There is another reason as well. No one declares what they earn on signature campaigns. It's like being paid in bills under the table. There are people who prefer to have Bitcoin with a clear origin in the face of tax authorities and spend the one from signature campaigns. So they do hold Bitcoin, but not from the signature campaigns lest the ball get too big and they have no way to spend it or convert it to fiat without attracting the attention of the authorities.

I believe that this interview is more useful to those who do not know this world than to us. Basically it is what we expect to happen based on a similarity of the past repeating itself in some way in the next cycle, although in this cycle the bullish forecasts also based on the past with complicated models like S2F all failed by a lot, so we will have to see what the next cycle has in store for us to continue drawing conclusions.

I've heard that many times but I'm not so sure. For starters, if the fees are high, I don't think it would be convenient for unbanked people to make day-to-day payments with Bitcoin, besides they won't be able to do it in many places and the LN is impractical if not relying on third party wallets. The unbanked do not have enough to save much, they live from day to day and for little savings I think Bitcoin is the same as a bit of gold.


But we are talking about unbanked. How much savings can the average unbanked have? $1K? I don't even think so, depending on the country. With amounts like that, I don't think there is much risk of being robbed and if someone does it because they know they have savings, it doesn't matter if they have Bitcoin, gold or cash, the most important thing is that no one knows about it.

I imagine that it happens like in Poker, that also 90%, I would say more, of players lose money. They don't know what they are doing, they don't care about studying, or managing their bankroll well, they are impulsive, and things like that.


In poker it is very important, the difference I see here is that the Value Betting you have to do it against the house odds, instead of against other players, which in principle seems to me a little more difficult, but perhaps those who earn money with sports betting and do not play poker regularly say otherwise.

I am not sure if this thread belongs here. Talking about investing in general and not trading, probably Economics would be a more suitable board but I am not going to report it.

I just think that most people and especially newbies would do better to approach Bitcoin and financial assets in general from the perspective of the investor, and not the trader, as the vast majority of people who follow simple investment rules, make money in the long run, while more than 90% of traders lose money. With that, the OP's advice is not bad, to which we could add some more, such as diversification.

Yes, well, with COVID some freedoms were also restricted, such as freedom of movement. But I think you are right, most citizens will happily accept CBDCs just like anything else that comes from their government. Although I would expect small resistance groups, minority but some resistance, unlike China, where there is virtually none because it is too dangerous.

My opinion is that you are clueless on the subject. Bitcoin will reach $100K with a very high probability within 2 years at most, and for that the legal status of bitcoin does not need to change.

It is already widely accepted in most countries but as an asset, not as a currency. As it is so short what you say, I do not know if you mean that the rest accept it as a currency, such as El Salvador.

But the fact is that it will reach that figure even if there are no changes in legislation.

Well, I have promised myself to control my tagging agressivity at least for a while but this account has everything to be wary of. She's basically a newbie asking for a non-collateral loan, supposedly behind her husband's back, but if it goes bad she's supposedly going to ask him for the money to pay it back too, even though she claims to have savings.

Overall this thread screams scam, scam, scam to me.

Also, as nutildah points out, the fact that she uses AI to write posts by basically copy and pasting or modifying very little doesn't speak very well of her honesty either.

I was hesitating between sideways and price increase, voting in the end for the "Yup" which I understand to be the most likely. Although in a month and due to the volatility of Bitcoin anything can happen, I think the worst of the bear market is over and in recent months, albeit with some ups and downs, the price has been rising. With less than a year to go before the halving, I think the normal scenario will be a slight rise. Without having seen the exact figure of $37K I was thinking of a slight rise in the range between almost $31K, where we are, and $40K. So the $37K is within what I expected.

Well, no. What I sincerely believe that you need are some classes in statistics applied to gambling so that you really understand the underlying mathematics and bet in a much more rational way than you do. As you point out, the problem is more psychological than anything else.



If what you took into account was the negative mathematical expectation of each bet, you would either not worry about these milestones or you would not bet at all.

In my opinion, it should not be prevented, as it implies a loss of privacy for those who make legitimate use of it.

The powers that be are not of the same opinion, however, and just as we are in a global trend of reducing the use of cash while implementing CBDCs for total control, they want the use of Bitcoin with privacy reduced as much as possible with the excuse of AML policies.

Faucets are garbage tbh and, as noted, freebitco.in is the best of all, or the least bad. We can say that it is good in that it has not limited itself to being a faucet and has been able to expand its business over the years.

