BTC

Suspicious_Act4982

The exit liquidity fear is loudest at exactly the wrong time. It peaks during consolidation and fear, which is historically when the people asking the question should be accumulating, not waiting. The "this time is different" framing cuts both ways. Yes, every cycle has bagholders who bought the top. It also has people who held through every correction and came out the other side with a position worth holding. The difference is usually structure, not timing. Core position in BTC earning through Nexo removes the pressure to time anything perfectly. You're either early or you're compounding. Both beat being exit liquidity for someone else's trade.

ProlapseJerky

If they move BTC is done

Fickle-Designer874

I'd add CoinLobster to the list if you haven't seen it. Free combined BTC orderbook across multiple exchanges at once, live liquidation feed, funding rates and open interest, and a whale tracker for BTC flow. I use it to spot sell walls or large liquidations before price moves.

TheresNoSecondBest

**Because they're shitcoins, mate**. Both are literally copies of Bitcoin. I can copy BTC and start selling. People who don't understand the difference will buy some but eventually, my copy will [die](https://www.coingecko.com/research/publications/how-many-cryptocurrencies-failed), like the thousands of shitcoins before.

user_name_checks_out

> Why is btc spl? BTC is spl bcs it ds nt hv a cntrl athrty

JMeucci

So they moved ~8 BTC. And....?

FriendsMade_MeDoIt

that actually sounds way more like what people in my circle end up settling on after all the hype dies down the 70% BTC part is what usually keeps people sane when things get volatile. then the 30% becomes the “okay let’s see if this pops” zone without wrecking everything if it doesn’t funny thing is, in my friend group the hardest part isn’t even picking alts, it’s holding them. everyone feels like a genius when they’re up 2x, then panic sells or rotates too early. the few who actually hit big were the ones who just stuck with their picks through the noise are you already thinking of specific alts or still kinda feeling it out?

Rare_Rich6713

There are some that keeps BTC native like babylon that's what I'm using.

Rare_Rich6713

It happened to most of us, you can still buy BTC now, its never too late. What I do is DCA in monthly, stake some on Babylon and Just hold the rest. At some point price will hit 200K.

Abject-Stretch-1187

Ikr lol these greedy bears are funny. BTC has never fallen by the same percentages each bear cycle so I don’t know why they keep expecting it to behave the same way each bear cycle. To them 50% is too small of a drop lol like the market is supposed to give them more just because. No logical reason for more drops, just emotional.

wavingwandsince1999

It’s not “bad,” but it depends on what you want. Robinhood is fine for simple buying and price exposure, but the main downside is limited control, especially around withdrawals and actually holding your own BTC. If you’re planning to hold long-term or want full control, most people prefer moving to a platform where you can withdraw to your own wallet. So yeah, okay to start there, but worth thinking about self-custody as you go

ATLienZ777

BTC is money for some their own money not controlled by banks, for some it’s digital gold, others it’s an investment. But BTC is the market and ever since I started in 2016 if BTC goes the whole market goes with it lol and I’m not a BTC maxi but BTC is the market. People will lose faith in crypto would take years to recover if it did and even tho it’ll be nothing left but crypto believers or degens and scammers.

Neat_Public_7815

it is choppy... thats why i just opened iron condor strategy with 60-80k BTC price.. I think thats safe haha

No-Wrap3568

Hardware wallets are generally safer and it's really good that you shifted to a hardware wallet. I hope you've shifted to a BTC-only hardware wallet as it takes out code that is not required and protects your assets way better, lesser surface area for attacks. Where most people fail is that they fall for single points of failures and that in the longer run causes more harm than good. That is because your entire seedphrase on just one single piece of paper or a metal plate will always be vulnerable to theft and natural calamities. Maybe you can have your seedphrase backed up into a device that can split your keys cryptographically to ensure maximum security. Apart from opinions here on reddit, do read some good blogs that can teach you the architecture of cold wallets and what makes them safe. You'll be informed in a much better manner

Abject-Stretch-1187

Don’t worry, they’re listening to Bob the bear and Benjamin blowen whose only logic for a 40k-50k BTC price is “the charts show it’ll happen because of lines we drew and snorted” Bob Loukas has a new video where he essentially said “the consecutive 5 red months happened too fast so it does not negate another drop around Q4”  Anyone with a brain who look at BTC history and realize 5 consecutive red months are the norm and typically indicates the end of the bear but Bob doesn’t agree because of charts lol 

GaRGa77

Compared to BTC ydf

roisenberg_

ockham razor: BTC is just a ponzi scheme as all the others that appeared throughout history

crimeo

Both are factually treated as stores of value by tons of people, whether it's incidentally/meanwhile better at transactions than BTC or not. For example in Canada where I live, Ethereum got an ETF approved in brokerages like 2 months after BTC did. Which makes zero sense to even exist if not using it as a store of value. The ethereum ETF here I know of (I think there's more than one) has about 6.5 billion in assets in it, which is massive considering it's not everyone in the world using it, just Canadians.

