|
I remember that event well, and I even had that picture as an avatar for a while. The man definitely had the courage to do something like that, and obviously it paid off through donations, although it is important to emphasize that he spent most of the 7.03 BTC during 2017, which means that he did not have good timing.
Besides, some say granny Yellen got even more mad at BTC after that, but not everyone can be happy in stories like this, can they?
|
|
|
|
There could also be another hash war and if BlackRock and its cartel of ETF issuers have the same proposal in each of their registration statement, they may have some impact of their own on what's to be considered "The Bitcoin". Because they could follow one fork and threaten to dump the other side of the fork. What if the other side they plan to dump is Bitcoin, BTC?
I understand people who think that the spot BTC ETF should have a positive effect on the price, but apparently there are very few who think at all about the far-reaching consequences when it comes to such big predators as BR or Fidelity. I have never read the requirements for the BTC ETFs in detail, but it would be interesting to find out if any other company had a similar text in its conditions, or is this something that BR did first? There is an old post on Reddit written by admin @theymos 4-5 years ago on the subject of BTC ETF, I have quoted it several times on the forum, and somehow it seems to me that it could be the closest to the truth. Agreed, an ETF will almost certainly turn into a disaster at some point. The coins will be stolen, forks will be handled controversially, there will be issues with fungibility (eg. someone will "trace stolen coins" to the ETF's stash), the world will freak out when a bunch of retirees lose their life savings after doing the equivalent of buying BTC at $20k, etc. etc. It'll also get the sort of people who love regulation more into BTC, which is never good.
But investors want it, so it'll probably happen eventually. In particular, I totally condemn trying to get regulators to interfere in the free market more than they already do by blocking any ETF. (When the SEC was last looking into this, I had actually written a long document that I was going to send to them in order to comment on many technical issues with their proposed Bitcoin ETF regulation, but I decided not to send it because I don't want to have even the slightest hand in regulations.)
An ETF probably will increase the price a lot (until the ETF suffers its near-inevitable catastrophe), which has some pros and cons.
Note that an ETF can't affect Bitcoin itself, just the ETF investors and the market. There is no voting of any sort in Bitcoin, so it's not as if holding a lot of BTC gives you any power over Bitcoin, for example. I do agree with Andreas that the creation of a "corpo-Bitcoin" seems probable, perhaps after the ETF loses a ton of BTC and wants to undo it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153962.0 |
|
|
|
To all those who read my opinions in different topics, you know that I'm cynical towards BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF because of the vague wording used about hard forks in their registration statement.
I found it and read it, and I have to admit that what is written there does not look good at all, because the fact that it is written there may mean that they (BlackRock) actually have the idea to make a fork in the future, and to use their influence and money, of course, to create its centralized version of BTC. I have written in several posts that I think that all these big companies only care about profit and that they don't care what will happen to Bitcoin in the long term. Of course, for some it is not too important in the event that before that those companies create a massive bull run and inflate the price of BTC so that everyone becomes rich - although when I say everyone, it will certainly not be possible, because someone's gain is always someone's loss. |
|
|
|
Does anyone believe the Mt. Gox repayment event may cause a downtrend?
Forget about 69 Billion Japanese yen and $40 million forked coin BCH.
Mt Gox will pay 142000 Bitcoins to creditors around $4.3 billion.
As far as I know, Mt.Gox will not pay everything at once, but in several tranches - and in addition, everyone got the option to choose whether they want to be paid in BTC/BCH or to their bank accounts. I believe that a part of people will prefer to accept payments to their bank accounts, which means that a good part of BTC will be sold by the bankruptcy trustee, and I hope that he has at least some business sense and will do it using OTC. This is another biggest event before the halving.
Some just want to take advantage of the possibility that this will happen, but for me personally it is overblown and according to what I have already written, it should not have too much impact on the price of BTC. Of course, I'm not saying that people won't panic, as with any similar news - but weak hands will always be welcome to fill the bags of those who are just waiting for such opportunities. |
|
|
|
|
Many people use dirty techniques to create the illusion that someone is buying something, but I don't see how to approach such cases and how to prove that they are using alt accounts?
It is especially difficult now that we have a rule that says "Old post: We generally do not moderate posts this old for on-topicness, substantiveness, multi-posting, and other "cleanliness" issues." In addition, except for plagiarism or spreading malware, it is extremely difficult to get a permanent ban on this forum.
There are even weirder techniques that I've seen, which consist of the OP quoting and then responding to posts that are several months or years old, which of course makes no sense and looks very strange - but it definitely saves them time because they don't have to create new alt accounts.
|
|
|
|
If they wrote that BTC is legal tender on the moon, would you still believe them? I don't know how many times I need to write that the CAR gave up on that law, but even if it wasn't, I don't know what the point of Bitcoin is in a country where the majority of the population does not have access to the internet... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5396366.msg61995837#msg61995837The Central African Republic’s parliament has repealed legislation that gave bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies legal tender status. A new law amends an April 2022 statute that proved controversial among the CAR’s partners in the Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa. The CAR legislature adopted the amended law unanimously on March 23. |
|
|
|
Yes, they may change their opinion, and this is the angle that I'm looking at in this topic on the government side, The government may also see a profitable way of taping into Bitcoin, and the government too may change their opinion completely with the way they see Bitcoin today as they say, change is constant.
