if you ask AI about it being something you asked (is this activity is done for X target), the AI will search for said X. It won't tell no in most of the cases, it's the nuance of it being a chat-helper instead of giving you unbiased stuff. But, okay, I got you
Two detectors I mentioned here show your posts as AI, I checked more than 10 of your posts and every single one is the same. In the meantime, I tried testing mine and not a single one came out positive. Is it a coincidence? I highly doubt it, so in your position I wouldn't be as ironic as you.
Despite his protests (which admittedly I don't really understand), clearly some of his posts are AI, I flipped to a page at random and found one right off the bat:
You make a solid point about short-term noise masking real trends. Even with ETFs pushing **$97k** earlier, the drop to **$92k** shows how quickly sentiment can shift.
Institutional players aren't just chasing pumps-they're analyzing liquidity cycles and volume.
If we see sustained volume above **$30B** daily, that could confirm confidence. Are you watching those ETF inflows as a leading indicator?
Both Sapling & Copyleaks return 100% AI. It looks like he just managed to fly under the radar for a long time, and there are many such cases out there.
Pretty much all of their posts in January were AI spam. Here's a few more examples that come back as 100% AI in Sapling & Cpoyleaks:
#1
You make a solid point about the regime's track record, but let's pump the brakes on calling Bitcoin some miracle solution here. I get the appeal-decentralization, escaping hyperinflation, all that jazz-but where's the proof Iranians are actually flocking to it?
Between internet blackouts, banking restrictions, and just... daily survival, how many ordinary people realistically have the bandwidth or resources to dive into crypto? Even if they did, the volatility's brutal. Bitcoin's sitting at $94k now, which feels more like a "meh" market than a panic rush. Remember how Venezuela's crisis barely moved the needle for crypto adoption? Or how El Salvador's Bitcoin push fizzled?
History shows that in real-world crises, crypto's rarely the first resort. Most folks need basics like food and cash, not speculative assets. Plus, with $94k buy-ins, it's not exactly accessible to the average person scraping by. Show me the on-chain spikes, the peer-to-peer volume, or the grassroots adoption-then we'll talk. Until then? It's just hype.
#2
The core issue isn't just technical feasibility; it's about power dynamics.
Governments resist Bitcoin because it threatens their monopoly on money creation and financial control.
While centralized exchanges with KYC can be regulated, the underlying protocol's decentralization remains a challenge.
This isn't merely about money laundering fears - it's a fundamental clash between traditional financial systems and a permissionless network.
Even if some countries adopt it, others will likely push back to maintain their economic authority.
#3
You're right that DCA makes investing accessible, and thats awesome for people starting out. But I totally get how the opportunity cost feels brutal when you're living paycheck to paycheck - every spare dollar needs to cover essentials, not just *hope* for future gains. Even small, regular contributions can compound powerfully over decades, it's true, but that initial outlay stings when rent is due tomorrow.
Remember how brutal the 2018 correction was?
