Yes i think it is the perfect time because who knows how much it is going to rise up and what if it is $4k this week and like $10k next month 5then the people who did not believe will regret that
they selled it and the people who bought it will have profit.
Absolutely perfect to buy now because with the passage of time the value will increase not decrease. I suggest that 4500$ would also be perfect for buying bitcoin because the price is expecting very high in 2018. So I think in the range of 4000-5000 it is good time to buy. People are of the view that the price will go down from 4000$ but they are in sweet dream and it is not expected in the history of bitcoin. Most traders are pointing at $4100 as the key moment. Whatever happens before $4100 is pretty much irrelevant. Honestly im feeling pretty nervous about the current situation, it is a coin flip really. It's going to be 50/50. It either breaks $4100 and we go to the moon or we crash pretty badly. I chose to believe we will break $4100 because we are making progress, we were flirting with $3400 a couple of days ago which is the last resistance before we descent into hell, so we are just $150 away from our goal, let's keep pushing. |
|
|
|
Well bitcoin is struggling to break $3900, let alone $4000 or $4100.
I think there are still traders with cash sitting on the sidelines waiting for september 30th, before they make their move.
Regarding the Chinese exchanges - do any users have information of what exactly is going on - have people managed to successfully withdraw their coins or fiat, for example?
We are sitting around $3936 right now, I don't see the drama of it struggling to get past $4000. Round figures always take a couple of tries and this could be the one that's needed to break it. China doesn't need to be active for us to get back to an ATH. And that these hoping to see the US-North Korea problem escalate to see higher prices... well think again. I don't want to see nuclear war in order to get rich, because what's the point? If you get rich in a world that has become a disaster, you will not be able to enjoy your wealth. We need to hit $100,000 without any major wars happening. |
|
|
|
BTC has no role to play in the real world affairs. People who try to create such a role are confused between asset and currency. The design itself only considers pure virtual activity with no touch with real world. People also mistake the buzz words such as "peer-to-peer", "border-less", "decentralised" etc as the problems to be solved. But sadly these are not real problems. The insignificant problems (speed and fees) are hardly enough to sell and these problems are going away anyway. I have no respect to Nakamoto because he ignored the most important element (govt and authorities) in social situation and still want to sell it as some solution to social situations. Hardly any country has regulatory framework that deals with btc.
The problems are rooted in the philosophy of crypto, not in the code. So, the beauty of blockchain tech is irrelevant for btc. It is like selling a bad app by showing how great Android is.
1) Bitcoin does not provide controlled visibility, because it doesn't recognise the existence of governments. Now if you make changes to provide visibility to authorities, ALL privacy is gone. If you don't, then ALL visibility is gone.
2) Fees are rooted in the design. Whatever consensus you invent for a public blockchain, you can't escape rewarding the work of validating transactions. So zero fees are not possible.
Public blockchains sacrifice all good qualities of a business application for the sake of trust-less environment which is not even actually a problem to solve in many contexts. Also they make it extremely costly to run small amount of code or small storage. Who wants their business code to be validated by all arbitrary people in the world?
Most ICOs are sharing economy concepts similar to uber model. Lack of a responsible intermediary and costs will make these "innovations" to fail, if they ever have to touch real-world activities.
Bulk of the blockchain activity will move to business collaborations which might not even look like a blockchain. Crypto coins will be used in most business blockchains, but these coins will be value-less tokens and very specific to the business or institutional activity.
