Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2025, 07:52:01 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 29.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 »
 51 
 on: Today at 05:53:42 PM 
Started by Moxiee - Last post by Mame89
Markets move fast, but emotions move faster. Fear and greed push traders into rushed decisions,buying tops, selling bottoms, or overleveraging positions.

Ethereum, stablecoins, or Bitcoin,it doesn’t matter. Without emotional control, the outcome is the same. A calm mind is as important as any chart.Do you think your biggest challenge in trading is technical skill or managing your own psychology?

In my opinion, both are major challenges in trading. Psychologically, it's about managing emotions (fear and greed). Likewise skills include analysis, discipline, and overconfidence, as well as technical incompetence in making sound decisions during volatile markets, managing risk effectively, and using a consistent strategy. These are all significant challenges, and both must go hand in hand to achieve success in trading.

I say challenges because these two seem easy to do and can be learned quickly, but in practice, they are very difficult because they involve emotions and mental balance. Furthermore the market is very complex and multi layered, making it difficult to solve them as easily as most people believe. Therefore to be successful in trading you must overcome these challenges so you can minimize losses.

 52 
 on: Today at 05:52:15 PM 
Started by sagorete - Last post by d5000
In reality there were a lot of good news about LN in the last few years. Several large exchanges now support it, also several small swap services. So it's not longer a problem to swap LN coins to on-chain BTC or fiat, if it ever was.

The security against the Replacement Cycle Attack, which was seen as a potential big problem when it was discovered in 2023, seem to have improved with recent updates too.

However node and channel statistics are still a bit disappointing as they basically stagnate, even if in the last month there seems to have been a slight increase (around 2%) which may hint that the tendency is changing. On the other hand, the value of the coins locked in LN channels has hit several ATHs in 2025 (now it's a bit below the ATHs, but that's because Bitcoin price has decreased a little bit).

Currently onchain transaction fees are however very low, and also the "currency" use is stagnating as still speculative/store-of-value use prevails. These two factors are imo holding LN back right now.


 53 
 on: Today at 05:51:45 PM 
Started by Natalim - Last post by Fiatless
Well they have a hidden reason why they did that.

If they give a big spotlight to countries who use Bitcoin as legal tender or fight against inflation from their local currency, this could make many countries will follow the same path and make the government lost their power to control the whole thing.

What they promote is something that make the government able to control Bitcoin, that's why they promote about ETFs.
In addition, the focus is usually on big firms investing huge amounts in Bitcoin. This is because it is such news that has an influence on the market. Bitcoin adoption or use in these developing countries would have no big effect on the market. They want to promote news that will lead to FUD or FOMO to enable them to manipulate the market. When my country's currency lost about 20% in a few months, Bitcoin was the most popular hedge against inflation. But it didn't receive publicity like ETF.

 54 
 on: Today at 05:51:06 PM 
Started by Reatim - Last post by BitHodlers
Snip

You are missing the point, read my previous post. What the law says is useless when there are many exceptions using certain structures. All of the tax loopholes were created by politicians for the rich people. This de facto makes it a tax exemption. They paid, they got what they needed and now they are using it. Instead of the whining about loopholes for decades, they would be closed otherwise. It is very easy to close most of the loopholes but they don't want to.
The last I checked I didn't quote you, telling me to read your post is what I don't get, except you are not telling me something. I wonder why another person will create thread while another person is taking it  up seriously than the op.
Good way to dodge admitting you are wrong like most people who responded to this thread. OP did not respond to this thread again so anyone who responds is taking it up seriously.  Cheesy The fact of the matter is that the rich have exempt themselves from taxes. There is no debate there. Some idiots even responded that the rich pay more taxes. My 7 year old niece knows better.  Roll Eyes Funny to see poor people defending the system and the rich, everything is working exactly as designed.

 55 
 on: Today at 05:50:48 PM 
Started by Donk1 - Last post by Mahanton
Greetings folks I decided to write on this topic based on one of my previolus replies on my local board because for me I think most people folks are still missing some few things I will like to talk about today on this topic.
Basicaly   many investors are misunderstandiing the advice "only invest what you can afford to lose." This saying doesn't mean you should  place little value on smaller investments and feel it is not a big deal if you lose it. But what it means is that every single investment big or small matters very well and that is why we have to be cautious about them Because if you feel the investment is small and just place little value on it it's just like you are gambling. Basically it will become a habit and one day when you sum up all the multipre small and careless investments  you will see it has become a   significantly big amount of money.

Small investments and strategy thinking

The truth is we see smaller investments as a learning opportunity to know how to invest bigger amounts which helps us stay disciplined. Yes that Is true but my fellow bitcoin talkers the secret to investing starts from our ability to evaluate the problem and bring out the solution, not evaluating the problem with just half of the solution. The idea is not about gamblilng  on what we can afford to lose but it's about calculating the risk we can afford to take with a well thought out strategy and with a good  reasonable mind. Knowing that the market goes up and down is good but remembering that true wealth is built over time, not overnight.
Lastly we must know that small gains from small investments mean great achievement and every avoided loss helps us grow a bigger financial goal, because we build our portfolio little  by little with good intentions and care. It all depends on how we view every investment regardless of the amount we invest.
Thanks for your time folks...................

