Bearish, correction, manipulation all of that is very normal in crypto. In investment it pretty normal and we can't expect to see green candle every single day. If you scared with market correction i suggest you just DCA your fav coin.

I have different vision. I think that NFT hype is over. Like every hype in crypto industry - it lasts for a year, maybe a bit longer maximum. Why do you think that hype isnt over? I see no loud articles in media about NFT, I see no scandals or scams connected with NFTs. People tried to restart NFT hype, when we had news that NFT now are on Bitcoin blockchain. This fact indeed worried a lot of people, as it made blockchain transactions cost more, but right now, one or two month has already passed and only few people remember about it.

The problem of NFTs was that it is easy to buy it, but it is hard to find a buyer. Now people have bought NFTs, and dont know how to sell it. They froze their money and have to wait and observe how values of their NFT go down (and yes, NFT prices went down heavily) or how inflation slowly kills their investment.

Payment processed.

what important is not popularity, its whether the reserved funds of tether as a company matched with their total supply, we all know stablecoin backed by something in retaining its value and if it didn't match it only means one thing, a disaster.

Well if you think Web3 games are going to be big, than I think it is still good to invest in Solana. It has launched Gameshift to make it easier for Web3 game development.

https://gameshift.solanalabs.com/

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/solana-labs-introduces-gameshift-to-simplify-web3-game-production-301880066.html

The difference that makes Bitcoin and this different from each other is decentralization. Everything that involves the government is totally centralized and they do it because they want control over everyone. As long as you are using services that are provided by the government, they are in control of your personal life. Bitcoin put all of that control shit in the trash. And that's the beauty of Bitcoin. No one will have control over your things. You are the owner of your stuff.

Even if we talk this and that about Bitcoin and govt. services, it will always depend on personal preferences. Those who know about Bitcoin and what it could do, also who are concerned about their privacy. They will use Bitcoin for sure. I have never heard of anyone who knows in depth about Bitcoin not using it. Those who are ignorant or don't know about Bitcoin and have no concern about their privacy will have no problem using government-issued services. This is all about knowing. If you have enough knowledge about bitcoin, you won't ask this question in the first place.

Altcoins are a good example of how easily you can fool an investor when presented with a bitcoin-like concept that is a complete vaporware in reality. We dont see much of the newly launched altcoins make any headlines after a couple of years - if you look deeply in the net you will find that they have been on a ghosting mode or making up shit excuses and delaying stuff, in reality they have gone bankrupt and have abandoned the project.

What matters is the lesson learnt from them. Give at least two years to any altcoin project before making your move on it - remember that your money is hard earned.

I feel is too late to back up a currency like the dollar, because to make from that a reality they would have to first pay the Debt they have, and that amount is a joke. We are talking about a $101,515,840,000,000 dollars. And how can you back up a currency with an astronomical debt like that, Is just impossible. And that debt will stay there forever, it will only grow up because the debt is the perfect tool to make from money an infinite element. And the reality is that the world doesn't have the balls to make them pay that debt. So, it's easy for them to increase it each year.

Great news indeed!

But linking bitcoin with fiat, would this be a strong selling point for the USA citizenry to vote for him

By the way, all things considered this is a big gamble , especially that BRICS is equally speaking the same language when it comes to crypto and the alike , and now the USA wants to take this route when Robert F. Kennedy Jr wins...something not adding up, or is it a technological war in the making as they fight for supremacy.

But since the lawsuit with the SEC has been resolved, I don't believe that there's any major reason to worry at the moment. Although BNB's price has yet to recover to pre-lawsuit levels, it's still not that low to raise any major concerns. On the contrary, it might be a decent opportunity to acquire it now that it's more affordable. I've already bought some, hoping that I don't regret it in the future; however, it's very unlikely for BNB to crash, especially after a resolution is found, because that would cause a chain reaction to other altcoins and ultimately to Bitcoin, due to the excessive trading volume Binance has.

I disagree that there is no such thing as a donation. I am sure in the years of 2008-2012 people who held Bitcoin may have had the idea that by destroying supply in some way, would positively contribute to the economics of Bitcoin due to reducing the supply. These actions would be considered donations to the network. It's very unlikely that this still happens with similar amounts. Maybe similar things happen today, though it just seems less likely due to value difference at that point until now.

Those who irresponsibly held their coins and then lost access to them did not voluntarily donate to the network like the above, rather their own actions and unfortunate circumstances led to an involuntary donation to the network, as their loss becomes beneficial to the economics of Bitcoin (again, less supply).

I agree that bruteforcing is unlikely to ever be successful and if it ever is near, a patch will be implemented prior to it being deployed against Bitcoin....I hope.

