With that said, you can use websites like eToro that offer copytrading features. Similarly, there's a bunch of trading bots that allow you to automatically mirror the trades of top performers, though this usually comes at a fee.
This works until it no longer does. Regardless of how 'professional' a trader is, a losing streak is very much what you will be subject to at some point. I get the idea of people looking at how other traders think about the market, read into their analysis and whatnot, but that should never be something you copy in full. Another disadvantage is that by copying trades you don't actually gain any crucial market experience yourself. All you do is depend on others to tell you what to do. You have no clue if they're selling you bs or worthwhile signals.  Also, some of these traders don't tell you is that they hedge their positions by using options, which means that even if their main trade isn't profitable, they can still make money through these options. |
|
|
|
Bots only follow the rules made by humans and there is no way for bots to defeat human intelligence. Bots are only tools used to make our work as humans easier including in trading activities.
Bots can analyze what happened in the last couple of years to determine the probability of a certain outcome in less than a second. You can't possibly beat that. We, humans, also do nothing but analyze the charts to determine the probability of a certain outcome, but we need a minute or so to come to the same conclusion, and there is always a bias involved when we make a decision. Bots don't have that problem. How much time do you think you need to figure out that the trend changed and you need to adjust your positions? This all might take you a couple of minutes, while a bot can do it in a second, perhaps two because it still needs the exchange to be responsive enough. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has been a savior for countries with high inflation, and the more demand is created, this will lead to bitcoin to be more stable and it will become an attractive way to combat the negative interest rates.
It definitely doesn't make Bitcoin stable. I don't think anything other than plenty of liquidity is able to do so. The thing with more demand in a certain part of the world in case it steers the price up, is that investors in well developed economies have an incentive to dump it back down because their profit target is met. Not everyone is in for the very long term; institutions and the more rational investors are perfectly happy with 50-100% returns, while people here aim at 500-1000% returns because they believe they're entitled to it. Also, Gold historically has been dumped back down the moment the global economy starts showing signs of improvement. This, if Bitcoin is actually being used as safe haven, will happen to Bitcoin as well. |
|
|
|
With loans being there, only those who own the loaning company will be making profit while you are paying them interest which should have been added to profit but not.
Even that isn't a guarantee. Currently with so much debt circulating in the financial market, it's literally a matter of time before it implodes in the face of the issuers of the debt. The smartest and most manipulative financial institutions will be able to hedge against this and sell a large portion of their debt to other (financial) institutions, but there will always be more victims than winners when everything comes down at the same time. Profits are privatized but the losses are socialized. The tax payer will be forced to pay for this mess. Very clever. |
|
|
|
If we look back at the bitcoin whitepaper which was written by Satoshi and the previous success story of bitcoin accumulators we should blame every individual which belief bitcoin to be the ever opportunity to be wealthy cause bitcoin was also created for making people financial freedom.
The white paper isn't law. Bitcoin is freedom as you also indicated, which means that regardless of your own point of view on speculation or people trying to accumulate wealth through Bitcoin, you can't do anything about it to stop them. Nothing wrong with people using Bitcoin to progress in life. Don't blame anyone for doing so. I'm balls deep in Bitcoin and convinced of its success in the long run, but there are enough people who think it has a shelf life and therefore try to make the best out of it whenever they can and while they still can. |
|
|
|
Nope. We hit the *temporary* bottom on the daily, being the 100EMA. It's usually a very strong support or resistance level, which in this case it favored Bitcoin functioning as support. In that regard, it's perfectly normal that the price is going up and will relatively soon hit its next lower high resistance point. First people blamed the $3 billion Chinese ponzi to be responsible for tanking the price, and now it's Bakkt responsible for pumping the price. Are the Chinese scammers already finished dumping their 200,000BTC? That was quick.  |
|
|
|
But as to whether 100k is possible, I think a lot of people are dreaming, and don't want to pinch themselves out of it.
I can't really blame people for thinking that. Most people here consider crypto the only ever opportunity to 'easily' accumulate a lot of wealth in a relatively quick fashion. If they had to work for this, they probably wouldn't be able to get anywhere near the financial level they are currently, especially when you live from paycheck to paycheck and have nothing to put aside. It's definitely more healthy to just be a rational investor and have only a few % of your net worth in Bitcoin, but we as hardcore hodlers are far from rational. In the end, $100,000 isn't that far fetched. I am convinced that we will get there with patience. Never bet against Bitcoin. It will rekkt you long term speaking. |
|
|
|
Exactly what I mean. Bakkt will get killed off it doesn't benefit the government or economy.
