BTC

LongjumpingFinish297

Should an AI agent transact with a coin that can lose %5 (or even 25%) of its value in a single day? Or would they choose a stable coin? Or better yet, a fiat currency? I sure wouldn't want to put a large balance in a wallet meant for day to day purchases if I couldn't be guaranteed its future value. How can businesses plan around that risk? Im genuinely curious as to why you think BTC is a good choice for this over other alternatives?

moonRekt

I can’t think of many safer investments now than oil futures but make sure you have your rainy day preparations before throwing money at BTC

InsightKnite

No one is going to accept BTC for food in a major economic decline. You are living a fantasy.

InsightKnite

"Meanwhile, BTC continues to hit new highs." You need to stop comparing based on a coins start price. Go back and compare BTC to any other coin for the last 5 years, not it's inception. That is the actual value. This is no different than a pump and dump going from $10 to $0.05 and then saying "oh yes but look at the total ATH value." You are lying to yourself.

Floridaman1388

Blows my mind how careless some people can be. Dude, you have theoretically billions in BTC connected to Silk Road. They’re never going to stop looking for you. 

adjudantloic

Those who potentially want to buy Bitcoin should have no doubts whatsoever. If they want to buy it, they will buy it. Regardless of the law, even if the US prohibits buying Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is just mathematics, it's not real. It can't be censored by anyone. That's what BTC is so beautiful.

NicKaboom

I'm a complete regard when it comes to the intricacies of crypto like this, but why the hell would you stay in the US with billions of "stolen" BTC when integrating it back into the system? Seems like the better option would be to go somewhere with no or limited extradition treaties before starting to unwind those funds back into accounts.

WolfBob808

I am holding off. Mainly because of the increase in oil prices which is adding to inflation which is resulting in an increase in long term interest rates BTC does not like higher interest rates. I am waiting until oil prices and interest rates moderate and then all in.

TheSauce775

Most people dont even understand what money or fiat actually is, let alone pristine capital like BTC lol

TheresNoSecondBest

>I challenge this by asking you to consider the role that ETFs play in BTC now. 2017 was a different crowd. The ones running the largest transacting nodes (ETF operators/custodians) will have the sway that the node runners in the BlockSize wars had. They also happen to be larger, centralized, and in some cases, more traditional organizations. There is higher probability of collusion between those and mining companies. And the further we go down this path, the worse this gets. Again, mate. Please, read the book. The ETF custodians can't unilaterally change consensus rules any more than miners could in 2017. Can they influence? Sure. But no more then Bitmain, Bitcpay, Bitcoin.com, Conbase, Xapo, Kraken, Bitfinex, Huobi, BTCC or OKcoin in 2017. These were massive names in the space at that time and they all were against segwit or at least leaned towards the big blocks while pretending/staying neutral. >This is interesting. Wasn't Satoshi's vision that the longest chain would prevail as the chain of choice and be the "turing test" on which is the legitimate chain? Seems to be debate on this topic within the community... The quote is: "It is strictly necessary that the longest chain is always considered the valid one. Nodes that were present may remember that one branch was there first and got replaced by another, but there would be no way for them to convince those who were not present of this. We can't have subfactions of nodes that cling to one branch that they think was first, others that saw another branch first, and others that joined later and never saw what happened. "The CPU power proof-of-work vote must have the final say". The only way for everyone to stay on the same page is to believe that the longest chain is always the valid one, no matter what." What Satoshi IMHO meant, is that the most work decides in a case of a split. Pay attention, this is the reason why miners are important. Bcashers had to manually reduce the difficulty, otherwise they would end up in the same boat, Luke was. Too much power needed to mine a shitcoin that is worth almost zero dollars. That's why the number of their blocks is higher than Bitcoin blocks. They have about 0.5% of Bitcoin's hashrate so the amount of work on that shitcoin is considerably smaller than on BTC. Anyway, not only the number of blocks or how much work has been done counts, the social consensus is important too. That's why I'm honestly not worrying about ETFs colluding with some miners. In the end, it's the rest of the world that matters. >I'd ask that you stop contrasting with "lukecoin". I never mentioned it in my original post and I certainly didn't say that it is more secure. I made it clear that that's not what I support. It's not adding anything to the discussion. Exchaning cultish propaganda isn't debate. The issue is, you're just repeating their talking points. It's obviously not your fault, you've been fed this from their channels, it's just hard not to see it. >I'm here to discuss reality and how to make BTC beter for everyone. Anyways, security is relative. So while BTC may still be secure relative to it's competitors right now. Does that make it more secure in absolute terms? In absolute terms there is a long ways to go as far as decentralization. That's all OK, you're just coming here with ridiculous claims while the truth is somewhere else. Perhaps more learning and less of trying to change Bitcoin would be a better approach. >One entity (Foundry) having a vote over 1/4 of the network is not decentralization, and as long as the ability for this to exist does exist, on a long enough time frame, it will occur. One pool doesn't mean one miner. We have already been here, mate. >This is why we must explore how to close this vulnerability so that it's not ultimately exploited one day. We cannot assume that the incentives of those with the most network influence (mining rigs, energy, and $$ coming into their ETFs), are aligned with those of you and me. There is nothing concrete that says this will be the case. Every miner, every ETF, every energy company is here to make money. They won't make much of money, by trying to attack Bitcoin because the outcome is known already now. >Don't trust, verify, remember? Sorry mate but you didn't verify the majority of your claims. Perhaps start there. Again, I'm not trying to attack you, but consider to visit r/BitcoinBeginners and learn BEFORE coming here with a plan how to change Bitcoin.

