Centralized exchanges and other entities are a natural part of the Bitcoin ecosystem, so it's not a spam.



Dust attacks are not profitable, so they don't clog the network as bad as ordinals do. In their case the fee market is doing a good job at preventing them from disrupting the core use case - sending money.


Well if they were as popular and problematic as ordianls, they should have been treated as a bug too. Bitcoin is not Ethereum, it should be a network for money transferring, not for creating digital assets out of thin air.


Bitcoin's only function should be sending money, and we shouldn't dictate how people send money, but I see no reasons why we shouldn't disable the possibility of transactions that in their nature are not about transferring money but do something else, like creating and operating with tokens.

Enough for what? To get rich quick? Buy a house? Most likely not. The previous bull run had around x10 growth between the bear market and peak of the bull run, and around x6 growth if you take averages, And there's a strong decreasing trend of this relative growth with each bull run. So this next bull run might have only x5 or x3 growth, and your $100 will turn into $300. That's a great result if you compare it with bank deposits or some stocks, but this isn't the crazy profits that the early Bitcoin investors saw. But this doesn't mean that you should look for altcoins, because altcoins lack fundamentals and are just pump and dump schemes that crash to the ground without any chance of recovery.

We, the users. If a new Core release will "censor" the ordinals, I will use it and I'm sure a lot of current users would use it too. Those who strongly disagree with this decision can use the older version and hope that some miners will mine on the old chain.


Bitcoin wasn't created to make some abstract "transactions", it was created to transfer monetary value, not some made-up tokens.

If you are so paranoid about someone looking at your screen, you can somehow listen to the price updates through headphones/earphones. I seriously doubt that any apps have a feature for that though, but it's such a simple task that it can be easily programmed by even a beginner coder. They can make an app that reads a price update regularly or on demand with one click and detects if earphones are connected to not accidentally play in through the phone's speaker.

This is not arbitrary. Satoshi created Bitcoin to be p2p electronic cash. De-facto it's used as a speculative investment or store of value. Most of users are not interested in Bitcoin also being a network for smart contracts, tokens and other unnecessary stuff.

Bitcoin is first of all a community of users who agree on the same rules. It's time to update the rules to remove the unproductive nuisance that is driving the fees up for all users.

I don't buy the slippery slope argument, because if someone thinks that the network rules should never change, they can just run the old version and form a network with like-minded users.

Bitcoin can't be in an unregulated state indefinitely. There's really only 2 options - either the government sets the rules how people use it or the government bans its use and Bitcoin becomes criminal darknet money. Did Satoshi want Bitcoin to be strongly associated with crime?

And the ideal of p2p economy breaks down when you remember that middle-size and big businesses are large entities that are easy to prosecute when they do something like receiving an illegal payment method. National economy is not just street vendors who sell hotdogs and lemonade.

In context of Bitcoin cycles, the bullish season can be confirmed once the price surpassed the ATH, which usually happens many months after the havelning. So the current rally is more likely to be a sign that the bull run is coming soon rather than being the bullrun itself. Remember, that the faster the price rises, the faster it fall when a correction will come.

Remember that Bitcoin wants everyone to be their own bank. Should kids be their own bank? Even many adults don't have what it takes to be one.


I would never trust a child with a Bitcoin wallet, there's so many things that can go wrong - they could send it to scammers or buy something illegal with it, they could download malware on their device and lose the coins to it and so on. It's hard to teach proper security even to an adult, it's much harder with children who have no life experience.


It would be impossible to enforce, but they probably shouldn't allow regulated entities to sell Bitcoin to children up to a certain age, maybe 14 y.o.

This is the only valid reason to pass KYC. If you want to have your Bitcoin gains turned into some $$ in your bank account, you'd better do it through a regulated exchange that is acceptable to deal with by banks and regulators. Because if you get a large enough sum through p2p trading or cash deposit - it's almost guaranteed that your bank will ask you about the source of your money and demand a proof, because in their eyes it's a high-risk behavior that is typical for illegal businesses or money laundering.

