You're a pain in the ass, dude.

Now is the right time to buy Bitcoin, whatever you say, because buying Bitcoin has to be done with a long term vision, at least one cycle view and better if there are two. We will see the current prices as a bargain in 5 or 10 years, regardless of whether the price goes up or down a little these days.


Good one that one, the OP is either a nocoiner or a fucking troll and I don't know which is worse.

Well, I think the news has made as much of an impact as when they announced that they were adopting it as a legal tender: in a very limited way if at all.


Well, I hope they try to solve their problems and improve the lives of their citizens, they can always adopt it again in the future when hopefully the standard of living has increased and their citizens use new technology more widely.

Yes, well, DCA is done by many people, myself included. You can make purchases every week or month, of an amount you can afford, but what I wanted to emphasize is first that the bull run is usually given a year after the halving, not the same year as the halving, and that if you want to get some really good returns, and you buy now, investing a lump sum, or you start to do it, with DCA, you better wait for the halving after, not next year for take profits. For me, investing in Bitcoin for less than 5 years does not make much sense.

Yes, every now and then.


The same thing happens to me. Playing in the lottery makes no sense from a mathematical point of view. It would only make sense when the accumulated jackpot brings a positive expected value to what you are going to bet. But that's not the sense that playing the lottery usually makes. The interesting thing is to be able to win a very high amount for a couple of bucks, even if the probability is derisory and it is EV-. In the same way, when there is a jackpot and it is EV+, the jackpot prizes are usually accumulated in the first or the first prizes, which have a very low probability of winning, so what is relevant is not so much if it is EV+ or EV- as it happens with gambling in casinos, but the possibility that it changes your life, even if it is close to zero.

What is the point in keeping them until 2024 when the bull run usually starts one year after halving? We will have to keep them until 2025 at least. Although for someone who buys Bitcoin now, with money that will not be needed in the short or medium term, as it should be, I would say you better wait a cycle and a half, about 6 years. I would expect the price to be approaching half a million by then, and if not, several hundred thousand dollars, which is a considerable increase from current levels.

The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. For those who do not know, there is a book with the same title.

While in most of the world societies followed to a greater or lesser extent a system of privilege, and in Germany a posh guy who never worked in his life, dedicated himself to writing a tedious piece of nonsense that would eventually lead to the greatest genocides of mankind, in the USA effort and talent were rewarded. The result has been the highest levels of development and welfare in history.

Well, with the mentality I see around the forum, I'm not surprised that the thread hasn't had a single merit so far and that most of the comments are negative.


If what I read brings me value, yes, but I'm not worried about being dethroned by AIs.

The most disruptive innovations were at the time not only rejected, but in some cases even mocked:

7 world-changing inventions that were ridiculed when they came out

The use of AI in everyday life will be as commonplace in a few years as the use of the Internet or cell phones is today, but we'd better focus on the negatives instead of trying to take advantage of these early versions, lol.

You guys sound like Peter Schiff or Charlie Munger criticizing Bitcoin.

Not really. I am concerned about the long term. These fluctuations, although they entertain me, don't worry me that much. I see the drop as part of normal volatility and I don't see any special reason for it.


I wouldn't rule out dips to around $25K or so, as you say, but I think the worst of the bear market is over and I highly doubt we'll see $20K again. I think the underlying trend is going to be up. With less and less time left for halving I think the macroeconomic situation is out of its worst moment too.

Lol, I voted "no" and I see that 100% (out of 9) we voted the same.

That's what the average slots player is looking for. That's what the average slots player is looking for.

To the OP's question: everyone loses in slots. The only way not to lose would be to play only once, and if you win something, which at that moment you are in positive between what you bet and what you won, leave and never come back.

The RTP that is always less than 100 makes it impossible to win in the long term.

You have remained in the 19th century, in Marx's ideas. What is this bourgeoisie? In Marx's time you could not earn money with signature campaigns comfortably from your computer as you are doing. The difference in Marx's time between the working class and the upper class was that the working class depended exclusively on their labor to earn money while the bourgeoisie and the upper class had financial assets that provided them with income. Today that is much more blurred, as you yourselves have Bitcoin, which is a financial asset, you can buy stocks and mutual funds from your cell phone for as little as $10 the standard of living for a worker has risen enormously in these 200+ years.

But you guys keep on with your victim mentality and I'm sure you'll do just fine.

This idea was popularized by Michael Saylor and many people have believed it, although I think he takes it too far by saying that the Bitcoin is going to absorb all the market cap not only of gold but also of investment art and Real Estate, and I think it is too maximalist.

In the case of gold, it seems quite plausible to me that the Bitcoin, being a kind of gold 2.0, a better digital gold, will absorb much of the market cap of gold, but will it absorb it all? I don't think so. You have to think that gold is used for jewelry and in industry, and you can't put satoshis to make a ring or electronic devices. This is why I see a better future for gold relative to bitcoin than paper maps vs. google maps.