CyanDew

*> manipulated trash* my brother in Christ everything in a market is manipulated. the disagreement is what makes a market in the first place. i believe OP is talking about what Bitcoin represents in a world full of fiat debasement. when you measure BTC against what it buys, and not against dollars, you realize the true value of a provably scarce form of money. not to mention permissionless, decentralized, and practically divisible. nobody gives a shit about when you bought or sold, and neither does Bitcoin. but one thing’s for sure, the downfall and collapse of fiat is inevitable. read The Bitcoin Standard and you’ll realize why holding zero bitcoin may not be the best strategy.

Abject-Issue-6639

You are clearly missing the point that when that company goes under, BTC will suffer by correlation because as u say. Most the companys networth is there. Along with many other large corporations who also will be following suit when Saylor makes the call. They are leading you in to a Funnel of Doom. Not worth explaining to you though when you cant even control your own emotions child... Good day.

Mysandwichok

He sent just $800 to an exchange that he had already completed KYC on. Investigators had been tracking the BTC for years already at this point, waiting for something to happen.

CtheKiller

The prosecutors didn't accept that claim, and charged him for wire-fraud, because he intentionally manipulated the system at the time of withdrawals. He got only 1 year in prison, and the government got to seize $3.4 billion worth of BTC at the time. Best believe, the government was hungry for that BTC, they were going to get it from him one way or another.

StraightPromise3596

Would you say that it doesn't affect Bitcoin directly but indirectly? Since it doesn't affect bitcoin but affects those who would potentially buy BTC?

CtheKiller

Yup, this was James "Jimmy" Zhong. The way he did it too was stupid simple, he literally pressed the withdrawal BTC button multiple times within a second, and the system spat it all out. Ex: Withdraw 500 BTC -> presses it 5 times super fast -> silk road deposited 2,500 BTC into his wallet. Here's the crazy part, according to Zhong, he ended up telling dread pirate roberts (owner of silk road) after discovering the vulnerability and withdrawing 50,000 BTC, and roberts let him keep it as a reward. Also - when he did this, BTC was only worth $12 . Still a lot at about $600k at the time, but nowhere near billions lol. He kept it hidden and it grew to that amount over time.

Fun-Analysis-182

Yeah, exactly. Bitcoin itself never broke. It was Liquid, a separate sidechain, that got tricked into letting go of the real BTC it was holding.

JakRenden2

Pretty much, yeah. Instead of taking the yield in BTC or fiat and manually buying upgrades, it auto-converts your daily rewards into terahash and applies it to your existing miner once per day.