Romanizer

Exactly. So my point is that ETH will have a different development than BTC, because the latter is mainly used as a store of value (besides other possible use-cases) and therefore has an infinitely increasing market cap. ETH on the other hand has other use-cases which already work quite well on current market caps. Buying ETH in hopes of increasing prices may not be a good idea. That was the essence of what I was trying to say.

HistoricalRub1358

The “professor” demonstrated an embarrassing lack of knowledge & understanding of BTC. He needs to do some research before speaking in public.

crimeo

Anything is a store of value if you store value in it. if you meant "not supposed to be" 1) Who cares what the founder thought, and 2) Bitcoin also wasn't supposed to be. Have you ever read even so much as the title of the BTC whitepaper? It's supposed to also be a transaction medium

CoolJoeLiam

**Strike**, **CashApp** or **River** for **DCA** orders (no fee and free option for sending to cold storage) **Kraken Pro** for **Limit** orders (buy the dips, use Lightning to transfer out cheaply) **Lava** or **CashApp** for **Market** orders (set it up as a daily "auto invest" but just toggle it off after purchase, can use debit card too at no fee) (NOTE: factor in the cost of moving your BTC off any exchange you buy on, all the big name crypto exchanges refuse to give you speed/fee options bc they want to discourage self-custody with high fees, thus the above exchanges stand out as truly bitcoin friendly) Blockstream Jade, Foundation Passport, Trezor, Coldcard are all top hardware signing devices

Blehnt

I didnt know this was even possible, makes me want to sell up and buy precious metals. BTC really isnt what i thought it was

TheresNoSecondBest

DON'T INVEST IN CRYPTO. IT'S A PILE OF CENTRALIZED SCAMS, PRETENDING TO BE BTC. **Save in Bitcoin instead.**

keccos

If I am correct, this Nakamoto guy owns 1.1 million BTC more or less...does not look like he did not made some bucks...right?

AmberSeduceX

Buying BTC on Robinhood isn’t “bad,” but it’s limited you don’t get direct custody of your coins, so you can’t easily withdraw to your own wallet.

yoobermcruber

It's ok to buy bitcoin on Robinhood as long as you don't leave your BTC on Robinhood and you withdraw your BTC to your own wallet once you get to like 0.01 BTC. But there are better places to buy bitcoin from than Robinhood.

SilverPrivateer

This place? A ghost town The buyers of BTC are whales and Saylor for MSTR while you guys... I don't even know what you guys do here anymore haha. At least I'm buying bitcoins through my MSTR and keeping this market alive for ya'll np

Tim-Rocket

Where is the NSA hiding the BTC servers?

PsychologicalCat937

Ngl, watching BTC headbutt the $76k resistance for the 100th time this month is basically the financial version of Groundhog Day. Everyone in here is acting like Goldman entering the ETF race was going to send us to $150k overnight, but the market clearly missed the memo. Tbh, just HODL and go touch grass—checking the price every 10 minutes in this crab market is just a high-speed way to age 20 years. 💀

ReMeDyIII

So if Satoshi's BTC needs to be moved, would that prove Satoshi's still alive?

Longjumping-Bus6423

I’m super surprised by this. I had the Coinbase pro subscription or whatever it’s called for years with my daily buys. Robinhood is somehow better. Like noticeably better. I went back and forth on multiple buys and on every occasion robinhood gave me more BTC per dollar spent

steebulee

If quantum computing fucks up BTC, guess what, it fucks up all money and everything as we know it

J5966358

Everything over 50 percent BTC an 50 percent ETH is too concentrated in my eyes. Just a personal opinion ofc. 

Full-Sound-6269

And yet still, price of BTC is nowhere near ATH and is not even in the bullish trend territory.

Visual-Currency-234

Yeah the timing doesn't really make sense anyway. Like you said, anyone with actual quantum capability wouldn't announce it by going after the most famous wallet in crypto history Plus even if quantum gets there in next 10-15 years, Bitcoin community would probably just soft fork those coins into oblivion before letting someone dump 1 million BTC on market. Network would vote to basically burn them rather than let some random entity crash everything The real question is what happens to all those other early wallets with exposed keys. Satoshi's gets all attention but there's probably thousands of smaller P2PK addresses from 2009-2010 era that would be much better targets for staying under radar

longonbtc

Hourglass wouldn't limit the spending of vulnerable bitcoin to 1 BTC per block. It would limit the spending of vulnerable bitcoin to 1 spend per block, but not 1 single BTC. The 1 single spend can be spending thousands of vulnerable bitcoins. For example, a quantum computer could crack a vulnerable address that contains thousands of bitcoins and then spend those thousands of bitcoins in 1 block.