Profitable in what sense exactly? Is it just taxes or do you think they might start mining BTC? In my opinion, taxes are the only thing they can profit from, because in less than 10 years 99% of all BTC will be mined and only a few will compete for the remaining 1% for the next 100 years. Remember that the government we talk about is run by individuals that have interests, the same as the people who run these private companies. If the government sees these big companies change their perspective on Bitcoin and are filing for Bitcoin ETF, don't you think it might draw the government's attention to find a way to have a review of how things can be sorted out with their stand on Cryptos?
The interest of every sovereign state is to have a strong economy and a strong national currency, and this will certainly not be achieved by doing the same as El Salvador, which does not even have its own national currency. What is important is that Bitcoin does not need to be accepted by a government in a special way in order to be successful in a country. I live in a country where the average politician has no idea what Bitcoin is, there is no special regulation of it, but there are many companies that accept it as a means of payment, and there are laws that regulate the payment of tax on profits from the sale of cryptocurrencies. Honestly, I don't know what my government should do more for Bitcoin, because as I already wrote, the problem is not in most governments, but in people who are waiting for some kind of approval from those same governments to use Bitcoin. Satoshi did not seek permission from governments, banks or private companies to create Bitcoin, and no person should seek the same permission. |
|
|
|
I would never advise investing in the projects you suggested, because completely centralized tokens like the one you mention from one CEX have some value only as long as their company operates stably, and we all know that if nothing else they are deep in the gray zone and under investigations around the world.
By inference, it's clear you're referring to Binance (correct me if I'm wrong). Can't we say CZ has really tried with his exchange so far despite that's a Cex? I mean, since 2017 that Binance came on the scene and was greeted with all that skepticism and criticism but it's still weathering the storm till date. I think we should give to it its flowers. It is more than obvious that I am referring to them, considering that their token is mentioned as something worth investing in long-term - but I have already mentioned that any similar token is stable and has value as long as the company behind it is doing well and has stability. Considering what is happening with that company, shouldn't it be taken into account that their token in x years might not be worth even 50% of what it is worth today, or might not be worth anything? In addition, I would never invest in something backed by a man who publicly says that 99% of people who use cryptocurrencies are incapable of keeping them in a non-custodial wallet and suggests that CEX is a much better option for them. Implying that almost all crypto users are stupid is not something that gives that man a reputation that seems to be considered impeccable by millions of people - but I'm not surprised by that, considering that there are the same people who believed that Bankman is a good, capable and honest man. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Is VPN the temporary solution to the issue ? And those who are using TOR, what are their experience ?
You can't know until you try, because not every VPN is the same, but it seems that some have managed to at least mitigate the problems with VPN. As for Tor, yesterday it still worked to some extent, but today it is completely useless and practically you can't even log in to the forum because you are constantly spinning in a loop of CF captcha and verification. |
|
|
|
~snip~
But there are some solid coins in the top 10 that are good as a long term investments like Bitcoin. It could be Ethereum, BNB, ADA and others, in my opinion.
I would never advise investing in the projects you suggested, because completely centralized tokens like the one you mention from one CEX have some value only as long as their company operates stably, and we all know that if nothing else they are deep in the gray zone and under investigations around the world. Also, another token switched to POS not so long ago, and now they boast that they are carbon neutral, unlike BTC, which uses POW, and at the same time, they cemented such centralization that one of the forum members concluded that they could carry out their entire operation with a couple of computers from someone's basement. Besides, what does top 10 coins even mean? Put that token at 21 million max supply and it won't even be among the top 100 coins - cmc manipulation. |
|
|
|
Gambling is more important for crypto users?
Where did you get this idea from? Gambling is as old as humanity, it is not a cryptocurrency thing. Maybe he got the idea by visiting this board and noticing all those gambling signatures worn by hundreds of members. Accordingly, some may conclude that gambling and cryptocurrencies are deeply connected, even though gambling has existed in various forms for thousands of years. The only difference is that today you can gamble with cryptocurrency or $, and in the past you could win or lose a sheep or a cow in gambling, although I believe that in some parts of the world people still use somewhat strange stakes when gambling  |
|
|
|
Just as the future is uncertain and no one can predict the future, The government may seem aggressive today on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency adoption, and tomorrow change their stand due to high pressure and demands from their citizens to use a technology like Bitcoin in the coming years. If BlackRock CEO criticized Bitcoin in the past and later turns to embrace what he kicked against, the government may do so because the government is run by friends of these individuals or people who own these companies, and they may have influence When it comes to government matters.
