated in the ICO VVTokens project, which conducted the ICO in the period from October 2017 to 01/05/2018. ICO was suspended, payment of tokens to bounty hunters was postponed until June 2018. And since then silence.
Of course, the situation in each ICO project is different. In some cases, suspension is appropriate, in others - not.

One should always remember about significant risks to keep huge amounts in cryptocurrency. I prefer to periodically withdraw my profit from cryptocurrency to regular currency. Although this reduces the amount of profit, but increases the reliability of this activity. We believe in cryptocurrency, but precautions do not interfere.

What else can most bankers say about cryptocurrency? These doubts are expressed every year, and the cryptocurrency continues to evolve. As the saying goes, dogs bark and the caravan moves on.
We expect improvements in ethereum next week, and of course, I want to look at the ETCV, which is separated from ethereum.