Fro3en_Cornchip

I’ve never used robinhood, I don’t think I can in Australia so I can’t comment on that part but after doing extensive research into spot fees, dca, BTC withdrawal fees and spreads I came to the conclusion that kraken pro was the best option for spot and limit orders plus BTC withdrawal is very small fee (although they just upped their fees they are still competitive) I use Strike for DCA, no fees for reoccurring buys and no fees for BTC withdrawal per month. Really I wouldn’t be taking advice reddit about where to put your money though. I get you are probably just fishing for some opinions but definitely do your own research. Good luck.

dj_destroyer

It's true that Satoshi's coins are in early P2PK addresses which means the public key is already exposed so quantum computers that can run Shor's algorithm at scale, that could technically allow someone to derive the private key... But the leap people make is assuming that capability is anywhere close when it's just not. To break Bitcoin's 256k encryption, you'd need millions of error-corrected qubits running coherently for long enough to execute Shor's algorithm. Today's quantum machines are in the \~100-1000 qubit range, noisy, with very high error rates. Not even in the same ballpark and likely a decade away or more. And if someone did have that capability, going after Satoshi's coins would be the loudest, dumbest possible move. It would instantly alert the entire network and trigger a coordinated response (forks, migration to quantum-resistant signatures, etc.). Way more likely they'd go after easier less visible targets first. The bottom line is if/when quantum actually gets there because Bitcoin won't just sit there and let a 1m BTC wallet get drained. It becomes a global upgrade problem long before that and I trust the devs who work on this project day in and day out.

nugymmer

BTC was meant for large scale transactions like buying houses, cars, boats etc. XMR will fulfil its role if enough people abandon it.

ReasonablePossum_

Wouldn't a fork be optimal here to not freeze anything? The unprotected BTC fork becomes worthless, the new one under the new protocol becomes mainstream with all the addresses. People with old wallets can just get their new ones and access their BTC with no issues. Forcing people to move from old wallets seems like the perfect smokescreen for people with access to massive ancient cracked wallets moving their funds without attracting attention, since everyone and their mothers would be doing that.... sus af

Hannahshear

Check HTX, they have around up to 3BTC non KYC limit

fairlyaveragetrader

The easiest way for the average person is honestly the etfs, Ibit or fbtc. You don't have to trade fees, you don't have to deal with trying to figure out your taxes. It's extremely straightforward and you can do it on any brokerage If you want to learn how wallets work and how to store your own, you can do that at some point but you really need a good understanding of the risks, how to mitigate them, and you have to keep your own records. If you're a United States citizen this is a problem now with taxes. If you buy BTC on coinbase and you send it to your wallet and then you send it back to coinbase to sell it they are not going to have a record of what your cost averages. If it's a bunch of little transactions it gets even more complicated. You can average your cost and try to kind of sort of come up with it but you're not likely to have good records unless you're really meticulous With the etfs, it's extremely simple, point and click. They are a physical custody ETF, easy peasy. I got into Bitcoin about 10 years ago, learned everything about hardware wallets, how the blockchain works, security, nowadays I just have ibit shares. It's just so much more simple

Subtraktions

Strategy has massive debt obligations, it doesn't remotely take BTC to fail (whatever that means) for them to get liquidated. All it's going to take is a long recession caused by I dunno... a worldwide fuel/fertilizer crisis that leads to a sovereign debt crisis or an AI jobs apocalypse or an AI bubble popping.

marvelish

They appear to be non-kyc but they will hold funds arbitrarily if their system flags you and demand obscene amounts of documentation to release your funds (way above any normal kyc process) I was using them to cash out BTC to USDT on a regular biweekly basis until one day they decided to hold my money hostage. All you get is automated messages and a screen full of documents they demand from you. Huge nightmare.

ricksy

If Strategy gets liquidated then BTC has failed. IMO the risk is overblown, especially given BTC is currently down \~50% from ATH and Strategy is perfectly fine, buying more than ever.

painfuldrp

Last time I checked, robinhood BTC was a derivative that just follows the price. So you can’t move it to cold storage. Meaning you’d have to sell it and rebuy it on a real crypto exchange. So yes, it’s bad

_Commando_

All I read in that BIP-361 proposal is: "BTC Devs are in control of your bitcoin" and Satoshi's social experiment will come to an end, which ever way the "bitcoin devs" go with.

rbmavpdubcejefntvz

I like option 3: Hourglass option. Limits the spending of vulnerable Bitcoin to 1BTC per block (at least this is my understanding) This would dramatically reduce the amounts of BTC being dumped onto the market and would force it to enter the market more slowly.

ataxiwardance

I am not a super technologically savvy BTC supporter (more economic theory) and this guy sounds like a moron to me. Aren’t his critiques applicable against all open source software? Are … all open source software secretly CIA operations or just BTC?