Mattie_Kadlec

BTC mining ain't what it used to be. And I sat that in a good way

AutoModerator

Post is by: Cezariu and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1whxlsm/betting_on_reversion_started_to_make_sense/ Started out with a pretty standard trend-following setup (EMA/MACD crossovers) across a bunch of coins. Back tested it with real fees and slippage and it just didn't hold up, barely broke even at best. Switched to something way simpler: betting on short-term reversion instead of trend continuation, just on BTC and ETH, on 30min and 1h windows. Actually tested it properly this time, trained on one chunk of history, tested on a separate later chunk, so it's not just curve-fit nonsense. It held up out of sample, nothing crazy, low-to-mid 50s% accuracy, but that's actually enough to matter for fixed-payout bets where breakeven sits around 53-54%. Been running it live for about a month now, roughly 160 calls tracked, 55% hit rate so far. Keep position size small (a tenth of bankroll per bet) and it auto-pauses itself after a handful of losses in a row so a bad stretch can't do much damage. Not getting into the exact logic since that's the part I'd rather keep to myself, but that's the gist, betting on reversion, not trend, and actually validated before going live instead of just vibes. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

Post is by: VibinNoodle and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1whwamj/clarity_act_died_in_the_senate_yesterday/ The CLARITY Act cloture vote failed 49-50 in the Senate on Tuesday. Needed 60 to even open floor debate, didn't get it, and by all accounts that's it for market structure legislation in the Senate this year. Zero Democrats crossed over, four Republicans voted no, and Lummis said flat out afterward that if this failed she thinks "we're done" for 2026. The sticking point wasn't the SEC/CFTC framework everyone actually wanted, it was ethics language around officials profiting from crypto ventures. Warren used her floor time before the vote to go after Trump's crypto income directly. Market had mostly priced this in overnight once the odds cratered, but BTC still gave back the rally and is trading back near $76-77K, down from almost $80K earlier in the week. SEC's plan B is already public, Regulation Crypto Assets is open for comment through October 20, so expect the SEC and CFTC to keep doing this by rulemaking instead of statute heading into 2027. On a better note, crypto cards keep expanding. Visа is bringing onchain credit to its stablecoin card lineup, pairing VisаNet settlement data with blockchain lending, and network volume on that side is up nearly 200% year over year. Swissbоrg also announced a partnership with Mаstercard to launch a crypto debit card across 30 countries. Feels like the card side of this industry is one of the few corners that's scaling regardless of what's happening in DC this week. On that note, this is also why I keep an eye on the borrow-instead-of-sell side of things. Nеxо's card runs on a revolving credit line against your crypto rather than a straight spend-down of holdings, so you're not triggering a taxable sale *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Helpful-Handle6849

Word man. I convinced my dad 8 years ago to put 5-10% of his money in BTC. Needless to say its a bigger chunk of his portfolio now.

Pyroll2206

If he is buying BTC then not just a wallet, there is an exchange. From his texte alone he is talking about a brand Bitbox. So he is promoting.

duracellchipmunk

I think 3BTC will make you a millionaire soon enough.

TheBestintheWest11

yea boys we ain't getting any clarity anytime soon. Embrace for BTC sale!

Reasonable_Band1536

Too bad BTC doesn’t care

ptrnyc

My concern is that with Democrats hopefully winning the midterms, we’re gonna see Warren climb back on her high horse and try to ban BTC, since this appears to be her lifelong mission.

cyger

Yup agreed, in for like 10 years now, but so glad I sold most of alts, over the last couple of years. The final nail in the coffin was last years 10/10 manipulation. Still holding mainly BTC, SOL, and some ETH, but also went heavily into AI stocks over the last couple of years. AI agents may boost SOL and ETH big time eventually, and maybe soon, but otherwise 99.999% of tokens are crap.

cyger

So glad I sold most of alts, including 50k moons a couple years ago. The final nail in the coffin was last years 10/10 manipulation. Still holding mainly BTC, SOL, and some ETH, but also went heavily into AI stocks over the last couple of years. AI agents may boost SOL and ETH big time eventually, and maybe soon.

AutoModerator

Post is by: w3_vic and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1whse8h/bitcoin_miners_may_need_a_completely_different/ RIOT, MARA and CORZ still trade like crypto stocks, but the businesses are changing. If more revenue starts coming from AI/HPC and data center contracts, BTC price and hashprice won’t tell the whole story anymore. You’d have to start looking at things like power capacity, grid access, tenant contracts and data center margins. That’s a very different business from Bitcoin mining. Some useful numbers here: [https://app.goai.digital/share/u\_T6njG5bpTwGjyTytUd0efQ](https://app.goai.digital/share/u_T6njG5bpTwGjyTytUd0efQ) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

SimpleMoonFarmer

Nothing was lost. 1BTC = 1BTC

Realistic_Fee_00001

Use Bitcoin Cash. This was never a Paradox. It became one when BTC was crippled.

dream_system_99

yes, if it is offset by productivity. there is common opinion that BTC will go up when M2 global supply is increasing. then, I give a question, when M2 global is not increasing, and BTC price does not go up, what catalyst makes BTC price go up? my question brings BTC investor to analysis this catalyst.

