We have seen this never ending cycle of poverty which has been passed since generations. Individuals having low income usually end up having low education and poor health. They have very limited opportunities so they can never break this cycle. Some of the major issues here are unemployment and lack of access to credit. Because of that the poor always remains poor as they barely get any chance to overcome their financial health and look for better options of earning.

Microfinancing or education can break the cycle so the governments should focus on that to maximize the incomes of lower and middle class by giving them access to micro funds and better education which can be of much help. Bitcoin or digital finance can break the barrier. Even though they do not have proper education, they should look forward to learn more about bitcoins or blockchain which will make them earn a better living without even having to worry about a full-time job where they only hire qualified professionals.

I don't see the need of moving to a new country just because they are crypto friendly. Though that's just me I don't know about other people. The idea is many countries which aren't crypto friendly are either not too strict with their laws against crypto or don't even have any laws. Actually adoption of crypto in a country depends on the amount of interest which it's people gives and how they choose to use it. The government will surely try to regulate how they use it but may not be able to totally stop the use of crypto in the country.

In countries like mine where the government aren't much friendly with cryptocurrency, we are still able to use it because they don't follow up that much..

Hey Pharmatech AI team,
Great ANN—thanks for sharing the details. After reading through, what stands out most to me is the revenue-sharing model for $PCH stakers (70% of fees in stablecoins) combined with the buyback & burn mechanism. It's a smart way to align token holders with real biotech revenue, especially targeting high-value markets like pain therapy and nanomedicine. The $5M from Rollman Management adds serious credibility, and the QuantifAI partnership for quant-trading integration? That's innovative for a pharma RWA play.

Yes i do, regulation will protect the market. It will give crypto more clarity that can attract ordinary people to invest. It will also help to eliminate crap scam coins exist in the market caused by we have millions of memes and vapor coins exist now. Importantly, it help to widespread the institutional adoption like this time. Hence, regulation gives plenties of benefit, yet i understand some may against it due to the make crypto less anonym.

The way your project connects real-world utility with blockchain is very impressive. Looking forward to updates!
 

"Hi team,
Just dove into the Pharmatech AI thread and I'm genuinely impressed. What I like most is your AI-MDIP model—using Graph Neural Networks and Transformers for predicting drug interactions sounds like a game-changer for speeding up cannabinoid-based therapies. The fact that it's backed by your own proprietary cannabis data from the MDIP Lab Grow (50k+ data points per cycle!) gives it a real edge over generic AI tools. Plus, the sustainable 60-hectare solar-powered campus in Germany? That's forward-thinking for biotech.
Excited to see the pre-sale progress and upcoming SaaS launch in Q2 2025. Will keep an eye on this—rooting for those $100M+ licensing deals by 2027!
Best,
[My Bitcointalk Username= Emerison]

Sure, I don't mean to reject that statement. I merely ask posters to be more precise. You can't make general statements regarding the global state of something based off of your local experiences. In most cases you will have to look for LN accepting places in advance and actively go to them. It is not likely that you will find them by chance wherever you decided to go. The people who live in a LN accepting environment are the lucky ones.

As I said, if you want to see the adoption you need to help it happen. In any case you can use LN for online things whenever you have so you get to at least have a taste of the experience.

It is, but perhaps this is not primarily a problem that comes from LN itself but rather from the overall lowered rate of participation in the market by retail. I see that that current sentiment is very low. On chain activity everywhere is extremely low. For shitcoin chains to get the real picture you have to subtract most or all automated systems such as on-chain bots. Once you do that you will see just how bad retail participation is right now.  Nevertheless, the difficulty in setting up a node and LN in general plays a role. To be honest, I think it is perfectly fine to tell people to simply use mobile wallets that manage this for you. Since for LN we are talking about small amounts of Bitcoin it should not be an issue.

We should not let perfection cause friction for adoption in this case. LN nodes are not as important as on chain nodes. 

Yes, that's right. I also see it as a process because achieving success is not instant everything requires a process, strategy, and consistency. If you invest with what you can afford to lose, it means you won't panic when price fluctuations occur. Even if you don't have a good strategy, you might experience losses, but those losses won't immediately frustrate you. You can start over with new capital and use previous losses as experience in making future decisions.

If your goal is long term of course buying in stages with money you can afford to lose is a good strategy. The advantage of buying with money you can afford to lose is that you already have an emergency fund and have all your basic needs covered. However if you buy with all your capital when you have an urgent need, it will be confusing and ultimately ruin your finances. So I completely agree with you the path to success must start small so that slowly, over time, we gain experience and continue learning, leading to success. Because in investment and trading, money is not the main thing, the main factor is how you implement your strategy.

To be fair, if you seriously take even just 1 hour of everyday, and not like careless not caring type of 1 hour, I mean like SERIOUSLY hard 1 hour every single day, in 1 year you have 365 hours of working on a subject. And I can guarantee you, after studying 365 hours on ANYTHING, you will be better than other people who are not in that topic.

Like let's say you study 365 hours on history, sure a historian, a professor, will be a lot better than you, how could they not be, but some random on the street? Whose entire history knowledge comes from tv shows and high school? You can even past them with 365 hours of it, because you are an adult, not a 15 year old, so you will understand better. If you study trading for 365 hours, sure wall street trader will be better than you, but your tailor won't be.

Yeah, if you do not know the full rules then you are going to end up with bad results. Or at least you are going to end up with less than you assume. The better approach would be not even go into trading competitions if you do not have a vast wallet, because if you are not rich enough, the results will be disappointing.

Many people end up with bad results, and they do not know what they should be doing, and because of that, they end up with returns that will not be great. If we do feel like we should at least give it a try, we should at least lower our expectations, that way even if we do not do great then we didn't expected to do great anyways. This should be the way to move, and could give you a greater outlook on trading competitions.