Physical space for holding money is not precious, it's absolutely not a problem, unless you're a Walter White.


And online banks are available 24/7 too. Or PayPal. ATMs too.


"Memes and GIF games (idk what's a GIF game" are not a good argument for finance. Actually makes it sound like a scam. And just because people have an intention of making a better financial system doesn't mean that it is already better.


Bitcoin network doesn't have intermediaries, but its ecosystem does. So if you're using centralized exchanges or a merchant is using a payment processor that convetrs BTC to fiat, there will still be fees.

And as for fighting government corruption, it's still just a theory. There's no succesful cases in the world where a government adopted Bitcoin and it helped solve corruption.

Ukraine holds only $1.5B in gold, the rest is cash and other assets. And it can be held in many places, including Western countries. Plus there were preparations before Feb 24, lots of valuable stuff was moved out of Kyiv, like government servers and documents.

Putin attacked Kyiv because capturing the capital is always one of the biggest strategic goals of any war. There's no economic justification here, the costs of waging war, the effects of sanctions are orders of magnitude higher than any potential spoils of war. This war has ideological roots, no the economic ones.

Sadly, those whom such warnings concern don't listen to them. The #1 reason why people lose in trading is because they believe they are special, gifted, have talent for trading, have luck and so on. Typically it happens when they make some money in a bull market, simply because all coins are growing. Then the bear market comes and instead of cashing out they double down on looking for profit to compensate for some unrealized gains, and in the process they lose everything.

There's a good amount of short-term correlation between Bitcoin and mainstream economy, but it's not strong enough to cause a 50% drop. The last time when something like that happened was when the initial COVID-19 restrictions were announced and Bitcoin suffered a 50% crash in almost a day. This Fed announcement won't have such effect, as it is more predictable and not as dramatic for the economy. Also, when that covid-related crash happened, Bitcoin very quickly recovered and a year later it entered a huge bull run. So don't think that a crash is the end of the world.

Centralized exchanges are a part of Bitcoin ecosystem, and when people say "Bitcoin" they often mean the whole ecosystem. It's okay to not care what governments and other big players think. But for those who are interested in Bitcoin's price performance and wide adoption, those things are important.

I can't judge how accurate this report is, but such public perceptions is quite damaging to Bitcoin's long-term adoption. Governments and investors with more conservative approach are not trusting Bitcoin, so it's hard for Bitcoin to become a truly mainstream asset, instead of being controversial.

Nothing can stop you from creating an NFT, because it's a token that exists on decentralized blockchain. But your NFT might get removed from sites that list them, because those are centralized. And the author of the original work could sue you, and then it will be up to the court to decide if that's plagiarism or not, and I'm sure that in many jurisdictions you would lose such case, because you clearly profited from using someone's work without permission if you sell such NFT.

The West is not pretending anything, Taliban is under sanctions, they can't access previous Afghan government's financial reserves and so on. They just realized that Afghanistan is a lost cause.


Afghanistan doesn't have one ethnicity, instead it has many tribes, and they even speak different languages. They didn't understand why should they live under one single country and government. And a lot of them didn't care if Taliban returned or not, plus the government was very corrupt and weak. So the moment the US soldiers left, it all collapsed. It was impossible to build not only democracy, but any state at all in such conditions. I think it's a valuable lesson for humanity, as it shows that for social change to happen, certain conditions must be met.

Who cares? 4,000 is not a bit amount for this market. Worst case scenario the coins get dumped and cause some temporary downside. In the grand scheme of things its irrelevant. These coin movements happen all the time.

Tracking whale transactions only makes sense if you are a day trader, and even then it's not as simple as seeing such transaction and immediately knowing how it would affect the market.

