I wonder: is there any conspiracy theory that @BADecker does NOT believe in? The bad thing is that he keeps opening threads making predictions about the future in this case, and when they don't come true I bet he won't pay any attention and will keep opening this kind of threads.

It is not that I believe that the CDC are saints, and I also believe that there are dark things in this thing that has been called a pandemic, which is nothing more than an epidemic and they changed the name to pandemic when they changed the criteria on the mortality rate (being able to call diseases with very low mortality rates a pandemic).

If what the OP says is true, in a few months we should see an infectious disease outbreak in those states that differs significantly from the other states.

What will happen if we don't? That BADecker will not come to acknowledge his mistake.

It will depend a lot on the country you live in. In some countries you can kill someone if he enters your property without your permission and in other countries, if you kill him you will go to jail and you will have to pay compensation to his family even if he was a violent criminal with a long record who had broken into your house armed.

The same applies to this case.

Anyway, I don't believe everything I read in the forums, but just in case, learn about the laws of your country.

By the way @cnut237, you always put that graph but there are things that the chart does not explain.

First of all, some of us believe that COVID cases have been being overdiagnosed, although I know you don't agree with that. But what that graph doesn't explain is why there were almost no cases in the summer, and then there is a huge spike in January. It has all the appearance of a flu-like graph. If the graph went further back, it would look similar, having the 2020 peak in March/April and then dropping.

Just a point of clarification. In the S2F model, as shown in the article written by @fillippone, there is a variance over the expected results:


The good thing about the model is that even if we have this divergence, the trend is regression to the mean, so that sometimes we will be above the predicted price and sometimes below, but always going up and down around the predicted price. So let's hope that the model continues to be successful.

If something is injected into your blood that has detrimental effects on your organism, it does not have to manifest itself in just two days, it is not a matter of thinking alone.

In this article: Long-term Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccine? What We Know. you can find descriptions of negative side effects of all types of vaccines that appear up to two months later. I heard an expert on television say that they could appear in up to six months. That's why I think the more time has passed since mass vaccination began, the more we can trust the vaccines. But let's not exaggerate either.

As it seems most likely that these bitcoins will not move, since they have not moved in all this time, I wonder what is the reason. I can see three reasons:

1) Satoshi is dead
2) He doesn't care about the money or doesn't need it. His creation is somewhat superior to the personal profit he could make.
3) He lost the keys.

2) it is more difficult to believe, there are not many people like that in the world, although there are some. Also in this case it would be normal to think that he is not going to give the keys to anyone and that when he dies, no one will have access to those keys, if he has not already destroyed them.
3) It is also hard to believe, but it is not impossible.

In any case, I think we can consider those Bitcoins as lost as the most likely scenario.

I often wonder how many of the members in gambling signature campaigns are problem gamblers. I have seen several posts of the style you quote. I remember replying to one that disappeared and I understand it was deleted by the same person who opened it. Then there was another one lately that he himself said he was going to lock or delete the thread. Surely they feel great shame after realizing the loss, open the thread, and then for some reason regret it and delete it, or lock it.

But I think the key to what is happening is given by the last comment:


Many people when they gamble get into an emotional state similar to that of a high, so they end up doing things that if they stopped to think rationally, they would not do. I am not referring to the fellow member aidi_hex who seems not to get into big problems in spite of getting "high" while gambling. I know many people who gamble responsibly. Some lost a little more than reasonable on a one-off occasion, but by and large gambling is an entertainment that thrills them and sometimes makes them money, although most of the time, in the long run, they lose money.

Those who develop a serious problem of self-control with gambling have a difficult solution, and I believe that it happens by

1) Seek help.
2) Quitting gambling for good. It happens like with alcoholics, even if they go years without drinking, a single drink triggers them to return to the destructive pattern of alcoholism.

By the way, I don't know why this is in off-topic, I think it should be in the Gambling section.

While I generally agree with the OP, it seems to me that he believes what he says in a very simplistic way, just because of the return it has given him in less than a year. The same could have happened to him with a shitcoin or a startup that then goes bust.

I think it is better to save in Bitcoin but because of its limited and decentralized nature, and because after what we are seeing this cycle, there is no stopping it. The return is a consequence of this, and of massive fiat printing.

Of course it makes sense. DCA works always because you can't predict the future. It is always better to do DCA than to try to time the market. If you believe that Bitcoin is going to keep going up in the long run, and that it will reach $100k and eventually $1M, trying to time the market (risking losing) makes no sense.

Yes, but don't cry.