People are saving their ass in places like Venezuela thanks to bitcoin allowing them to receive payments from all around the world. They can also sell good and services in the dark market. Your fatal flaw is that you are assuming all governments in the world are "good" like on developed countries. Well guess what, a lot of people's life depend on censorship resistant tools such as BTC and Tor to survive, so stop selling this narrative of it having no impact on "the real world" be cause "the real world" includes the endless amounts of corrupt governments out there. Eventually all countries will end up like Venezuela due hyperinflation due the fiat system scam and you will be sorry of your words while BTC holders become rich. |
|
|
|
Hello, dear guru. I'm new to investing in the crypt, but I already have experience in investing in bitcoin and ether. But I have a question about ICO? Guys, why is this all? What should I expect from an investor buying these tokens? And why do you buy these tokens? If you buy?  People are buying a ton of different ICO's because some of them go to the moon and deliver insane gains, but of course, you might as well buy lottery tickets because at this poin, with so many ICOs and so many scams, buying the right one that moons is increasingly unlikely. But unlike lottery, with ICO's you can do research and know what you are buying, so if you do enough research, you may find the next (rare) project that actually brings value to the table and pumps nicely for a reason. This is what value investing is. Most of the work is done on the research of the endless projects out there, not trading. |
|
|
|
speed of technological development
We do in terms of _real_ technological development, but not fake marketing crap... and not at the expense of stability and security. Compare, Bitcoin moving to innovative second generation error protected addresses w/ BIP173 vs ethereum still behind bitcoin 0.1 without a strong safe to use address system. Or ethereum validation being so slow that its impractical to sync-up a full node anymore, pushing almost all eth users onto SPV-like security for their initial sync, while Bitcoin sync tx/s speed is orders of magnitude faster and keeps getting faster. Oh man I remember when I tried to set a full Ethereum node last year. It was an absolute mess. Apparently there is a part of the blockchain that got spammed into oblivion with some sort of attack and now that part is pretty much impossible to download. My computer was going into overdrive trying to process that part. It would have taken ages, so now they recommend that you skip that part. So I gave up and used Parity instead, only to find out later on that it got some massive security bugs. Trying to use Ethereum as a store of value is indeed an act of insanity. |
|
|
|
Could someone explain to me how the 2X drama is likely to play out in November?
I know core are against it and some who signed up to the NYA have pulled out but there is still 94% support (signaling) of miners.
Ver and Wu are in the bcash camp or do they want 2x also ?
Whats likly to happen in the weeks/days leading up to the split and wont core need a significant percentage of miners on their side?
https://coin.dance/blocksHere is the ultimate proof that the current 94% signaling is nonsense. Look at the current miners signaling for segwit2x and you will find F2pool. Well here is the actual stance of FP2pool with segwit2x: https://twitter.com/f2pool_wangchun/status/906022864389681153So basically he hasn't stopped signaling because he is too lazy to do the whole reset thing, but once the time arrives, he will not send hashrate to scam2x even if it currently shows up on that list. So stop thinking 94% of hashrate will signal for it. |
|
|
|
Go back and watch that Elliot Wave analysis again.
Did you watch it? Because the dude doesn't say it's going to $200 prior to $20k as you stated, he says the correction is nearly complete for this leg, and it could then go to $79k before a much deeper correction. "Seven to Nine Thousand", not $79k. Have a look at the scale. He also clarifies it later on on the logarithmic scale. He expects it to go to $7000 to $9000 for the final wave, then correct in a 2 wave retrace to retest the start of wave 5 (which would be the $180 level) before leaving this entire range for good.  This is so dumb. Bitcoin is not going to be 3 figures ever again, because if it does it would be over. Bitcoin is supposed to grow similar to BRK-A, in other words, making new floors, and these floors are not to be crossed ever again. This is called progress.  This is what will happen in the long term. A retrace from $7000 to $180 is ridiculous. It would need to be due a fatal bug discovered or something almost impossible. Not even the hardforking idiots with their BCash and segwit2x garbage would cause that much damage to the price. Im expecting the price to break into ATH when we get past $4100's nearest resistance, then sky is indeed the limit. |
|
|
|
|
The technical analysis sustained by most professional traders on bitcoin right now is that it was key to stay above the $3400 latest bottom as the closest resistance we had, because below that it was descent into hell. We were able to stay above that and don't cross the 300 day moving average which would have been very bad, through the weekend, and now that the market started becoming active with the start of the week, we are seeing massive bull pressure to break the $4100 key point. So keep an eye on that number if we cross it, get ready for another re-test of an all time high possible as soon as this week, which with due traction, could lead us to $6000 pretty easily.