Current my transaction few days later when claiming coins with ERC20 network, spent almost $20 with $8 fees for claiming and left $2 for sending coins, in my wallet still left 10$ and I filled huge amount for protecting with gas transaction up and down drastically. ERC20 network have higher gas fees for transaction, we need spent more than fees to anticipation if transaction failed and we still have enough fund for sending coins.

Today have many option for lower fees transaction because all network have tried with lower fees from Solana, Matic, and BSC, but many coins dominance by using ERC20 network and we need have much fees for sending than other network needed under $1 will be success sent coin or claiming coins from pre sale.

Bitcoin might be decentralized but people are not decentralized unless they renounce their usa citizenship. They still have to pay taxes. Still are accountable for how they use bitcoin. Right now the government doesn't really demand to know the identities of everyone they transact with and for what purposes but they could. And people would have to comply with that. So it's just an illusion that bitcoin really gives anyone any control. The government is the one in control in any event. No matter if they use bitcoin or just traditional fiat. But enjoy the illusion, is what I say! 

The reason binance included Pepe and Sfloki is of course because the coins are hype with very large volumes. that would be a huge boon for Binance. CZ himself also warned that meme coins would be very risky, but in fact he made a lot of profit even if meme coins went up or down. Those who enter into meme coins are of course with the aim of getting big returns faster. But they were wrong to have started with a price that was too high, this is because the FOMO that kept happening made everyone start to be interested in entering.

Yeah...in the beginning the development was sketchy.  They certainly took advantage of NFT hype and got out ahead of their skies.  They have several years worth of development under their belt now and have a whole new team, including Chris Clay, former Game Director for MTG: Arena. The difference between a game like Hearthstone and a game like Gods Unchained is the NFT, true ownership of game assets secured by a blockchain. In Hearthstone, the platform controls the cards....In Gods Unchained, the user owns the cards, and they can trade them on the decentralized markets, permissionlessly.

I'm not trying to endorse Gods Unchained, it's just an example of a usecase for NFTs other than goofy ape jpegs and pfps.  It's also a good example of how the various layers of abstraction add utility to the NFTs, while maintaining the same level of security, without bloating the main blockchain. Anyway, I'm just saying....I don't think NFTs are going away --> they're just becoming more utilitarian.  It's exciting stuff.

It it wise to avoid tron without any future expectations. Cause it doesn’t have fuel to fly like doge or ada. When tron launched, people liked it a lot as it offered something that was need in that time but now a lots of coin have come in crypto market as tron's compitator and those are far better. Even more altcoins will come in future with more update but tron still standing where it was in past. So try to analysis with other potential altcoins

FedNow advances modernizing the American banking sector. This long-awaited move could alter company practices. This strategy has several advantages, including instant money. Comparing this to Bitcoin may be apples and oranges. They have various purposes and ideas. FedNow wants to simplify banking transactions, but Bitcoin provides privacy, security, and freedom from central authority. FedNow lets you send money worldwide, but Bitcoin may be better if you want to keep your finances private or avoid fiat currency instability

Small circulating supply profits a project that's why Bitcoin has only 21 million supply and the price is around $30k because of the low supply and we have other projects benefiting from the low supply and we can see their price high which is why other projects with high supply like BNB is burning their supply so they can reduced their circulating supply to attract more investors.
If a coin like Dogecoin had a small circulating supply it would had been worth more than $100 because of the hype the project has but because it doesn't have a maximum supply, it'll be very difficult for the coin to pass $1. Other project like Shiba Inu will take forever because of the trillions of supply the coin has. Large communication also is important for a project success.
We have many things that contribute to the success of a project and having limited supply is one of them then we have the community support and the marketing of the project. Many projects aren't worth what they're valued but because of their marketing they're among the top projects. So a token having just small circulating supply doesn't mean it's a good project to invest into.

Lots of stuff that affects the price of bitcoin, the ones at circulation are just a factor of it. If it were to be discovered and returned into circulation, depending on if it were to be sold outrightly, or if it were to be sold to be traded yields two different outcomes. The former causing the price to go down cause it depreciates the value of bitcoin by dumping some of it especially if it's a substantial amount, but the latter wouldn't do much cause at the end of the day, nothing of value is lost.

I would argue that the recovery of lost bitcoins would even be great for bitcoin cause at the end of the day, that's more bitcoin that would be in circulation with more people being able to buy and use it, so whether they sell it or not, the price change will be temporary, but the benefits will stay with us until bitcoin's gone.

US Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announces plan to back the US dollar with Bitcoin. Do your think it is a good idea?
source: https://www.thestreet.com/cryptocurrency/rfk-jr-announces-plan-to-back-dollar-with-bitcoin-end-bitcoin-taxes