The power of hodling has been proven time and time again. As a matter of fact, it has been proven by so many individual experiences how it is a lot more profitable than trading. And it's easy, too. The easiest way to make profit out of Bitcoin is hodling.

But hodling only happens once you're thoroughly convinced of Bitcoin. I guess it follows a certain level of understanding, and consequently belief. Hodling might be too stressful to somebody who is in doubt with Bitcoin. He/she might not survive. It's easy to hodl in the sense that you don't do a thing, not an analysis, not a buy and sell order and stop loss, and so on, but it isn't easy in the sense that you need to keep hodling amidst bears and winters and corrections.

Is this concern the same concern that you brought up in December of last year? Or is this another one? The last time you asked about how to directly contact them, you mentioned about losing access to your account. And then you also posted about having login problems a month later. And now you're asking about another issue, is it about their faucet?

Have they not responded to you yet, even once? Do you have funds stuck in your account now? Have you ever made a deposit in your account? I'm sorry, but the impression is that you've got nuisance concerns that they treat them with least priority. I'm not saying Freebitco.in has a sterling record when it comes to customer support, but they probably put yours aside in favor of more urgent ones.

But continue to reach out to them through all avenues suggested by the others here.

Even before the US imposed a huge fine for both CZ and Binance, Binance's situation in the Philippines has already been shaky, as it was in many countries all over the world. It has been investigated before. Binance has already been called out for operating illegally.

This isn't about the US fining Binance. This is about the Philippine authorities being incompetent and ignorant. To a certain extent, Binance is suffering because it is popular. It is illegally operating, yes, but so are the dozens of other centralized exchanges. If Binance users would transfer to another centralized exchange, say, Bybit or KuCoin, can they do that? Yes, because these exchanges are still accessible to Filipino citizens even though they're all operating on an equal footing with Binance.


If I'm not mistaken, it is still accessible via VPN. As mentioned, Binance app also remains accessible. But it might just be a matter of time before Binance responds to the government's actions and avoid serving residents of the Philippines.

I won't call it a Bitcoin alternative because it somehow connotes that it shares certain similarities with Bitcoin, when in fact it probably doesn't share even a single feature with Bitcoin. It's centralized, to begin with. In other words, it is antithesis to Bitcoin's philosophy.

We probably can call it a cash alternative. It is after all another form of fiat. It's the kind of fiat money that is tailored to the needs and demands of an increasingly digital and globalized world.

Nothing's special it seems. This is just SWIFT undergoing upgrades.

1. Bitcoin wasn't invented (not invested) in 2009. It was launched in January of 2009. Satoshi released the whitepaper in 2008.

2. If you refer to Bitcoin's price value, it didn't have any the day it was launched. 1BTC wasn't just too low, it was worth nothing, at least as far as fiat equivalent is concerned. USD price was only assigned to it several months later.  

3. There's no such thing as physical Bitcoin. There are, however, physical coins that carry with them private keys tucked underneath a hologram. So they're supposed to be loaded not with Bitcoin but with private keys, access to a coin. They're not safe to use as a currency, though. There is so much trust involved.

This isn't the most cruel one. In the first place, no life is lost in this case. A U-turn is still possible with the help of professionals. Money can be earned once again. He could still get back his family after undergoing therapy and rehabilitation and turning over a new leaf.

Gambling addiction can actually be very brutal and fatal. Around 7 years ago, a gambling addict entered Resorts World casino here in my country, set the gambling tables on fire, fired at people, killing dozens in the process. He stole millions worth of casino chips before killing himself. That's how far gambling addiction could actually go. It can be as deadly as this.

Here's the article which was published December of last year. The regulatory framework I was talking about is mentioned there.

To be fair, if I were the Indian government, I would have done the same. India offers such a huge market, the top country as per "Chainalysis’ global crypto adoption index of 2022," but how are they benefitting from the profitable operations of Binance, Kraken, KuCoin, and others? These top exchanges are illegally operating. Why should they be allowed to do that?

So, perhaps the right way is for the government to subject them all to regulations. It's either they comply or perish. At the end of the day, these are private companies, centralized entities that should be held accountable for what they're offering to Indian citizens.

I won't say this is common in my country, but this has happened to friends and even myself; I mean the doubts, the suspicion, coming from the family. I haven't heard of parents or relatives making reports to the police though, but the impression that we are involved in some kind of scam has always been there.

When I was new in crypto, especially during the height of the ICO, some crypto friends and acquaintance are even minors, but they made money, good money. They had to seek the help of their parents and relatives when cashing out. That's when the parents are surprised how these youngsters are already earning big. And that's also when the suspicion usually came.

If you're familiar with the sport, their players, their games, their tendencies, and so on and so forth, I guess the odds would only come second. Your analysis comes first. At least this is how I do it. Although there are times when you have to rethink your analysis over again because the odds are surprisingly too far from it, it may still happen that you'd stick to your analysis in the end.

Having said this, whether the odds are high or low, for as long as you're more or less convinced that your pick has a big chance then you bet for it. However, you also have to strike some balance because there are times when the odds aren't worth risking.

I think one doesn't automatically get established with BTC by simply having BTC. Having exposure to BTC doesn't necessarily mean you're established with BTC. The way I understood OP's question, he/she seems to be asking how to dive deep into "BTC and the community." Establish denotes a certain level of firmness or permanence.

I know of a number of people who don't really understand BTC but they're exposed to it one way or another. One hasn't even heard of Satoshi Nakamoto or of Lightning. I don't think they're established with "BTC and the community."