|
|
|
|
I arrived here in the times of 0.7 and I just realized we are back to 0.15. Why is this? I guess the number of the version went back to 0.1 when Bitcoin-QT was renamed to Bitcoin Core? but why would you change the number of the version? Well I guess it makes sense because we were getting way too close to 1.0 and we are obvious years away from calling the client "final version" (is it even possible to call it final version ever? It will always keep improving I presume) Edit: Oh wait I just realized this: https://bitcoin.org/en/version-historyIt looks like the number just keeps increasing. It's confusing because 0.9 looks closer to 1.0 than 0.15 to me. The version number was not reset to 0.1. It kept increasing. After 0.9 was 0.10, then 0.11, etc. Notice how there is no dot (.) between the numbers. It is a higher number. It is highly unlikely that there will ever be a 1.0 release because that would indicate some level of finality, and we don't want that nor can we agree at what point should there be a 1.0 release. Right now it seems that we might just keep incrementing that middle number to infinity. I am in favor of just dropping the 0. in front of the version number or changing our version number scheme to the one used by Ubuntu (2-digit year followed by 2-digit month for the year and month that the release was made). I understand the never-release-1.0 thing but isnt software made to be always evolving? There is never a final release of a software just because it is 1.0 I mean you can have 1.1 , 1.11 and so and so.. You can. Satoshi wanted to go to 1.3 in 2010 - from 0.3 edit: Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=217.0Im not sure if caling Bitcoin 1.3 would be a good idea. 1.0 means usually "final version". If you add additional numbers behind 1.x, that x just means patches that fixes bugs but the final design is already there. Maybe Satoshi wanted to call it 1.x+ because he wanted Bitcoin to stay as it was for life and additional changes would be just that, bug fixes over the same design (which would mean no blocksize increases btw). Well we will never know what Satoshi exactly wanted, what matters is now and I think 1.x sounds too much like "final version" to me so we might as well keep increasing the 0.x number into infinity. |
|
|
|
Currently worth $70 Bn, Is this a lot?
Personally it seems quite a lot for a fairly untested currency.
US gold reserves currently worth something like $300Bn, the largest in the world (though it's no clear if anyones checked its there). All this is less than a company like Google but still $70Bn is a lot of money.
For the bitcoin price to rise a lot of money would have to flow in. Right now it seems like every grandma and her dog is being persuaded onto the bitcoin bandwagon. Is this not a sign of an impending crash, in which those at the bottom of the pyramid get burned? Is the bitcoin rise sustainable? Where will the money be flowing in from? Will shops have to start selling bitcoin investment scratch cards over the counter to keep the price rising?
I'm keen to head from people who can make arguments based on fundamental economic principles, either way.
Theres no limit to the marketcap of bitcoin and you must understand about that will never have a limit. Imagine all of the people around the world are using bitcoin. There is not limit to the price of bitcoin as the stable currency like usdt. bitcoin is possible to growth 10k dollar or even 100k dollar for each bitcoin. Well the theoretical limit is the amount of wealth everywhere but bitcoin in the world, which is tons of trillions, so yes, Bitcoin is a tiny dot in a sea of potential wealth that can come in in various forms, be precious metals like gold and silver, stocks, bonds, commodities and all kinds of assets. BTC could be worth millions of dollars if people diversified small %'s of each of their holdings on their portfolios into BTC. This should explain it better than any words (just consider BTC is not 70 billion and not 5, but like you see, it's still nothing, we are early adopters)  |
|
|
|
Thank you  I suppose it's better than nothing. Still not the 0.1.5 version I was looking for  0.1.5 is not the very first release. 0.1.0 is, and 0.1.3 was released shortly after 0.1.0. There is almost no difference between 0.1.0, 0.1.3, and 0.1.5. Why do you want specifically 0.1.5? I arrived here in the times of 0.7 and I just realized we are back to 0.15. Why is this? I guess the number of the version went back to 0.1 when Bitcoin-QT was renamed to Bitcoin Core? but why would you change the number of the version? Well I guess it makes sense because we were getting way too close to 1.0 and we are obvious years away from calling the client "final version" (is it even possible to call it final version ever? It will always keep improving I presume) Edit: Oh wait I just realized this: https://bitcoin.org/en/version-historyIt looks like the number just keeps increasing. It's confusing because 0.9 looks closer to 1.0 than 0.15 to me. |
|
|
|
|
There are now a lot of big names that have said there will not be a Chinese ban on mining, including Charlie Lee, John McAfee, Jihad Wu amongst others, so I wouldn't expect an actual ban anytime soon, but remember that if the bans happens, there's no reason to panic, it's obvious that we can survive with a lot less hashrate, believe it or not bitcoin is overprotected at this point, so if we lose the weight on our shoulders that the chinese monopoly is, it will be positive contrary to popular belief.
|
|
|
|
As of right now, Binance has international customers doing most of the trading. The chinese can just go to Macau or Hong Kong and they will be able to trade. The ban is a region ban I think and not the accounts itself.