Cautious_Monitor_164

Depends, from your paper : "The total amount of dormant quantum-vulnerable bitcoin may reach 2.3 million BTC when all script types are considered" (∼11%) So it's a lot less if we're speaking only of dormant or "outdated BTC wallets". 6.9M is when you add reused adresses but this figure is falling fast because many of these coins can still be easely transfered to a new address. Thanks for the very interesting reference.

JohnTheGambler

Its really matter much for BTC? 🤔

Traditional_Most105

Well i just got in back in July but from my research and learning its been always like that... its just there are safer bets or riskier ones... you either choose random ones and hope for the best or you do your research and choose safer ones with potential or just dca in BTC which is the safest among all, you put money you can afford to lose, you have your exit strategy or hold long term and you accept any negative consequences.... Anyone who gets in hoping for retirement or moonshots putting all their money in and losing them without accepting the possibility of losing some or all the money they put in when it happens they'll blame crypto for it... but never blame their choices and actions... Its similar to a casino i'd say but not a casino. There is a casino aspect to it especially in memecoins but not 100% a casino...

AutoModerator

Post is by: Cezariu and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1whq99c/built_a_small_meanreversion_bot_for_btceth/ Been running a side project for a couple months now and figured I'd share since this sub tends to appreciate the "show your work" angle more than most. Started out trying a classic trend-following setup (EMA/MACD crossovers) on a rotating watchlist of top futures pairs. Backtested it with realistic fees + slippage and it just didn't survive, barely broke even at best on any timeframe I tried. Pivoted to a simpler statistical mean-reversion approach on just BTC and ETH, 30m and 1h horizons. Chronological train/test split (not just in-sample curve fitting), and it actually held up out-of-sample , nothing crazy, low-to-mid 50s% accuracy, but consistently above the \~53.5% breakeven line you need for fixed-payout products (I was mainly looking at this for MEXC's Event Futures, binary up/down, fixed \~85% payout, no leverage). Since then I've had it auto-posting every call AND every result live to a Telegram channel, no cherry-picking after the fact, you see the call before it resolves. All-time so far: 88 correct / 71 wrong, \~55% accuracy across both symbols/horizons. Not a money printer by any means, it's a thin edge, and I size small (1/10 of bankroll per bet) specifically because the edge is thin and variance is real. Not trying to sell anything, it's free to watch, but I'd rather not get into the exact signal logic publicly, hope that's fair. Mostly curious if anyone else here has played with mean-reversion on short crypto timeframes and gotten similar/different numbers. If you want to see it running live, contact me Not financial advice, past performance doesn't guarantee future results, standard disclaimer applies, this is a hobby project not a signal service. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

Post is by: Exact-Ad-8325 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoHelp/comments/1whl0rt/how_important_is_fed_and_macro_news_when/ I’m trying to understand how much attention I should be paying to macro news when investing in crypto. For example: Fed meetings, interest rate decisions, CPI, unemployment data, liquidity, etc. I mostly DCA and hold long term, but I’ve noticed BTC and the broader market can move a lot around Fed announcements and US economic data. For people who have been in crypto for a while, do you actually use this kind of information when deciding when to buy, hold, or wait? And if I don’t want to follow every piece of economic news, what are the few macro indicators that are actually worth paying attention to? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Lavayo

No. He does not back anything. He, and Larry fink (blackrock) may have an impact on distribution and current price in fiat currencies. Same as clarity etc. But none of that changes what BTC is and how it's backed. If Strategy lost its keys tomorrow and saylor left. There would be ~750k coins less. That's all that would happen longer term. Another person would take saylors place and try to reach the stack strategy had.