I also think that the traditional DCA is better. Buying during price drops may be good but what if one long green candle is followed by another long green candle, and another one, and then another one again? You've already missed a lot.

If buying during corrections is really attractive for you but you don't really want to time and analyze the market all the time, then you can integrate it with your existing DCA strategy. It doesn't have to disrupt your DCA schedule. You can have the traditional DCA, but you will also set aside amounts in case there is a correction that's deep enough for you to make the most of.

Rather than seeing many more exchanges following OKX, it seems OKX is actually the one that is following the fate of Binance, Huobi, Bitstamp, Kraken, KuCoin, Bittrex, Bitfinex, and others. It seems all the big names have already gone ahead.

But there's supposed to be a regulatory framework to be released this year. I hope it will be on time and more or less fair to exchanges. They might come back considering the size of the market in India, once this is released for their compliance. One requirement that seems interesting is the "real-time proof-of-reserve audits." This a strong regulatory protection for their clients.

Silk Road is not an online drug store. It is a free marketplace. As in free. And because it's a free marketplace, anything could be sold and bought. That may include illegal drugs.

Bitcoin is a free money as well. And because it is a free money, nobody can control how you use it. You could use it to buy legal and illegal goods and services. Surely, it shouldn't be stopped simply because some crooks are using it for the wrong reasons, just as fiat isn't stopped because it is used in all kinds of evil things.

Your first will always be precious, more precious than the rest.

Your early merits would probably put a smile on your face not only because your post is appreciated but because there is a higher rank that you are climbing. And merits are what you primarily need to achieve them.

At some point, however, or perhaps when you reached the highest rank, merits may not anymore be as precious. They may come, they may not. All you care is that you join discussions and enjoy it.

If I were you, I wouldn't be chasing merits. It will naturally come if your posts are of value.

I think this is part of financial literacy, which many failed unfortunately. There are so many people who are always short in their finances despite having high salaries. There are also many businesses that crumbled down because money coming from them were treated as personal by their owners.

The family of my mother started one business after another. They all ended up bankrupt. The main reason is that they weren't financially responsible. They weren't financially educated. They get money from the business for their personal use. They borrow from it without paying. The business could only absorb so much. It would give up at some point.

Things happen gradually. It isn't like something is suddenly switched off once all coins are mined. Rewards are growing smaller and smaller until such time that there's none left. So there's a lot of time for adjustment and assessment and changes. Halvings happen every 4 years.

Supposedly, the price of Bitcoin will make up for the decreasing reward. So even if the reward would only be less than 0.1BTC a couple of decades from now, for example, it shouldn't be much of a problem because the price must have also risen a lot by then. The same is true when after the 1 Satoshi reward in 2136 until 2140, there'd be nothing else but transaction fees. The assumption is that the fees will be sufficient because of the level of adoption and the price of Bitcoin.

Whether all this will prove to be right or not in the end, we will never know. But we might face a somehow similar challenge within our lifetime. By 2052, the reward is already as low as 0.0244BTC. If the price of Bitcoin hasn't multiplied several fold by that time, it's going to be difficult for mining operators and many of them might shut down.

First off, tokenization has been around before 2017.

In a sense, we can consider it a Trojan horse. After all, with this offer, the market is attracted to it, an option that is completely centralized, off the chain, with a number of layers of middlemen, in custody, and so on. Furthermore, the full sense of ownership, control, transparency, and others are also compromised. This is the same market which should have been convinced of the philosophies of Bitcoin.

All in all, what's being compromised with the advent of spot Bitcoin ETFs are no less than the main principles of Bitcoin. There's no more peer-to-peer with spot Bitcoin ETFs. Bitcoin is money no more.


May be true, may be not. But we can also say that with spot Bitcoin ETFs it is traditional finance that's invading Bitcoin. There are compromises from both sides.

I think it's just fair for gambling companies to be taxed. And I also think it's just fair for gambling winnings to be taxed. But there should be a higher threshold below which winnings are exempted from taxes.

There are also existing tax regulations in my country as regards gambling winnings. I think it's even harsher here save for the fact that our government is very weak in terms policy implementation.

If I'm not mistaken, all winnings big and small coming from gambling will be taxed. Small winnings are subject to ordinary income tax. Winnings above ₱10,000 ($178.23), however, shall be subject to 20% tax. Now, that's harsh.

All this might be true, but I guess the bottom line is that they're using what's already popular, marketed, and talked about. Many don't research which platform is best to use. They just go straight to what's currently the most popular. And they would even mindlessly recommend it. They've got no basis at all other than their actual experience of using it which was successful. They don't even offer alternative options.

Having said this, ads matter. You don't get to encounter the likes of Bisq while scrolling on social media.

It's a bit of a surprise that somebody who is a hero member and has been on the forum for more than 8 years thinks that mining stops as soon as all coins are mined.

Anyway, the role of miners is not merely to mine or extract coins as if they're miners of gold or whatever precious stone and metal, such that when the supply is depleted there's nothing else to mine and the operations stop. The role of miners in the Bitcoin system is to process transactions and add them to the blockchain. So, they continue to have an essential role even after the last Satoshi is mined. Transactions won't be confirmed without them.

If it isn't anymore profitable to mine, then many will stop. As a result, the difficulty in mining will fall. It may reach to a point when even a personal computer at home could be able to perform it. In which case, profit would be realized once again.

Whether we want to or not, we cannot wait until all coins are mined. We'd all be dead by then.