I think it will not get all the green lights needed to start.
How will it not benefit the government? The coins Bakkt stores on behalf of the investors using their platform are confiscated easily when the government orders them to do so. That's a pretty damn strong incentive to have Bakkt become operational and grow larger and larger. The same applies to Coinbase. These institutions will end up holding a significant portion of the total supply (Coinbase already does). Taxation-wise it's also a great tool for the government because they know exactly who to prosecute. These centralized platforms grant governments more control than ever before. |
|
|
|
Even if bitcoin takes 10hrs for confirmation for a normal low fee transaction during a busy network or network congestion, people and even altcoin developers will still prefer storing their coins in bitcoin than some uncertain shitcoin created out of the blue
People who understand and value the properties of Bitcoin don't end up with a transaction that needs 10 hours in order to get its first confirmation. They pay up for it to have a fast confirmation. Only if the transaction they're sending has a very low priority and thus doesn't need a fast confirmation, they'll choose to go with a low fee. In the end, I don't think there is a scalability problem. People just need to understand that scaling the main network in today's state is quite a serious task due to Bitcoin's decentralized nature. This isn't BCash or Ethereum you can upgrade at your will as main developer or head of the project. Upgrades will come, it just requires some patience. Schnorr is what I look forward to the most. |
|
|
|
In terms of transaction fees Bitcoin can be perfectly used as a payment system for buying/selling goods/services priced above $100, because fast transaction currently costs less than $1.
Yup. I have had 4 transactions confirmed by the first next block today, and that with a fee of less than $0.20 thanks to native bech32 Segwit. Would that not be enough I just use RBF and bump the fee by approximately a whole cent. It requires some level of understanding, but once you get the hang of it you don't ever want to go back to the 1x address format. People paying the high fees use the old format addresses in combination with clients that suck at properly estimating the right fees. PayPal, which is the most widely used form of ecommerce payment option (at least in the western world), charges fees up to $5 when you send money to an international account. If you use the goods and services option, the receiving party swallows a 3-4% haircut. And then you also have to worry about chargebacks, lol. |
|
|
|
I would love to figure out what Roger and Bitmain's stake in the company is. It definitely isn't below the 50% mark collectively, otherwise they wouldn't be this authoritative.
According to wikipedia Roger Ver wasn't the only early bird investor. I think the general consensus amongst the backers of BitPay is mainly that they support the big blocker ideology and for that reason have an incentive to promote BCash over Bitcoin. Another option is that Roger Ver is generously rewarding them for supporting BCash, but the first option is more likely. Bitcoiners are very much anti altcoins, and that applies to these big blockers as well, even though they support an altcoin too, because that's what BCash is. BitPay for that reason will not offer support to any other altcoin even though it might give their business a financial boost. A move I could respect if they were on our side. |
|
|
|
For me, even though their signature campaign that recently opens is paying, I won't help them to promote and participate even though I don't have a signature campaign. Unless they resolve and clean their brand name and reputation as well here in the forum.
It's impossible to see an exchange with a highly profitable business model (which is being a shitcoin exchange that doesn't care about anything) suddenly shift to a less profitable business model (which is being an honest and professional exchange that does care). It would cost them a lot of money to provide proper customer support, have high security standards, not listing any shitcoin for the sake of making listing fees, etc. Yobit is banking on the fact that the more reputable exchanges still allowing people to use their platform without KYC are shrinking with the day. People eventually will end up begging Yobit to accept them as user. |
|
|
|
|
Hello, I am the IRS; I do not provide any help when it comes to your tax reports, but when you make a mistake I'll rip your head clean off.
Most of the retailers investing and trading crypto don't have much experience with tax forms and whatnot. This is their first experience with anything related to investments in general. It only makes sense to be a little more lenient here as tax agency. People trying to do the 'good' thing by reporting their gains shouldn't be penalized but helped to correct wrong declarations.
I have zero respect for any tax agency. They expect you to fill their pockets but don't do anything to help you where possible. Get lost you swine!
|
|
|
|
Why does it matter? It's not like cash settled futures affect the spot market; there's no arbitrage mechanism. I don't see anything wrong with people speculating on the price. Surely Bakkt's order books will benefit from such speculators when its markets launch.
I see Bitfinex-style margin as more problematic for the market: you can use cash collateral to short the spot market, or BTC collateral to long. This seems much more influential to price than the CBOE or CME markets.