TripTryad

Alt coins for me, were what they were always intended to be. A way to create more bitcoin during bull markets. But that part gets drowned out by the true believers and the ones arguing with them. The vast majority of BTC I own by this point was made from swinging into alts in 2015, 2017, and 2020. ESPECIALLY 2015. Nothing is ever going to top the ETH/Antshares double whammy in 2015 and 2016. WATTBA 🙏🏾

JashBeep

FWIW, I am completely unphased by bitcoin being accepted or regulated by governments and corporations. There are a set of people who are super focused on news cycle, hype and short term trading. That's just not me. I regard most laws at temporary in the face of something as immutable as bitcoin. For several years there was a meme where China would repeatedly ban bitcoin. What matters is that all of the bitcoin is secured by the bitcoin network and that the bitcoin rules are enforced. As long as that holds true, I think it will continue to gain adoption and value. When governments and corporations accept it, they bend the knee to a system beyond political control. At the same time, they empower themselves against the machinations of the global fiat monetary system. Let me say "if" bitcoin becomes more successful, it will continue to be adopted by corporations and governments. That would be an inevitable outcome of success, any way you look at it. It is not a well reasoned position to say it should only be used by individuals. You can have concerns about manipulation of the value, but you need to recognise that you're measuring it in fiat terms. It is unbelievably difficult to unlearn how to denominate value in something other than currency. I could just tell you to look at GLD/BTC or the average wage denominated in bitcoin or your average house price denominated in bitcoin or your iphone, car, whatever you like. When you denominate in bitcoin, everything gets cheaper over time. At least part of the reason why this is true is because bitcoin has a tailwind because fiat will continue to be debased. There is a certain insistence, even within the bitcoin community, that the USD denominated value of bitcoin is what matters. It is vastly overstated. The majority of people are not from the US. They do not want to buy USD denominated goods and services. In that regard, bitcoin has further tailwinds because most other currencies debase faster than the USD. Having said that, you can use USD as a proxy to understand it's value, but it's an approximation only. It carries with in the problem that the dollar itself fluctuates (see DXY) and debases (see GLD/USD). A good way to be fleeced of your bitcoin is to focus on the short term USD denominated value and trade it based on news cycles, hype, speculation etc. The volatility will destroy you. OTOH, if you see the rules of bitcoin and you like those rules, if you think that's what actually matters and it's a good thing that people should have to give them freedom from financial repression, bitcoin is the superior monetary technology. That's how I see it and so I think it will continue to gain adoption and value will accrue to the network. Everything else is noise.

AutoModerator

Post is by: StrikingInteraction4 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/binaryoptions/comments/1whlsgg/has_anyone_else_tried_swivr/ I’ve been testing it. It offers 5- and 15-minute BTC, ETH and SOL binary markets with low fees and low vig. If anyone’s interested in testing it out, you can onboard here: https://swivr.trade/waitlist Seems pretty cool, what other sites do you generally trade on? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoMarkets) if you have any questions or concerns.*

CG-Saviour878879

I mean just get and hold BTC and watch it appreciate over time. Otherwise stake ETH.

OrangePillar

Cool. I saw your other comment about using JPY. Are there many games where JPY is not accepted but BTC is?

OrangePillar

Does it use on-chain BTC or Lightning?

f2pool-CSR3

The process involves registering and logging into the distributor's website, selecting the desired BitCash denomination (in JPY), and paying with BTC. You will receive a Hiragana code, once verified within the game, the top-up is complete.

OrangePillar

How much does it cost in BTC to play?

WolfBob808

This was a bigger negative for stable coins. Circle Internet screwed. I still will stay under weight on BTC until after the midterms when political garbage may subside.

Neo_Awakens

In 2009 mining was a low-competition, experimental hobby that anyone could do using a basic computer that did not even have a GPU Because the global network was tiny and the mathematical difficulty was at its absolute minimum, users could easily solo mine directly through the original Bitcoin Core software client, earning massive rewards of 50 BTC per block. Could have just mined 50 btc and forgot about it only to realise now your a billionaire BUT it is what it is

Abject-Issue-6639

No but it shouldnt be allowed to be gobbled up by microstrategy and blackrock. Idk how you cant see that this is bad and is not Satoshis Vision. BTC was meant to provide people a better way of transacting money globally and fix the Monetary Problems of Inflating Fiat. Instead. It has ensnared people in a Game that is controlled by Elite and Big Government. Im not saying it wont still go up. But at what cost? And will you even own enough when it does to even make a difference after they have inflated everything to the high heavens?!

Pizzaboy0511

Let’s talk through this. Say you want to put 50k in and you believe BTC will go to 300k in 3 years this is an idea of what your gains would look like. 1) you wait for it to drop to 50k. In 3 years you net 250k 2) you spend 25k to buy at current price and then you soend 25k when BTC drop to 50k. You net \~199k 3 you spend 50k to buy at current price. You bet \~148k. As you can see entering this trade at the right time has the much greater gain potential but there is a risk factor. The what happens if BTC never drop to 50k 1) in scenario one you never enter and you bet nothing 2) you net 75k 3) you 148k

f2pool-CSR3

BTC is strong enough to speak for itself; the minimal price reaction has already proven this.