Regarding the previous discussion on inflation, I think it is clear that calculations are made on the basis of how things are now, and in any case inflation will be factored into the future. That is, if the market cap of gold is $13T and that of Bitcoin $0.5T the more maximalist think that the future will be of say $1T for gold and $12.5 for Bitcoin, but that in today's terms, in today's purchasing power. In the future inflation will have to be calculated and the total numbers will be higher.

I've reported the thread to be locked. Let's see if there is luck, because as I have said several times I think the moderators think more before acting on this section.


That's because you don't go much to the Bitcoin Discussion section, as there are many such claims there, which some of us question, but many others don't, and they fill up with pages of comments from members congratulating and even meriting the OP who doesn't provide a single piece of evidence.

The original old, dusty, hole-punched books can be consulted thousands of years from now thanks to digitization. To preserve something you don't have to keep it in its original format.

Besides I think they are two different things. I would leave the forum format as it is. However, for innovations such as IA, I am clear, if it were up to me all text that is a mixture of IA with human content and results in a quality post, welcome.

The forum is staying in the time of the Australopithecus, going hunting with a club, while the world is on its way to the fifth industrial revolution.


AI is being used to improve the work in various fields right now, and the change it is generating is among the fastest in history. Those who worry that AI will jeopardize their income from signature campaign would do better to worry that AI will make this forum obsolete if they insist on fighting it instead of embracing it.

You forgot to say that, according to whoever popularized that definition, good debts give you positive cash flow, and that does not happen with Bitcoin, no matter how much return you get from capital appreciation, so it would be bad debt, also too subject to volatility.

When you have a loan you have to face payments every month, and a good debt would be for example that of a mortgage in which if you have to pay $400 a month, what the tenant pays you after deducting expenses is $500, so you have $100 of positive cash flow. With Bitcoin if it goes up a lot you can make partial sales, but there are also periods of bear market when it drops from $69K to $15, and if you have borrowed to buy when the price was at $60K or more, let's see how you manage to afford the payments.

Therefore, it is not a good idea to go into debt to buy Bitcoin, and although in principle we can consider that it is better debt than taking a loan to go on vacation, it is not good debt.

Let's see my friend, have you stopped to analyze the thread? I don't think so. Good thing there are some of us who are fed up with the threads of supposed investors who claim to have invested in Bitcoin and things like that that when you do a minimum analysis do not hold up.

In this case I didn't even need to do the analysis, Darker45 did it on the first page.

There are so many threads of this style in the forum, usually in BD with made up stories, that are a pest.

The problem with responsible gambling is not so much the percentage of people who have problems with gambling but the harm it does to people who do have problems. Most people who gamble lead normal lives, and apart from the odd occasion where they ended up gambling more than they had planned, like the one who went out one night and ended up drinking more than they had planned, it doesn't cause them any major problems. The bad thing is that those who do have problems with gambling that they cannot control are on their way to financial ruin, often asking for loans to continue gambling or taking money from their loved ones.

That is why I welcome all the responsible gambling measures that have been implemented over the years.

As far as I can see, since I wrote this post the OP has been edited and I see no explicit reference to "clean" coins or avoiding "coins from dubious sources".

Has the policy on this changed?

I just watched the video on the [banned mixer] website and these references are still made.

Not really. I don't see how someone could earn little money in their job and invest a lot, it's not mathematically coherent.

If you search on personal finance you will see that they usually recommend between 3 and 6 months of expenses, and at most there are those who recommend a maximum of 6 months of salary (which if you do it right is an amount higher than your expenses). The rest to leave it in cash is to lose money because of the opportunity cost, it is better to invest it.

Another thing is that many people are not clear, or refuse to be clear, about the concept of unforeseen or emergency. Changing the wheels of your car is not an emergency, you have to save for it and leave your emergency fund untouched. If you see that your roof is going to need some repair, you better start saving from the first moment to repair it and do not wait until your roof falls down and you have to use your emergency fund to repair it.

In other words, one thing is an emergency, and another is that, apart from the emergency fund, you also save for foreseeable expenses.

I agree.


This has nothing to do with reality. Surely you are someone who doesn't gamble, you only know the gambling world from a distance and from some extreme cases you have known, and you take those extreme cases as the generality. Saying that is like saying that people who drink alcohol end up alcoholics or that people who use kitchen knives do it to murder.

Most gamblers gamble money they can afford on an activity that can be considered entertainment, like going to the movies or dining out, but with the difference that at the end of the night you can occasionally walk away with more money than you came with (here I do not take into account those who play sports betting or poker in a more professional way, and get regular profits for it).

Then, yes, there are the addicts, the problem gamblers, the ones who steal money from their mother or wife to keep gambling, but that is far from the norm.