The other problem that has not been mentioned is that, apart from the fact that it will cost you a lot of time to get something, what you will have is one or several small inputs that will cost you a lot proportionally to move.

For example, let's say you start the free game in freebitco.in from 0 and in 3 months you reach the minimum of 30.000 satoshis to withdraw. That is $9.3 at present.  If you want to spend that money, you will have to pay between $0.50 and $1 in fees if you don't want to risk the transaction staying stuck in the mempool indefinitely and not long ago it would have been more.

I would also bet on a figure in this range. It would be the most normal considering what happened in previous cycles, which we always have to keep in mind that it does not have to be repeated, but we can think that it is the most likely: the year before the halving after the bear market the price rises without reaching the ATH, and then moderates its rise and fall, and finally enter the bull market post halving. It is most likely that something like this will happen.

This style of question that is repeated every so often in this forum, especially in this section, it is curious that I have only seen it in this forum out of all the forums I have participated in, of which there are about ten. If you are interested in something on a forum, cryptocurrencies, poker, motorcycles, etc. what you do is put your energies into learning on the forum, not asking how to succeed in the forum.

That is, for example, in a poker forum there may be similar questions but they are focused on how to succeed in poker, not in the poker forum. I think the key here is in the economic aspect, in a poker forum people learn to earn money outside the forum, playing poker, while here there are tons of people whose main source of income with cryptocurrencies is the forum itself. That's why they want to succeed here.

Add to that the fact that the OP hasn't logged in since the day he asked the question, it seems to me he is not going to have a successful future on the forum.

If what you want is to better understand Bitcoin, it is best to concentrate on reading and understanding what others have written, diagrams included, rather than creating one. To most of us who have been at this for a while, that diagram doesn't tell us anything,


Without wanting to discourage you in your desire to understand Bitcoin, I think you have to leave creativity for a while, when you have a better understanding of it.

I would qualify some of what you say but I have to tell you that I am a little touched by it, because it is the first time I see a criticism of me in this forum that sounds 100% sincere to me. I will think about what you say.

I don't know to what extent your argument is becoming more emotional than rational, because


Having alts, it depends. If it is a scammer's alt, to leave a red tag is stupid shit as well?
Shitposting. You made me look at my feedbacks because I don't remember tagging anyone for it. If you see negative feedback from me just for that tell me and I will delete it.
Purchased account. Here, as I have already said, not everyone has the same opinion.

But I get what you mean, at least partially.

I left you feedback before the allegation you make that it was one account managed by many people, which sounds to me rather like an argument made against the way my brain works recently, which turned out to be false.


I am going to think it over.

Edited: I have changed the feedback temporarily to neutral (it could stay permanently like this).


As I see it, the trust system is useless if you have to have irrefutable evidence, because by then it will be too late. We are not talking about murder cases.


It seems to me that you are unclear about the difference in the weight of evidence to be had between criminal cases and civil cases. For criminal cases, the evidence asked for is much higher than for civil cases, and to me the cases we deal with here are more like civil cases.

What is the Standard of Guilt in Civil Cases?


When I red tag someone, I assign a probability (which I recognize is subjective) of at least 90%, higher than in civil cases.

Let me point this out NotATether:


A law can be made to prohibit them, and although this is a small country, I would not like other states to copy the idea, because even though P2P transactions cannot be stopped, they can be reduced to marginality. We are in a global trend of reducing the use of cash, mostly voluntarily by the population and the upcoming launch of CBDCs that mean a step further in the total control.

The legislation underway in the European Union is going in the same direction, and this type of legislation is not going helpful for us.


Again, they can.


Of course.

I am open to changing any of my feedbacks and I wanted to open this thread because of what I have had to read about the last one.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=239997



As far as I know, there are two types of cases where DTs disagree.

1. That of the newbies who ask for a loan in the lending section without offering collateral.
2. That of purchased accounts.

So I understand that, although not all DTs have the same opinion, it is legitimate to leave a negative tag for an account that has obviously changed hands.

Well, I had to read this today:


Happy? I find it pretty boring, actually.

This is coming from a person who had the same reaction in this case:

martyins

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1114408


This forum is full of people who break the rules, who buy accounts that make ban evasion, who have alts in the same campaign, of which surely we do not discover even half, and when we discover someone and they are left red tags, as in the case of martyins and this one you have to come out with conspiracies that even you don't believe.

All this when negative feedback means less than ever as we can see nowadays quite a few cases of people with negative feedback participating in paid signature campaigns.

Let this thread serve to question my feedbacks, I will not hesitate to change them if I see weighty arguments or a consensus of DTs to say they are wrong.