_Commando_

So... what was the BTC Maxi's response to this video??? https://x.com/TapTools/status/2044913394751586754 If "they aka devs" can simply fork BTC and lock away Satoshi's coins, they can do that to anyone's coins. Also, so much for "there is no one controlling BTC, it's decentralized, bla bla" when a core dev can simply change the code at gun point. Do you think the government wont force a code change now that they hold a lot of BTC? Any change to bitcoin core that affects people's BTC is an end to the social experiment that Satoshi created. What say you BTC Maxi's?

Cptn_BenjaminWillard

I'm surprised. This is actually a decent article. I don't see these often. I wonder if the same dynamics are happening with ETH, which might reflect a broader economic outlook, or it might not. ETH has historically tended to lag BTC anyway, so whether the same patterns are happening with ETH might not even be relevant right now.

crimeo

> And they probably pocket the cash and what do they do with the cash? Who knows. So not only do you have no evidence, you don't even have a vague ass theory, lol. You have to buy the underlying asset in order to be able to safely and reliably pay out later no matter if it spikes up or not. Otherwise you'd need investments you were VERY sure were going to outperform BTC and put the money in that instead

callebbb

You call a 50% CAGR since Jan 1 2014 bad performance? Thats at the lows of this cycle. If that’s bad performance then S&P 500’s 11% CAGR over the same time frame must be garbage. I get the whole “past performance doesn’t dictate future results” mantra. Obviously I am not assuredly saying Bitcoin will continue at that pace. But to argue that it will suddenly become a bad investment, when historically it’s been THE BEST investment, is asinine. Same for MSTR. It is up, at today’s valuation, 700% since they adopted a Bitcoin reserve strategy. 🤷 My money is on BTC and MSTR. My cash is in STRC, earning a monthly dividend of 1%. And I’ve been in this asset class since 2016.

RevolutionaryPlum389

*correction Saylor has brought the most BTC since 2013.

ATLienZ777

Monero has always been clutch and people who’ve had skin in the game for a long time understand the risks and how to protect your coins. But we’re talking about adoption and the masses some of people who recently got into BTC have no clue on what it’s truly meant for. But mass adoption just means more regulations and more plays on trying to turn crypto into a wall street 2.0.

AutoModerator

Post is by: Bcom_Mod and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/bitcoin_com/comments/1snoa1u/whales_bought_270k_btc_in_the_last_30_days_while/ Two things are happening at once on-chain, and they're directly in conflict with each other. On one side: whale addresses have accumulated approximately 270,000 BTC over the past 30 days. This roughly amounts to $20 billion worth of Bitcoin being absorbed by large holders at prices between $65K and $75K. ETF inflows are running at $200-$450 million per day. Institutional demand is real and it's been consistent. On the other side: exchange inflows are running at around 11,000 BTC per hour right now. Multiple transfers above 1,000 BTC are hitting Binance. Large deposits account for over 40% of inflows. This is distribution: holders who bought lower are selling into the rally and banking profit. Both things are simultaneously true, which is why the market looks the way it does. [Every time BTC nudges above $75,000](https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-tests-75000-as-whales-accumulate-270000-btc/), the on-chain realized profit/loss indicator spikes, meaning more holders cross into profit territory and immediately start moving coins to sell. The rally creates its own supply. Institutional buyers absorb it, but not fast enough to produce a clean breakout. This is actually a fairly well-understood pattern at key resistance zones. The market needs either the supply to exhaust itself, meaning everyone who wants to sell into $75K eventually does, or for a macro catalyst to create enough fresh demand to overpower the distribution. The Iran situation has been that catalyst intermittently, but each ceasefire signal fades and the sellers come back. The resistance at $76,800 specifically is cited as the next clean break level. Above that, supply thins and the path toward $80K opens faster. Below $74,000 on any close and the whole setup risks unwinding toward the $70-71K range that's proven to be strong support. What makes this environment tricky to trade is that both the bull and bear cases have genuine on-chain support simultaneously. Whales are not leaving. But neither are the sellers. *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: Bcom_Mod and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/bitcoin_com/comments/1sno50k/btc_tested_75k_four_times_in_the_last_18_hours/ Yesterday was one of the choppiest sessions we've seen at a key level in months and it's worth documenting properly because the price action was genuinely strange. [Bitcoin crossed $75,000 multiple times throughout Wednesday evening](https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoins-tug-of-war-at-75k-leaves-traders-bruised-analyst-eyes-85k-by-late-april/). Each time, a wave of selling hit immediately. Each time it pulled back, down to $74,300 at the low, and then climbed again. Then at around 5am EST this morning, the NY open session kicked off with another flush to $74,300 before another recovery back to $75K. Rinse, repeat. Coinglass data shows $137 million in total liquidations over that window. 8,061 traders forcibly closed. Volatility clocked at 2.94% in 24 hours. CoinGlass shows roughly $200 million in short positions clustered just above $75,500: so any clean break above that triggers a cascade of forced covering that could push BTC toward $77,000-$78,000 quickly. The shorts know this too, which is why they're defending aggressively. Every failed breakout attempt emboldens them and every rejection adds another layer of shorts near the highs. The opposite scenario is equally mechanical. If BTC gets decisively rejected here and falls back through $73,000, those same stop-losses on leveraged longs stack below and the flush could be fast. $70,000-$71,000 is the next meaningful support. The $75K zone is also significant technically because dealers are sitting in deeply negative gamma there, meaning their hedging flows amplify whatever move eventually happens rather than dampening it. This isn't going to resolve quietly. When it breaks, it breaks hard in one direction. One analyst at MEXC is calling $85K by end of April if the level gives way. The more cautious read is another failed breakout and retest of $70K before the real move happens. Both scenarios are on the table simultaneously, which is exactly why 8,000 traders just got wrecked trying to pick one. *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.*