It clears up one of the biggest misconceptions people carry around in this space the phrase “only invest what you can afford to lose” often gets twisted into an excuse for careless behavior but the reality is exactly what you highlighted every investment no matter how small deserves discipline and attention otherwise it trains you into gambling habits instead of building investor habits. Small amounts can look harmless at first but when they’re stacked up carelessly they turn into a larger hole over time and people wonder where their money went the smarter approach is treating even the tiniest allocation with respect seeing it as part of a bigger picture when you start with that mindset discipline carries over naturally as the numbers grow.

The idea of strategy over gambling is key too the market will always swing both ways and no one controls that but what you can control is how you prepare how you size your risk and how you protect yourself against emotional decisions small gains may not feel life-changing in the moment but they stack into consistency and consistency is what turns portfolios into wealth over time. So yeah the wisdom isn’t just in “affording to lose” it’s in knowing why you’re investing how it fits into your plan and making sure even small steps move you toward the larger financial goal step by step that’s the true foundation.

 56 
 on: Today at 05:48:45 PM 
Started by adadrian - Last post by Lanatsa
I'm not so obsessed. Bitcoin is currently facing criticism, which is quite reasonable despite all the advantages of the leading cryptocurrency.
Firstly, it's becoming less centralized as people like Michael Saylor are buying it up, accumulating it into a single pool.
Secondly, the number of Bitcoins could ultimately exceed 21 million. A central fork is theoretically possible when the community decides the time is right, and I'm sure it will happen, crashing Bitcoin's price.

You're saying it like holding a lot of bitcoin in one place is bad. What about exchanges? They accumulate bitcoin and centralize it in a single wallet.

But to fork you actually need people to vote by moving to a different chain and prefer that chain. Usually these forks die because as they say people are inherently good and want everyone to profit. A fork would probably harm everyone and they know it, which is why coins lead by scammers like BSV will never succeed, despite the narrative being they're a better alternative.

Bitcoin criticism is natural especially now that it’s matured into something much bigger than a small tech experiment the points you raised are fair but they look different when you zoom in on how the system actually works. Big buyers like Michael Saylor holding a large stash do create concentration but unlike an exchange where coins are custodial and could disappear in hacks or misuse saylor’s coins are still under private keys and traceable on-chain it’s centralization of ownership but not centralization of control because nobody else can move those coins unless he decides to it’s different from exchanges where millions of user deposits are sitting in one basket and subject to operational risk.

As for the 21 million cap that’s almost sacred in bitcoin culture technically yes the code could be changed but it would need near-universal consensus and the community has shown many times it values scarcity above everything the moment a fork tries to inflate supply it loses the one thing that makes bitcoin unique credibility and that’s why such a fork would likely collapse in value forks already happened with btc/bch and later bsv and each time the fork coin became weaker while btc held dominance. So while the idea of forking to increase supply is possible in theory in practice it goes against the very reason people choose bitcoin in the first place forks only survive if they add value without breaking core principles that’s why btc continues to lead and forks that ignore fundamentals fade into irrelevance.

 57 
 on: Today at 05:48:17 PM 
Started by sagorete - Last post by NeuroticFish
Number of services that support LN isn't growing significantly.
Absolutely not true.

I think that this perception depends greatly on the region.
While I expect that in most Western countries and especially in US the number of LN services grow significantly, I have 100$ in my LN wallet and I was unable to spend a dime of that during this year's holiday (both inside my country and abroad, but not in capital cities).
So yeah, if it covers "the others" but not yourself, it kinda sux...

 58 
 on: Today at 05:47:18 PM 
Started by Natalim - Last post by coolcoinz
We aren't focusing on it, it's the media bombarding us with news. Who controls the media controls the narrative.

Remember when the US media screamed at you to get vaccinated because covid was going to kill you otherwise? When you're bombarded with certain narrative you should think twice because that's what they want you to think about and take for granted. When they were telling you that Trump would create a national bitcoin reserve that's when BlackRock was making money selling ETF shares. They wanted that narrative. 6 months later there's no reserve at all. The recent news is they haven't done anything in the matter.


 59 
 on: Today at 05:43:54 PM 
Started by SilentEcho - Last post by Alvin_talk
Op, I think including an intro to your write-up will make others understand better the information you are trying to pass.

That said, for me I think with the qualities bitcoin posses it will be more reasonable to say it is a digital asset for now. The scalability issue of bitcoin is a clear signal that it cannot be adopted as a global financial system at least for the time being. But if the scalability is enhanced then we can consider bitcoin as the future of global finance.

 60 
 on: Today at 05:39:26 PM 
Started by sagorete - Last post by moonmimi
Yes, it has potential fast, cheap payments but adoption and usability still need to improve.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!