Cryptocurrency is a decentralized currency, DeFi is an application built around this decentralized currency. Many DeFi projects are created on Ethereum smart contracts and they can have tokens on this platform. DeFi claims to be an alternative to what they call "traditional finance" or "centralized finance", but this is far from truth, because DeFi is very limited, it provides very small list of financial instruments. For example, there are decentralized loans, but you need to provide a huge collateral, which lowers the utility of such instrument, because why would you need to borrow money if you already have them?

Can't spell "Taliban" without "ban" 

Jokes aside, it's not surprising that a country with crumbling economy and religious fundamentalist government would ban crypto, these types of people see freedom as a threat to their rule. The good news is that Bitcoin was created to operate in any conditions, including under threats from government, so its users in Afghanistan will still have access to it, they just need to be extra careful to not get caught.

Usually "resistance" means resisting the growth, and "support" means not letting it fall below certain level. So while saying that Bitcoin is resisting the fall is correct, it sounds weird to people who used to understand resistance as "opposition to growth".

The $20k support is holding well for now, it's clear that there are groups who are interested in defending this important psychological level, but only time will tell if they will fully succeed or not. I wouldn't bet that this is the bottom of the bear market yet.

Bitcoin always used mainstream tried and tested cryptographic standards that are used by everyone else, so I assume it would be the case with quantum-resistant cryptography too. If there will be multiple options, the devs would choose the one that suits Bitcoin's needs best - smaller signature size, faster verification speed, etc.

In crypto marketcap is not as meaningful as in stock market. Tokens get printed out of thin air, then the volumes are pumped by fake trades on unregulated exchanges, and it creates an illusion that a coin is doing well, that it's the next big thing and a potential Bitcoin killer. All while it has no actual uses and users, its code is not properly reviewed and developers are just chasing hype with their new features. That's how we end up with coins like Terra Luna that inevitably collapse and defraud investors.

Bitcoin does not need smart contracts and tokens because the world does not need them.

If you have income that is high enough to allow you to settle your debt in the near future, then you might be able to afford a Bitcoin investment. Just keep in mind that your investment could go down and further strain your financial situation and it could takes for it to recover and turn profitable. What would you do in such scenario? Because you shouldn't invest in Bitcoin or any asset if you are not prepared for the worst.

On one hand its their own fault that they set their expectations too high and the reality proved different from them, on the other hand if crypto disappoints people, it would mean lower interest and probably further disappointment as the result. Crypto is very sensitive to public perception and hype, so this pessimism could be pretty bad for the market.

No way this is going to happen, the world, including the West is currently in crisis, why would their governments do something so risky? To move to a digital currency that doesn't exist yet? And why people so quick to assume that governments want this digital currency? It would create quite some headache for them if some people will not use it, for example the elderly who are not good at using electronic devises.

The main characteristic of gambling is not uncertainty of the outcome, it's known probability and fixed odds that are stacked against the player. In trading the probabilities of outcomes are unknown, so you can't even know in whose favor are the odds. If you are doing short-term speculative trading, then it resembles gambling, because it's nearly impossible to make a rational prediction that would be correct more often than not. But long-term investing that is based on some solid analysis is more likely to be profitable than not, so it's not like gambling at all.

It's like asking "what's better - a train or a plane"? They are entirely different things that have their own pros and cons. With Bitcoin you are responsible for storing your wealth and if things go wrong, no one will fix your mistakes. But mutual funds require trust, and there's a risk that the company will scam you. They also perform very differently, Bitcoin is a volatile purely speculative market that so far enjoys tremendous growth, while mutual funds provide moderate or even small but more predictable growth.

That really depends on what you do. If you are a top executive in oil or chemical industry, you could be tempted to cause a lot of damage to environment and endanger lots of lives to boost the company's profits. But if you are making children's toys or something like that, there's less opportunity for evil actions. It also depends on your country - in some causing harm to the public could be risky because you can be sued and harshly fined or even go to jail, in others you can bribe your way out of any legal trouble.


No it's not the root of economic issues. Economic problems like inflation, unemployment, lack of business activity happen for many different reasons.