That's simply because of the market cap, when Bitcon was worth much less it also had higher percentage changes. With $1T market cap it's much harder to move the price, and yet it's still the most profitable asset, more so than those shitcoins. You can play to get the movements of those shitcoins right in the short term but it's like playing roulette.

And I'm not worried about the market cap. Bitcoin loses market cap with respect to 10,000 shitcoins? LOL Let's compare one to one to see.

I believe that Bitcoin is too big to fail. By this I mean that, especially in the USA, I see a hard ban as almost impossible. You have to think of all the companies that are getting into the Bitcoin world, either by buying it as a reserve or by implementing mechanisms for people to buy and sell it, like Paypal. All those companies have lobbies, there are pro-bitcoin senators, the SEC chairman taught a course on Bitcoin and blockchain at MIT etc.

At some point in the past I would have bought into a hard ban but not today. What might be is that some other kind of measures are put in place such as banning it being held off exchanges and the like, as has been mentioned.

Lol! You are right. Other than that, Buffett has underperformed the S&P 500 over the last 15 years or so. He missed the big tech bandwagon and only a few years ago bought Apple. He got rich in a different world. He is not the best person to analyze well what is going on in the crytpo world.

That is simply because gods do not exist. And if they existed they would have no need to prove that what they write is of divine origin. They would not need to communicate with humanity, and if they wanted to do so, they would have no problems.

So, I don't know what your lucubration is about. I guess you believe in God and you are with the eternal conflict between reason and faith, which in the West has long since won the reason. God either does not exist or is an entity absolutely separate from this world that only has power in another world, the afterlife or the one that supposedly exists when we die.

I agree but what's more, whatever we can speculate about the 30-year future of Bitcoin has a very low probability of resembling reality. It is clear that we expect the price of Bitcoin to continue to rise and fiat to devalue but 30 years is so many years that making predictions seems to me like playing fortune teller with a crystal ball.

Yes, it is extraordinary, especially because of how long the pension or social security systems are lasting in a lot of developed countries, which are based on the same system that Madoff used. With this I am not defending him, but rather criticizing these systems that are a escape forward. The difference is that when the base of the pyramid instead of widening narrows, people like Madoff, the system collapses and they end up being discovered, while the states can squeeze more taxes to their citizens, get into debt printing much more money, etc.. In short, they have more resources.

What is clear with news like this and others we see every day is that Bitcoin permeating society more and more. This has gone from being a rare thing of a few freaks, to an important asset of our society, as can be gold or other type of asset that everyone knows what it is and is part of the financial debate.

I don't think an inverse ETF would be very successful today, it's another way of betting down against Bitcoin but those who do that stand to lose. It could probably be useful in the future, I'm not saying it won't, but you won't see me buying ETFs, inverse or not, I prefer the real Bitcoin, although I suppose it will be successful among a certain type of public.

I wouldn't say oppressed, rather blamed.

If you are a straight white male, there is a discourse that blames you for the oppression that historically blacks, women, homosexuals, etc. have suffered, even if you have never discriminated against anyone and you are against it. This is done from political positions from the left.


Positive discrimination is discrimination at the end of the day, because you end up choosing a less prepared candidate not because of his merits but for those reasons I mentioned before, that I have to pay today for what some morons with whom I do not identify did in the past. I don't agree with that being a greater cause.

I have quit smoking 3 times with the same system. And I mean quitting smoking and going about 5-7 years without smoking, then for some reason going back to smoking 6-12 months and again I quit.

The system is the same as a doctor would use if he had prescribed you an addictive drug when it comes to withdrawing it: gradual reduction of the doses. It is also useful to stop or reduce coffee consumption: if you drink 5 coffees a day and you want to quit, if you do it all at once you will get a terrible headache, extreme lack of energy, etc. If you reduce 1 coffee every 5 days, you will not even notice it.

In the case of nicotine, the gradual reduction is difficult to do with cigarettes, because they are more addictive as nicotine rises quickly in the brain. That is why it is better to use chewing gum, but to use chewing gum you have to use the initial dose that leaves you as satiated as cigarettes. Let's say you smoke a pack of cigarettes a day. Then, 10-12 nicotine gums should be enough to feel satiated. If you start with 12, go down by 1 gum each week. When you go for about 3 gum a day, you will be able to quit at once because the nicotine dependence will be so low that you won't even notice it.

Thanks to this thread, and these comments, I've found the answer.

I was curious about this and I was thinking of sending him a PM because it has happened to me the times he has merited me, that after a while he would send me a merit again for the same post. In fact the last time was yesterday, and I didn't know why this pattern was happening.