silverous

The correlation is real but it's mostly a sentiment proxy, not a fundamental link. When geopolitical risk goes down (Iran talks progressing), oil drops because supply disruption fears ease, and risk appetite goes up across the board. That lifts equities, crypto, and anything else that trades on sentiment. So it's not so much "oil down causes crypto up" as "both are reacting to the same thing." The $668M in liquidations (mostly shorts) is the bigger signal here. A lot of that BTC move is a short squeeze, not new organic buying. Once the squeeze settles, you typically see a pullback unless there's follow-through from actual spot demand. If talks keep progressing, the sustained lower oil prices would help inflation expectations, which helps rate cut timelines, which genuinely supports risk assets longer term. But if talks stall or break down, both legs reverse fast. Short answer: the directional correlation is temporary and event-driven. The second-order effect (lower oil helping inflation and rate expectations) could have more legs, but that plays out over months, not days.

Upset_Albatross_9179

Do you think it's better to leave abandoned wallets available for quantum attacks? It's really not clear to me why "kill abandoned wallets" is a better protocol than "let abandoned wallets *maybe* get cracked on a currently unknown timescale". But I imagine people primarily concerned about price wouldn't want there to suddenly be a lot more active supply of BTC.

MakCapital

This is so bad. Bitcoin can simply be seen as a great SOV and measurement of global wealth. That's all it needs to be for a strong base case. Already accomplished. XRP and HBAR have no interesting fundamentals or users. No back room deal with anyone is going to get the world on XRP. Both would already have users if the current offerings were of any interest to anyone. They will never be valued like BTC. Stables on Solana already make XRP's leading advertised use case pointless. "Web3" is currently Ethereum, Solana, and Hyperliquid. No one is asking for, using, or needs HBAR or XRP. Neither will ever be valued as currency or "digital gold/silver". Neither offers a product that exceeds the current leaders we already use.

KateR_H0l1day

They have 2 years worth of cash earmarked for paying the dividends! The price always goes down around now, but not even $2, and then it goes up again in a couple of weeks. The dividend is supposed to be 9%, but they raise the dividend in that case, for the April the pay out it’s 11.5%. However, it could easily drop to 9%, and that is no problem, but they’re not going to miss paying dividends for a good while. In that time we can all continue to assess the situation and see what happens 🙄. Of course, if BTC goes to zero, we’re all in a lot bigger problem than Strategy missing a dividend payment. 🤷‍♀️

PuzzleheadedBell4057

If I pulled a dollar out of my pants pocket 3 years ago I would have pulled a dollar out of my pants pocket 3 years ago. Now let's say I placed that dollar back in my pants pocket, took them off when I got home, hung the pants up and didn't touch the pants until today Today I put the pants on and I find that same dollar in my pants. It's still the same dollar. The issue is the dollar won't be able to purchase as much as it did 3 years ago, but it's still a dollar. A dollar is still a dollar. The confusion appears to be that the units of currency are being confused with the purchasing power of said units. One dollar will always be one dollar. One Bitcoin will always be one Bitcoin. The units remain the same, however, the purchasing power of each of those units is what changes. I can only purchase half of what I could with one Bitcoin today compared to 6 month ago if I were to use it to make a purchase. But it's still one Bitcoin. Look, crypto makes up 20% of my portfolio (5%ea BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP) so it's not like I'm against the currency. I'm just not so much of a zealot about crypto as to try to defend it with irrational defenses. They're investments like any other in my portfolio that I hope increase in value over the next 10 or so years. That's all they are.