It is not at all a problem of the governments of the world, some of which have a negative attitude towards Bitcoin, but it is actually a problem of people who seek approval from their authorities to use Bitcoin. The whole situation is actually paradoxical because one wonders if centralized governments will agree to use decentralized crypto-currency and in that way actually begin to reject the power derived from national currencies. BlackRock is a private company that at the moment thinks that it can make a profit with the help of Bitocin, and in a year they can change their opinion completely.What does that have to do with any government that should do exactly what? El Salvador is a leading example of government in the front run of Bitcoins adoption and when more countries' governments follow suit in the race, other ones will not want to be left behind, they too will join the queue.
El Salvador is an example of a country that found itself in a situation where it had to abandon its national currency and has been using another country's currency for more than 20 years, and Bitcoin was not something that got them out of the crisis in any way, but only gave them a lot of media attention. |
|
|
|
BREAKING: $800 billion Standard Chartered Bank now forecasting $120,000 #Bitcoin price by 2024
~snip~
You don't need to have $800 billion or be a banker for such speculation - everyone who knows how to use their own brain assumes that the next ATH will be at least x2 of the previous one, which means that we hope that the price will reach at least $140 000. |
|
|
|
A friend of mine recently complain to me about how he loses thousands of dollars to crypto after invest in a token. He now said he is quiting crypto and now comparing crypto investing to that of gambling.
~snip~
What is perhaps the most important thing in this story is that you cannot lose thousands of $ if you do not have them, and your friend, like many others, obviously does not have this problem. I have met many people who wanted to invest in cryptocurrencies, but luckily for them they never had enough money for a serious investment, and considering all the projects they had in mind that failed, everything turned out great for them. What I want to say is that some people learn the easy way, and some the hard way, and some people are just lucky at a certain moment and don't make a wrong step. Those who are aware of the risks of such investments should warn others whenever possible, and sometimes even banks that block clients from investing in cryptocurrencies make sense, because they actually save many naive clients from losing their money. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Biden is extremely unpopular even within his party, so it's a perfect time for a challenger like Kennedy. It'll be extremely difficult for him to win the nomination due to the mainstream media and the pro-establishment Democrats doing everything possible to discredit him.
Considering that RFK Jr. is a Catholic who also practices his religion without hiding it, I have no doubt that it will be very difficult for him to get the kind of support that Biden, who is also a Catholic, got before him. In addition, if I'm not mistaken, before Biden, only one US president was of the Roman Catholic faith, and that was JFK, who bothered them so much that they ended up liquidating him. If it is true that the Democrats have so far only three candidates, somehow it does not seem to me that Biden has a chance for a second term, and frankly, I have never even heard of Marianne Williamson. However, no matter who the next US president is, it somehow does not seem to me that we can expect any big changes when it comes to Bitcoin - because politicians change, but politics is more or less the same. |
|
|
|
|
@ETFbitcoin, I confirm that it no longer works, it was apparently only a temporary solution. I hope we will soon find out what is happening...
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see why that would be news at all, although I guess it's because someone's last name is Kennedy, so I guess it should be associated with the glory days of that family, and especially the fact that he's the nephew of one of the most famous presidents (JFK).
I will not say that the man does not have an impressive career and that he is one of the more famous activists and lawyers who fight for the environment and ordinary people, but if he has a few BTC in his possession it is really not an important thing. Will it be news if we find out for a while that he sold BTC?
|
|
|
|
|
Something is definitely going on, but I can't tell if it's Cloudflare or BTT hosting server or maybe a combination of both. For those who use Tor, there seems to be a way around Cloudflare check when it happens, and all you have to do is select the "New Tor circuit for this site" option. The page then loads normally (currently works for me).
|
|
|
|
You are surely referring to the private keys and seeds in the part of your post that I bolded.
~snip~
I speak generally in the context of trust in a company that behaves irresponsibly and thus endangers the security of its customers and their data. Unfortunately, we can not forget "recovery" because it is the key part that shows that their devices may have been able to "share information" all the time, but only now they have decided to admit it and charge for it. Let's think for a moment what else is valuable in the Ledger database, say our IP addresses with all the logs and total amounts that we keep on these devices - because when you use their HW and Ledger Live you actually connect to their servers and share everything with them. I'm sure there are those who would find this information very interesting. |
|
|
|
I think the most coolest & Bitcoin-friendly countries should be "El-Salvador" & "Central African Republic" simply because in those areas Bitcoin is fully legalized as legal tender and as such could be easily accessible by citizens without stress.
You still haven't found out that Bitcoin is no longer "legal" in CAR? Even when it was official, what do you think it looked like in real life, most people don't even have the internet, let alone know what Bitcoin is?
~snip~
However, Malta, Slovenia, Portugal, Germany and Croatia are excellent countries for Europeans when it comes to crypto taxation. Bulgaria and Estonia also benefit from pretty low taxes. France should be avoided, as should Italy and Austria, for example.
Considering that I am a resident of one of the listed countries, I can say that i really have no objections regarding taxes because it is possible to pay 0% tax if a certain condition is met (sale 1 or 2 years after the investment). As for other things, I can say that there are no bans on using BTC and other cryptocurrencies as a payment method, and many are adding this option to their online stores using payment processors that of course protect them from the volatility of cryptocurrencies. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