The recent candles are already so vertical that it seems unlikely that this growth will  continue for long and will touch the $48k level in the next days - the correction is long overdue and if I were a short-term speculator I would dump already. This recent rally reminds me of the previous rallies that happened before the halvening - they all stopped abruptly because they were premature, as the true bull run starts long after the halvening, typically 6-9 months.

This reasoning applies not only to casinos but any services that allow depositing and withdrawing Bitcoin. And the answer is that mixers employ their proprietary techniques and algorithms for shuffling coins to make it hard or impossible to untangle them and find which outputs match with which inputs, while services don't do that. So at a glance it may seem like services act as mixers, but it's easier to link incoming and outgoing transactions with them than with actual mixers.

My government didn't ban Bitcoin and I obviously don't care what laws do other countries have since they don't apply to me. But if my country outlawed Bitcoin, I still wouldn't care. I'm guided by my moral principles and not the laws, if I don't agree with a law then it must be a stupid law.

Bitcointalk is not Bitcoin. It's not like the Bitcoin software banned mixers. It is a sign though that Bitcoin ecosystem is changing and becoming more in-line with government demands. But Bitcoin ecosystem will always have many faces, and mixers or darknet markets will always be a part of it. They can't be separated because no one can stop Bitcoin transactions from happening.

Did they deny your payments or freeze them and your account? If you can still move your money, you can send them to other bank that is more crypto-friendly. Ask some people from your country who have experience which banks they use and if they moved larger amounts. You can even try to open account in a bank of another country, but it would come with higher fees. Or use PayPal which also has larger fees. There's also p2p trading where you will make a bank transfer to another person, but that can be quite risky because banks treat such transactions as suspicious when large transactions happen.

Your analogy has a huge flaw. Bitcoin is fungible, houses are not. Like you pointed out, there can be reasons why a house could be worth many times more than the house next door. But bitcoins are worth the same as any other bitcoin, if you ignore that ordinals nonsense.

There is no way anyone will offer to buy coins for higher than the market prices. They will just go on the market and buy as much as they want there.

And I will say some portion of my coins if the price will rise high enough. I will always hold some Bitcoin in my portfolio, but I don't plan for it to be the largest share of my portfolio - that's an unnecessary risk that in my book is not worth the potential outcomes.

Committing crime in a group is usually an aggravating circumstance, and it also makes easier to prosecute the criminals, because if you catch one, you can make them give up their partners. The businesses that suffer from these crimes could lobby the politicians to make police go harder on these crimes.

I personally never clicked on any ads on this forum, but brand recognition is working, because if I were to look for some crypto service, I'd likely look first at a service that got advertised here, just because it feels familiar even if I never visited it.

Some of the services that advertise on this forum make huge amounts of money and it's not a problem for them to generously compensate their signature campaign members even if the advertisement campaign is a net loss.

There would only be millionaires if they sell, and they can only sell if there are buyers. For that reason the huge price peaks don't last very long - lots of holders want to sell and not a lot of people want to buy so the price collapses. Plus a lot of holders just keep holding because no one knows for how long the bull run will last and when the bear market hits it's already too late to sell.

Bitcoin isn't really affecting economies or societies because only a small percentage of the population buys or sells it.

Cryptocurrency is not an essential part of ransomware attacks, other payment methods could be used too, but crypto made this process so much easier and safer for the criminals that it resulted in growth of ransomware attacks. If crypto didn't exist, there would less attacks because hackers wouldn't spend their time on developing them and focus on other attacks instead, and they would be getting caught more often because fiat payments leave more trails.

Bitcoin can make its holders poor, because there's no mechanism that prevents it from crashing. Its price is dictated by supply and demand, and those are not predictable, because no one knows how people will behave. It's entirely possible that someone will put all their savings or wealth into Bitcoin and then it will crash and ruin their life.

So far Bitcoin was on average going only up, but there's really no good explanation why, and without understanding it we can't know for how much longer it will keep growing and what will happen after it stops.