It matters because these legacy cash settled platforms are gaining more dominance within this space. The CME market is no longer a market you can ignore. It has consistently been delivering super high volumes that have gone through the $1 billion mark more than once, and that's just 8 hours worth of trading. In a space that's getting more and more institutionalized it's only going to gain more dominance. Bitfinex on the other hand isn't that dominant anymore. It has gone backwards after their many fuckups which lead to a massive outflow of capital. Not really something I consider worth following. No institution will send a penny to Bitfinex. |
|
|
|
1 Bitcoin = 100,000,000 satoshis on the main network. 1 Bitcoin = 10,000,000,000,000 satoshis on Lightning (1 main network satoshi = 1000 milli satoshi). There will never be a shortage of satoshi units. There has been an auction last year where an 'art piece' has sold for 1 milli satoshi which back then was worth $0.000000037 in us dollar value. Obviously more of a publicity type of stunt, but it shows how small payments can actually be on Lightning. It's much easier to deal with satoshis rather than 0.0000XBTC. It's only a matter of time before satoshis will become the main unit standard instead of BTC. |
|
|
|
For example many Youtubers I watch now have btc and eth as an option for donation in addition to Paypal and Patreon. It's possible to make a small business selling digital goods and just have them paid for in btc or other crypto. Money goes straight to your wallet, less hassle with the bank and remittance centers.
If you work with Lightning then it's viable, but if you just stick to the main-chain then it might become a bit too expensive, mainly when you sell low value (few dollar range) items. I have seen it myself where someone accumulated plenty of smaller payments, then sent everything in one transaction to an exchange without understanding why the transaction hasn't got a confirmation after nearly a whole day of waiting. It's about time for people to stop complaining and start shifting over to Lightning so that they can have instant and near free transactions. Admittedly, it would be more of a useful option if exchanges started to accept Lightning deposits, but that's only a matter of time in the end. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin can touch $100,000 even in next year, if the bullish trend will continue, but it might take a decade or two before it will sustain $100,000 or higher. We basically need $100k to be a bottom, not top, and it will take many cycles to get there, and then there's no guarantee that these cycles will continue, halvenings will be less important in the future, and the bullishness can't last forever.
True. I have never had a doubt about Bitcoin reaching insane price levels, the problem has always been to maintain them, which Bitcoin historically had a lot of problems with. If things go well, and I mean really well, the next main resistance (after making a new all time high of course) is the $1 trillion market cap, which would bring Bitcoin to ~$55,000. If we can have the bottom to be the $19,500 level which currently is the all time high, that would be an exceptional move. If we can't even do that things will turn ugly real fast. I can see the Gold industry try to prevent it from surpassing the $1 trillion market cap for a while as that would put Gold under pressure. Interesting time that will be. |
|
|
|
Also, merchant adoption is too low right now, and most of the time, you will need to buy gift cards to be able to spend it.
Merchant adoption is low relatively speaking (i.e. comparing it to PayPal, etc). If you look at how little people actually use Bitcoin as a currency, you'll consider its existing merchant adoption to be on the higher side. Too many merchants hope that people will spend their gains at their websites, yet nothing really happens. If you also add that BitPay is being a dick making Bitcoin look bad and expensive as payment option, why would people still use Bitcoin to pay online? If you buy gift cards to "spend Bitcoin", that may be a convenient workaround for some people to convert their profits or earnings, but other than that, it's nothing that adds anything useful over conventional payment options. |
|
|
|
Besides, haven't at least two or three other platforms somehow outdone them and launched cash settled futures earlier?
Both CBOE and CME have indeed been the first to have launched after regulatory approval, but these cash settled futures are a product that belongs in a casino. These futures are backed by hot air. It gives anyone the opportunity to short without actually owning the asset. All you need is cash. Sucks. I'm glad CBOE quit. Bakkt's futures are backed by Bitcoin, which is an important difference. People need to give it some time and not expect them to turn over massive volumes. Is it a sell the news event? Who knows, but I wouldn't want to put it to the test. I'll gladly buy that dip if so. |
|
|
|
In contrast it is very hard to map bank transfers.
For outsiders perhaps, but not for the government or bank itself. I'm pretty sure that they can show us a pretty detailed compilation of all transaction activity we participated in throughout the last years or even decades. They technically can even reverse your transactions from years ago if they so wish. It's a private database. Very transparent to them, but no to us. Only when banks are providing banking services to the underworld they miraculously 'lose' transaction data and whatnot. How surprising. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