I know for a fact that a lot of the Chinese traders are getting back into the market by using VPNs. I've seen leaked paperwork by the chinese government claiming they will try to crackdown on VPNs too, but this is delusional. There are new VPN providers pretty much daily. They would need endless resources to try to stop it. It's going to be pretty much impossible for them to stop it. Oh and decentralized exchanges are definitely coming. the first atomic swaps are happening, this will change the game, it will be a mess for authorities trying to stop the free flow between cryptos. |
|
|
|
Well i just got tired trading usdt-btc only so i thought i should put my whole investment in bcc, at 0.123 price(stupid move, but hey, i'm a rookie), and thought i should sell it at 0.127 bcc, then sell all my btc at 4100 again. But this little crash made me realize that i have done a stupid move  , and also the fact that i bought the BCC HIGH. I guess i didn't spent enough time thinking about it. Are you referring to bitcoincash (BCH) or bitconnect (BCC)? I am expecting Bitcoincash to be pumped in November to coincide with the probability of bitcoin forking again. (The people behind bitcoincash want their coin to be the main coin, and November is their best opportunity). BitcoinCrash will crash as its name implies, as soon as it gets pumped, a there are millions of wallets full of BCash out there waiting to be dumped at a good price. That is what happens with every bitcoin fork, you are at constant risk of getting dumped because all these coins got distributed for free, so there's a constant bear pressure. I wouldn't count on BitcoinCrash to perform anything more than a quick pump and dump. Segwit2x is a disaster and I hope everyone involves pays for it. |
|
|
|
This is the worst disaster for bitcoin, when the price is skyrocketing but china confirm will close the exchanges of course have big impact so the price is hard to reach $ 5000, hope this soon finish.
Dude you should stick to football. It has been confirmed alreay that they will close the exchanges on september 30th, the negative news are already priced within the last dip we saw, now the only way is up. We are recovering and we are only $200 dollars alway from bitcoin hitting $4000, and once we get past that, we will get an ATH short thereafter. There are trillions of dollars out there outside china, stop worrying. |
|
|
|
Let them close exchanges. Closing down exchanges wont' stop bitcoin nor the blockchain by any means. The free market will always come out on top and find new solutions to the problems. Maybe this will start to stimulate decentralized exchanges.
Governments can try to create liquidity problems by getting rid of all the big exchanges. If they get rid of Coinbase, Bitstamp, Bitfinex etc, the crash would be pretty bad, but in the long run OTC would make bitcoin go ATH eventually, then governments would commit suicide since they realized they did a big mistake in fighting Bitcoin instead of adapting to it. |
|
|
|
BTCC will be no more on September 30th. How do you see this effecting the price?
What is BTCC? are you talking about Bitcoin Cash? Im getting really confused at the people that talk about Bitcoin Cash in numerous different tags for the token. I have heard BCC, which also means BitConnect (same token), I have hear BCH, and I have heard BCS. This shows the lack of coordination and general mess that a hardfork can generate. The price of BCash will keep dumping. Any rises are artificial, there's no demand for it, look at the blocks. |
|
|
|
Lol this guy.
Just two days ago he was tweeting that he heard from "trusted sources" that this was just the beginning of the China ban and that things would get much worse from here.
I think we found one of these whales he's talking about...
It doesn't matter though, even if China wasn't planning to ban Bitcoin initially, you can bet your life that they got wind of the influence Bitcoin has with all this drama and they want nothing of it.
So bans ARE in the works, and not only in China, the only thing allowed to be in control and set strict rules are the Governments and banks in these countries, and they are big in numbers.
My prediction is that within a 2-5 year time frame Bitcoin will be illegal in 99% of the worlds countries and only be allowed in Antarctica or some other place where nobody actually lives or does anything with it.
You have to be really naive to think the 0.1% of people holding 99.99% of the worlds wealth will give that up for a silly monopoly money computer program.
Well, and he was right wasn't he? Charlie Lee got accused of being a FUDster himself when he claimed that China was going to ban exchanges. He said he could trust his sources. Turns out hours later, the ban indeed came: Charlie Lee was right. And he is probably right again. There will be no chinese mining ban, and if there is, it's bullish for Bitcoin anyway. Also in no moment in history have all governments agreed to do something. They will not agree to ban Bitcoin, there will always be places where it isn't banned (other than Antarctica) |
|
|
|
Bitcoins Intention was to brake the banks dictatorship. As we can see, nothing changed with bitcoin. Instead of banks, now whales dominate everything, manipulate and steal.
Wrong. Bitcoin was all about putting fair rules for everyone, and the rules are fair and clean, open source, there are no lies within the protocol. You can never stop whales from forming and you can never stop them from telling lines. If you are stupid enough to fall for the FUD and sell and lose your BTC then that is your problem, not anyone's else or BTC's problem itself. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