Cold_Respond_7656

So you want limits on how many BTC an individual or entity owns??

Aanetz

The oil market & AI bubble is more concerning & in my opinion would affect BTC price even more.

Pizzaboy0511

I was looking forward to this but disappointed it barely made a tend to BTC. Been waiting for weeks now trying to enter a sizable amount in mstr and BTC.

TitanicChurro

I don't have much conviction, but I know enough about BTC to know it doesn't need this Clarity Act.

Over_Reputation_8801

The SEC and CFTC will now make their own rules that will satisfy the institutional investors. Clarity was never actually going to do much for BTC anyway.

Abject-Issue-6639

I dont doubt that it will but i think we have more turbulence ahead. Never shoulda let the Lionshare of BTC be controlled by Corporate Fat Cats and War Mongerers. That wasnt Satoshis Dream.

paccanonhf6

BTC remains the same, with no backer to its name.

libretumente

Trading crypto is a casino. Crypto itself is a huge umbrella term that includes very sound, scarce, and relatively decentralized and fair projects such as BTC and LTC, as well as absolutely centralized scamcoins which unfortunately makes up 99.999% of projects. Cryptos are not made equal. I consider some coins, and most (scams) tokens. Tokens =/= coins. Buyer beware.

FousHikes

Neat. We know. We also know BTC needs adoption or it literally doesn't matter.  So yes, we wanted Clarity. 

JuxtaposeLife

Data over Opinions... In the last 12 hours (79 blocks) there were 615,132 UTXOs and 96.0% of that activity was coins that previously moved just 7 days prior or less (extremely short term trading). Coins that have been held longer than 90 days made up 0.95% of th total volume in those 615,132 transactions. Lowest reading I've seen. No one who has held BTC longer than 90 days moved today. All of this market activity is tourists. More specifics in the data: the total change in value of the BTC that moved in that <7 day held group was $-145,938,220.71 Basically very very short term traders freaked out and sold. Everyone who has been here longer than a week is simply watching and waiting...probably accumulating (though that doesn't show up in the data, just volume).

bitusher

> They barely understand BTC, and now they're being told "oh this one is bad now so you have to buy this other one"? Yes, but many of them became interested in Bitcoin by either Influencers or developers/OGs and not company CEOs. The bad news is this allows some scam ifluencers or devs to lead a small group of followers into investing in some scam altcoin. The good news is as a person invests more in Bitcoin they tend to learn more and follow many devs and influencers so aren't so easily swayed by any one opinion. >It's too economically destructive. We aren't discussing hypotheticals here. There have been over 50 Bitcoin forks since 2017 so this has been tested many times before and most the network stays together >who are the ones that would have all the money and influence to run such information/influence campaigns? Influence comes from many directions including a long list of early adopters/crypto-anarchists and some of these have large amounts of Bitcoin so cannot be swayed. Some of these people control large sites and companies and they cannot be bribed or influenced against their ideals very easily. >The incentives or "motivations" as you called it, of the mining companies. Keep in mind that many people have incorrectly labelled miners as the enemy when many tend to deeply care about Bitcoin and have long time preferences to secure it (otherwise they would not have invested millions of dollars in infrastructure) >It's no longer true to say that the economic incentives make it undeniably true that miners will cede some miners won't as we just saw where miners acted irrationally and mined at a loss , most miners will follow the incentives and what secures the largest chain.

Moist_Ad_5580

My cousin, when he was around 14 years old, insisted that my parents buy at least a 1000dollars worth of Bitcoin. Naturally, my parents ignored him, just like his own parents had done. He somehow ended up buying approximately 8 Bitcoins. (I believe his investment was around 4000-6000dollars for 8 BTC.) He still has those Bitcoins I think stored in a drive, and he remembers the initial password, but he has forgotten the transaction password. (I don’t know the exact name of the password or the wallet, but I can ask him if anyone wants to know or help.) He told me he has unlimited attempts, but the password is between 8-12 characters long, consisting of alphabets and numbers. Of course, he has tried every possible password imaginable and many different methods to recover the password. He clearly isn’t trusting anyone easily for this. Is there a chance to get it? ChatGPT told me it could take anywhere from 10 years to a million years.