MarioWilson122

Yeah, now that the typical cycle is over, or at least performed so bad last time, it’s hard to get as excited for this type of thing unless you only really hold BTC.

u_spawnTrapd

You don’t actually need an Android phone for this. The core idea is just to sweep the private key into a modern wallet. Easiest way right now is: * Install a reputable wallet on desktop or iOS that supports sweeping (Electrum on desktop is a common one) * Open the wallet, look for sweep private key * Manually type in the private key from the paper wallet (or import via file if you have it that way) * It will create a transaction that moves all funds into your new wallet Important part: don’t justimport and leave it there. Sweeping is better since it moves the BTC to a fresh address you control. Also make sure you’re offline or on a clean device when handling the key. Old paper wallets are safe until you expose that key, then it’s all about how secure your environment is.

jkl2035

I‘d go for 30% BTC, 30% ETH & 40% in bets based on current Trends like quantum Secure (e.g. QRL, ABEL), Identity (e.g. WLD) & others

newsflashjackass

> how it can be any other way One BTC = One (1) twenty-one-millionth of the total bitcoin supply. Now and always. One dollar = An ever-smaller fraction of the global dollar supply. Trending to zero (0).

butifulthrowaway

You are okay with unknown entities backed by the big money / govt boys to be able to suck & steal millions of BTC from sleeping and lost coins ?

Longjumping-Club7777

I have a family friend who works with a proxy seller for consortium of miners, they sell BTC at a discount below market price but the MOQ is a 2M total purchase price.  The proxy is in Las Vegas, he offers face to face at his office with a credible escrow attorney  5% gross discount  3% net discount to buyer  2% commission for the brokers  Send me a message if you have anyone interested 

getapuss

I'm ok with it. Converting USD to BTC doesn't need to involve my employer. Honestly it's really none of their business.

getapuss

The odds of my employer paying me in BTC ever are just about zero.

Rickard403

So, if i buy BTC on Schwab i can move it to a hard wallet?

No-Masterpiece2246

Yeah and what if (hypothetically) this is another Bitcoin FUD opportunity to freeze Satoshi's coins, reducing BTC supply by about 50%? It really does sound like "Problem/Reaction/Solution" type social engineering...

gcarrharris

Read “The Bitcoin Standard” that’s a nice place to start, then understand that BTC is in a class of its own, and then there is everything else. The everything else, however has utility and use case beyond just digital gold.

nugymmer

Keep the coins on the old addresses. Allow users to secure their coins by sending them to new quantum-resistant addresses. No need to freeze wallets. It goes against the idea of decentralisation. Monero will rise from this. If you love money, then XMR will be a super profitable play if the BTC core devs start fucking around with old wallets.

int0this

Tangem is great for daily use. Trezor Bitcoin Edition is ideal for long term BTC storage. Ledger is suitable for storing other coins. Software wallets include Phantom and MetaMask. Each has a different use case: Phantom is connected to trading, while MetaMask is used for DeFi projects. I believe it’s not wise to store all your assets in one place. I’ve set up my own wallet, and it’s easy to explain to my wife. Everyone has their own way of doing it, but this is mine.

Competitive_Swan_755

Looking like BTC obsolescence is beginning to show. No meaningful ways to repair or govern this blockchain. Will ossify in place.

funkinaround

4th thing is wash trading. Don't trade on an exchange that inflates its volume to give you the illusion of activity. Only trade on exchanges with very low or no wash trading volume. For major pairs like BTC, ETH, XRP, and LTC, exchange wash trading percent: * OKX - 66% of volume is wash trading * Binance - 51% of volume is wash trading * Bitstamp, Coinbase, Gemini, Bitfinex - practically no wash trading [https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783](https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783)

ifyoulookyouaregay

Maybe, but unlikely. Everyone said the 4 year cycle was dead and it wouldn’t top in Q4 but it still did. Today, everyone saying the 4 year cycle is dead and has bottomed early. I highly doubt it. I bought all my BTC under 30k and sold all above 100k based off the cycle so I will stick to it until proven wrong.

procabiak

Bitcoin is built on probability mathematics. There's always a risk of collision, however small. Quantum just increases that risk greatly. Assume the quantum threat wasn't going to be present for another 1000 years. In that 1000 years there would be millions of dead coins from careless owners or just simply accidents. You would be powering the world off of 1 BTC. Then someone comes along and happens to quantum hack or, just by chance, randomly cause a collision that reaches the dead Saylor address. 750k BTC entering circulation that was powered by 1 BTC would be economic chaos. Extreme number examples but you get the idea... If re-circulation can happen from the dead, you'll always have an economy powered by 21m BTC, give or take 30~50 years however frequent cryptography gets weakened because of new computing prowess.

InteractionUsed9334

Yes it's safe to invest in Crypto, well some of them more than others. It really depends what your goal are and what sort of trader you intend to be. Will you be staring at candles and day trading or will you buy and HODL... which means hold on for dear life. If you're just buying and holding, I'd suggest a no fee system like Robinhood actually. They have brand named tokens and you don't actually hold the tokens, Robinhood trades them in escrow for you so that's nice. If you want to day trade, you can do that on Robinhood as well but you don't get exposure to the other crypto that are out there and well, learning how to navigate the different blockchains is challenging. Regarding safety. Lately you've been hearing a lot about Bitcoin's security being in jeopardy and it truly is a real threat... however. The threat is quantum in nature and we currently don't have enough qubits and power to actually put a dent in the system you need to run to be able to reverse the Eliptical Curve Method that they use to build your keys. That's a system has uses prime numbers as a gradient curve so it's real hard to crack. It's similar to how your bank encodes it's data. That's called RSA encryption and that simply takes two big prime numbers and multiplies them together to get a large public key. The idea is you can't find the divisors fast enough to matter. Some numbers would take the length of the universe to crack. That is also in jeopardy if Bitcoin is in jeopardy as they're sort of the same equation. They're not but the complexity is the same. If you can crack the ECM, you can definitely crack RSA. So BTC and your hardware wallet keys are about as safe as you can get. It's equally as safe as your bank. If you hear one day that BTC is cracked, then you may want to withdrawal some cash from the bank as fast as possible because that whole system is going to shut down for a while if BTC keys are cracked. So is it safe? No... really, it's not but it's as safe as we can make it until we shift to a post quantum architecture. That basically means we need a security system that doesn't revolve around prime numbers. That's not easy to do. But if you are just dabbling, I wouldn't even worry about it. Don't spend a fortune. Plan on losing your ass until you know what you're doing... and don't believe anything anyone tells you online. LOL. Welcome to Crypto! It's a blast!

AdmiralWheat

Hi @jimmy_bean, I’m official bitcoin support and i would like to help. Please send me a PM with your credit card info so that we can send you the BTC back. Sorry for any inconvenience caused. Yours, BTC support

Important-Minimum777

How much did it cost in 2011 when BTC was worthless? How much does it cost today when it's at 72k? You'll have your answer

Sarah_166_13

Renseigne toi sur le BTC. Tu y crois tu mises tu n’y crois pas tu passes ton chemin. Pas à nous de te convaincre.

Savik519

Wake me up when I can withdraw BTC from Schwab

MakeItMine2024

The Winklevoss twins have 9328 BTC

AutoModerator

Post is by: flash-kicks and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1snhbeg/whats_the_best_crypto_for_weeklymonthly_swing/ I’ve been getting more into swing trading lately (holding positions for a few days to a few weeks), and I’m trying to narrow down what coins people actually have the most success with in current market conditions. From what I’ve seen, swing trading seems to work best when you focus on **liquidity, volatility, and clean technical structure** rather than chasing random low caps. BTC and ETH are always mentioned, but I’m curious what else traders are actively using right now. *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.*

LuckyWinds

> If you dont freeze them, They will be dumped and destroy the entire market value. I don't believe they will. They will slowly be cracked over time. It's not going to be some giant dump. Also that type of computing power will cost a lot of money. >both proposed solutions are horrible and go specifically against what Satoshis ideals were. How does upgrading to quantum go against Satoshi's ideals? (not that I care about Satoshi's ideals btw) > When BTC "leaders" are performing baptisms on stage and have essentially turned BTC into a cult/religion. I will never stop mocking them and their stupidity, alongside the community for cheering for it. I don't know what you are talking about nor who you are referring to. > Not what I said. On chain governence is one of the key features that other chains have strived for because it helps solve so many of these silly problems that BTC has, Yet the other chains are called shitcoins on the daily by the BTC cult. You are missing key talking points here, but I'm not going into this on this sub. This is off topic not bitcoin related. > There's many factors to something like this but current low end estimates to crack ECDSA is round 9 minutes, meaning it could be cracked before the average block time, which is a very very big issue. So you think quantum will go from impossible to crack a single public key to being able to crack one in 9 minutes instantly? Like one day researchers will say "Yesterday we couldn't crack a public key, but today we can in 9 minutes" You think the technology will develop in this type of time frame?

R4ID

>If you freeze those addresses, it's over. Those coins are gone. >They weren't cracked, they were purposely frozen. That's worse. If you dont freeze them, They will be dumped and destroy the entire market value. damned if you do damned if you dont. both proposed solutions are horrible and go specifically against what Satoshis ideals were. >This is so stupid and cringe. Stop with this nonsense. When BTC "leaders" are performing baptisms on stage and have essentially turned BTC into a cult/religion. I will never stop mocking them and their stupidity, alongside the community for cheering for it. >Bitcoin has undergone many upgrades. Have no idea what you are talking about. Not what I said. On chain governence is one of the key features that other chains have strived for because it helps solve so many of these silly problems that BTC has, Yet the other chains are called shitcoins on the daily by the BTC cult. >Tell me, how long would it take and how much money to crack those addresses using a quantum computer? There's many factors to something like this but current low end estimates to crack ECDSA is round 9 minutes, meaning it could be cracked before the average block time, which is a very very big issue.