Domestic_AAA_Battery

Now. If you want to be risky, invest half of what you're planning to jump in with. If it goes back down to $63k (or less), dump the second half in then and you made some extra money. If it goes up to $85k, I'd say buy then with the other half. It'll go up to $100k+ (eventually) so you'll still make money on the 2nd half. And if it dips to $60k, then you profit on when you invest now and even moreso with the money you invest in the $60s range. Either way you'll make a profit eventually (well, us BTC believers assume that's an inevitability). It's just how much of a profit - because most of us believe that BTC hasn't reached it's peak. If you just want to get in the game, feel free to invest it all now too.

Pantzzzzless

It's funny how easy it is to tell how long someone has been involved in BTC. Anyone with at least 10 years still vividly remembers Thanksgiving 2016 when it first crossed $1k. That was wild as fuck. I still have moments where I forget that it isn't still in the triple digits. It has been well past "the moon" for years now. It's orbiting Neptune right now.

IncidentFar3849

Almost fully exited. Only have low 5 figure in BTC

Ok-Information-2428

This is a fundamental problem. It will likely be the case that BTC either fails or changes (removing the 21M limit).

DeepSpaceDesperado

The inherent problem is that society still "values" fiat. People only care about this stuff only because the price is effected one way or another to the up or down side. The day we live for is the day when we return to valuing true assets over fiat--and the purest, hardest form of money is BTC. Its base is growing more and more, as the public trust in fiat continues to shaken. Until then, keep stacking & tick tock, next block.

DiamondHandsDarrell

I mean I've sold 100 BTC through them, I feel they're pretty safe. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Bradleygrayson

You should self custody your BTC. Leaving it on exchanges exposes you to unnecessary risk.

AnywhereSavings1710

Actually, this is a good time to divulge a bit more. Without telling a life story here, I'll explain my reasoning for previously running Knots. I care about BTC being decentralized, as it serves the common man, and is a core pillar of it's value proposition, and what (theoretically) partly props up price in USD. I ran Knots and started supporting Dashjr's work for three reasons: 1. Decentralization is important 2. I have a bias towards action, not watching 3. They seemed to be the only ones who cared enough to act I'd love to bring this same energy to the Core community, granted, I'm just a guy... I now run Core and stopped supporting Dashjr's work for five reasons (probably more, but this is what I grabbed off the top): 1. They hardforked themselves into irrelevance and gave up any momentum they had for real change 2. They were focused on the wrong things (minor technical change), under the narrative of the right thing (protecting decentralization) 3. Luke refused to entertain other options and was noticeably making an emotional decision to hard fork on September 1st. (I actually participated in the Knots discord discussions following the failed UASF in August, unable to positively influence the direction of their energy) 4. The more I learned about Dashjr the more I realized he would not lead his followers toward a productive solution, just isolation 5. no other alternativ to the legitimate chain exists, so I must run Core to utilize the network as a sovereign participant

Bright-Ad-4072

Worth buying. I don't think we will get to the £46k lows we recently saw from the $5bn dollar liquidation from whales in the last 2 months. The more credible crypto analysts have already seen many indicators we are past the bottom of this cycle. Funny how we will still get a revote on the clarity act so its not out completely. The global bond market is effed so many people will pile money into BTC as a safe haven deflationary asset not linked to a bank

ximogui

Clarity didn't pass and guaranteed rate hike tomorrow in a historically weak month (Rektember). Hard to imagine sentiment getting worse than this in the near-term but this is BTC so who knows

Archer_solace

It’s not really a loss. BTC doesn’t care.

_Stylite

Saylor is now in the red on BTC

powni_

1. The security of Bitcoin is only meassured in Fiat. This is the most relevant metric when it comes to security. 2. I don't believe in a 51% attack myself. I simply believe that the network is atrophying. We're already seeing the early signs. Bitcoin is stuck in its dysfunctional state. Bitcoin rises from $60k to $80k, yet there is no significant demand for block space. Median fees remain between 0–3sat/vB, while billions of dollars in BTC are being moved through the market by custodians and ETFs. CeFi is making a ton of money off BTC, while L1 comes up empty-handed. I can already hear the upcoming big boy discussions about demurrage, storage fees, tail emissions etc...

JimmySki6166

Cashed in one BTC and put a big down payment on my daughter’s home. Just held the rest.