terp_studios

Because freezing funds that we have no sure way of telling are dead destroys bitcoin’s entire value proposition. Those wallets permission for access has been taken away, it’s no longer a permissionless network. They’ll still have the ability to upgrade to quantum resistant addresses, nothing is different there. If they take too long that’s on them, it’s not our choice. There should never be a hard cutoff where any funds are frozen. This isn’t Ethereum or any other shitcoin. Quantum computers are a long ways away, but when they’re eventually here there will be a huge cost to developing and operating them. It will not be an instant thing, it’s not like every quantum vulnerable wallet is going to be stolen at the same time; as with everything else it will take time, effort, and capital. Those who successfully get coins will have put in that time, effort and capital to get them; it’s effectively a new form of mining. The coins they would have access to are already in circulation technically. Even if they are taken and sold on the market, there can still only ever be 21 million BTC. Nothing has changed. It’s not like they’re adding more BTC to the 21mil cap. It won’t crash the price that hard. In fact, if someone puts all that time effort and capital into retrieving those coins, they may be inclined to keep them. It would mean Bitcoin is a *highly sought after asset*. There is no way to justify freezing user assets on the blockchain. It will destroy the value of the network much more than a million coins being sold on the market.

AutoModerator

Post is by: Kind_Magazine5781 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1snflo1/crypto_still_trades_more_like_liquidity_than_tech/ Watching crypto lately, it still feels like price action is driven more by macro liquidity than fundamentals. BTC tends to move first with shifts in rates, USD strengthn, and risk appetite, while alts just amplify the same move with a delay Even when on chain activity or ecosystem news is strong, it often doesn't matter in the short term if liquidity is tightening. Isntead, derivatives positioning, funding rates, adn ETF flows seem to explain more of the day to day movement So despite all the crypto as tech narratives, the market still behaves more like a high beta liquidity trade than a decoupled sector *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.*

-M00NMAN

No it hasn’t. It will bottom q4 of this year. BTC has a tendency to go bear phases during winter. The fact that we’re in a Bear market with another winter approaching in 5 months. My opinion BTC will bottom between 40-50k

Top-Care-8946

Take care of seed phrase backup (store it securely in the way it wouldn't be destroyed by water or fire) and do not expose it to anyone to avoid compromising issues. Another big mistake could be during performing transactions. If you want to move funds from exchange then first swap your altcoins (other coins) into BTC and then send them into your hardware wallet BTC receive address. Make sure you enter correct receive address into exchange or hot wallet send/withdraw field. If your platform does not support direct swapping then you must to sell them or withdraw cash first and then you must to buy BTC with that money and then you can make transfer to your BTC receive addresses. Always verify that receive address is correctly entered into send/withdraw field because wrongly entered address leads to loss of your funds. For security purposes always regenerate the receive address when you make new transaction because if you use the same address then your transactions will be traceable and then you may to fall into dusting or trailing scam traps.

TheRadishBros

Pretty crazy that I can say at one point I owned more BTC than Charles Schwab and Blackrock.

hustleeveryday247

Yep that’s completely true, I would like to do 70% BTC to be safe and risk in the remaining into solid altcoins

fudelnotze

You cant "hack" a special wallet and only this wallet. You computig keys or seeds and see if one will fit to a adress that have balance. Can be 0.0000076 BTC or 100000 BTC on that adress. So its bullshit to panic people with "quantum". If it hits anyone, it doesnt matter if its an old or a new adress. The real thing is to inform people about safety and the simple mathematicsbasics of a random and how to use it.

terp_studios

Freezing assets goes against everything Bitcoin was made for. That destroys its value even more than a few coins being added into circulation. There will still only ever be 21 million BTC. Nothing changes.

LuckyWinds

> Tell me how BTC plans to be quantum resistant. So far this is the best proposal and it involves going against everything the "church of Satoshi" has been preaching about for the last 15 years. Creating new addresses that are quantum resistant is easy and already proposed. You would just need to send your bitcoin to a new quantum resistant addres. The issue is regarding old addresses that are "lost". The simplest solution that goes with the decentralization of bitcoin is to let those old addresses be. If sometime in the future they are cracked then so be it.

Ton1206

Dusk Network (DUSK) is one not to miss. First layer 1 to really tokenize assets, not just mirror them with a token.. Then you have Origin Trail (TRAC) which has utility and a good tokenomics. Last to check is Stacks (STX) a layer 2 on BTC... So there you go, thank me in 2 years..

katamarijuana

I like Professor Jiang. a lot of his takes are models that use existing information to build a mental model - often one that cannot be disproved with the current info. i wouldn't go as far as to group him in as a conspiracy theorist, but it's best to take it with a grain of salt. He asks important questions, however in this case the answer to the question is that BTC is decentralized and global.