Electronic_Quote399

Best answer here. All depends what you're trying to do. What do you want to do? Want to buy 1 BTC for 75k and flip it short term for like 90k? Invest as you can and stack? Trade? All different answers, and different for different people

AnywhereSavings1710

Good point about people needing to buy the coins from the miners for it to still be effective. Otherwise they will sell themselves to zero. It seems like Wall St and their customers would continue to buy the original BTC if a fork took place. Most modern BTC holders know little about the technical side, so it would take a massive information campaign really to sway buyers/current Holders to switch to a new coin. Think about these people. They barely understand BTC, and now they're being told "oh this one is bad now so you have to buy this other one"? This scenario seems, at best, like it would crash BTC/USD for a short to midterm, for potential rebuild in the future. It's too economically destructive. Additionally, who are the ones that would have all the money and influence to run such information/influence campaigns? Probably the corporations. I know there's ways you could pick apart this argument, but overall, what seems to be the *most likely* outcome? These things take months to truly study and forecast, even then, without certainty. The incentives or "motivations" as you called it, of the mining companies. It's impossible to know them all, with precise weighting of each one, of course. But that's precisely the problem. Because of the centralization, because of the regulation, etc... It's no longer true to say that the economic incentives make it undeniably true that miners will cede to whatever the majority of non-economic node runners want.

AnywhereSavings1710

Replied to your other comment. The bottom line is that my personal past is irrelevant to this discussion. What I posted today is the current truth (if you're referring to my perspective) and the intent was to foster genuine innovative disucssion. If the only point of BTC forums is to be an echo chamber, the utility is rather low.

dj_destroyer

I lost .2 BTC to Quadriga which at the time was borderline dust. Now it starts to hurt more and more every year.

Forded_Fiction24

Only God knows, but every second your money is sitting on the sidelines not invested it's losing purchasing power for BTC, other assets or consumer goods alike, that's a guarantee. So you better spend your money on something. Bitcoin is definitely an option

stheodore1974

I suspect you’ll see another drop or two in the next days/weeks but that is only a hunch and not financial advice. I’ve been buying BTC since 2020 and I’ve bought it at $9k and I’ve bought it at $120k. I’ve never sold any. This is the way

JimmySki6166

BTC for 15k

anon1971wtf

If fees stay at 0.02 BTC per block - around 2056 it would be half of total reward. I don't see any problems, difficulty will adjust

JunkBondJunkie

I wrote some BTC mining malware in C++ in 2012.

daddynewpairofshoes

Whatever dude. Clarity was a shit coin bill. BTC is going up..bottom is already in.

anon1971wtf

> But as the block subsidy shrinks, transaction fees are expected to fund more of Bitcoin’s security. Not necessarily. If fees freeze at 0.02 BTC per block it would represent half of total reward around 2056

AggressiveGas4637

Today’s a good example. We are down almost 5%.  I have a DCA going off Saturday. I bought the same amount today cause a almost 5% dip is nice. That means my buy will immediately be up almost 5% when BTC is where it was…..yesterday 

cubeeless

BTC to $400k!

Abject-Stretch-1187

We can tell you have no BTC buddy lol we figured that part out from your toddler fit/rant

xaviemb

Let the Karens sell their BTC to the whales who know where this is headed

Abject-Stretch-1187

This idiot thinks BTC is done for because the act failed to pass lol The act isn't for bitcoin buddy, it's for those who have no clue that they don't need any sort of clarity or permission to interact with the network. Imagine being this pompous and broke( yes you're most likely a broke person considering you have access to AI that can break down what BTC is and yet you believe it is some gambling asset)

1Tim1_15

The dems were given concession after concession, including the ones about Trump (who was already a multi-billionaire), and still no. This screws everyone because investment firms can't use BTC as part of people's retirement package, and that's the best thing for their retirement package IMO. The Ds have always and will always hate crypto because they can't control it, and because the banks own them.

1Tim1_15

It does matter. Investment firms with billions can't use BTC as part of people's retirement plans, and IMO BTC is the best thing for retirement plans. The dems will never approve of BTC because they can't control it.

Financial-Milk-7488

BTC will be fine bro…

Majestic-Baby-3407

I'm great, I don't have any BTC so things are good.

I_talk

5% of the BTC supply? What? Who's holding that much?

Cygnus_X

Republicans voted for, Democrats against. I suspect if Dems had their way, they would ban BTC completely and take the whole market to $0. They'd rather we all lose our investments than allow us to enjoy the liberties of an alternate currency system.