BTC

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.

AutoModerator

Post is by: Artistic_Quit2878 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1whasat/a_virtual_fruit_fly_brain_was_linked_to_coinbase/ The project is called Stonkfly. A neural simulation of a fruit fly brain makes trades on Coinbase after receiving real-time BTC/USDC price data straight into its visual receptors. The program produces artificial dopamine when a trade closes in profit. Negative experience neurons fire when it loses. The fly responds to green and red candles but without the human factor. Compared to most traders, the risk management regulations are stricter. $10 is the maximum position size. No shorts, no leverage. Trading immediately ends if it drops $20 from the initial $100. It is practically impossible to take 100x leverage on futures in an attempt to recover losses, average down on losing bets, or go all in on emotion. This simulation is outperforming the decision-making of a significant portion of crypto Twitter. The fly is currently live-streaming its trades, and a memecoin has already been launched in its honour. *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.*

DeeperThanClovis

You’d need to give monthly expenses and details like that. Ultimately you’re thinking of living off the BTC appreciation? Assume 10% return (I’m making that up) and assume $50k annual expenses, you’ll need $500k in BTC. Basically have to work backwards from your annual spend and settle on a comfortable BTC return.

Original-Read-6475

Why do we even care about the FED anymore? The last three times a rate cut was announced BTC shat the bed in response. BTC dumps no matter what the FED says. Cut, hike, unchanged, it doesn't matter.

LionRivr

It’s not that BTC needs it. It’s that US needs it to do some shenanigans.

TheresNoSecondBest

**6.15 BTC exactly**. Don't question the number, it has been scientifically proven.

tenor_tymir

5BTC

adjudantloic

Never any clarity act will exist: imagine That this funny to imagine that --> because there is no impact. The goal of the BTC system is precisely freedom Bitcoin doesn't technically exist. No one can ban it, that is its strength. Banning drugs is fine because the government makes money by seizing illegal goods. The government will never be able to seize your Bitcoin.

adjudantloic

Peer to peer systems are being devoloped for buy and sell BTC. The peer-to-peer system is the best. It is used in a great many IT applications, particularly in antivirus update distribution systems and other areas for governments and major institutions. It is very powerful.

JuxtaposeLife

Then $90k tomorrow because Clarity had nothing to do with BTC.

Illustrious_Nothing9

F the geriatrics, Let's go BTC

adjudantloic

This is where we see the power of Bitcoin: whether US policy does something or not, it will never change Bitcoin. The US, like the rest of the world, is powerless against this unique BTC system. Why are people so drawn to the Clarity Act? Bitcoin is free and therefore it is nothing compared to any law --> it's a force and this is a sign that the BTC system works very well and that even the most powerful person in the world will not be able to do anything about it. [](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/sections/38303584022676-Accessibility)

adjudantloic

BTC system doesn't care about this sh.t

LowerStranger9021

This is an incoherent comment that contradicts itself. Buying BTC is going long. You understand this right?

Mobile-Growth2053

checking the chain is the right first split. If the withdrawal address shows nothing, this is probably internal rather than a market issue, even with BTC moving around again ahead of the Fed headlines. Save old emails too, especially any miner payout confirmations

Chrysalis1111

I give more of a shit how much BTC will Russia and Russian citizens stockpile now that they at least have a law about it. Also the countries that wish to trade with them (or are forced to - Helllooo EU!)

adjudantloic

Why are people so drawn to the Clarity Act? Bitcoin is free and therefore it is nothing compared to any law --> it's a force and this is a sign that the BTC system works very well and that even the most powerful person in the world will not be able to do anything about it.

anonymousopsec1337

Fuck longs and fuck shorts. Buy BTC

adjudantloic

This is where we see the power of Bitcoin: whether US policy does something or not, it will never change Bitcoin. The US, like the rest of the world, is powerless against this unique BTC system.

JohnnyMofo

"US national debt now exceeds 40 trillion USD / 524 million BTC" 😂

bitusher

> still account for a huge chunk of (centralized) hashrate and % of the network. It has a lot of room for improvement , sure, but its merely one mechanism in Bitcoin's security assumptions >however, the economic incentive doesn't exist for that to be a meaningful change. If all the hashrate to secure the network is pointed at the larger chain, there is no incentive for anyone to switch over and start using a new, "little brother" chain, The 2017 Blocksize wars reflected otherwise because we could see which chain had the most economic support in multiple ways from large holders statements and prediction markets . Miners ultimately get paid by users so it was clear that a majority of the sell pressure was going to be on the forked coin thus the largest miners decided instead to simply create a separate altcoin to A/B test and mine both chains. > It will be far less secure. No. The security is ultimately paid by the users buying coins from miners . If there isn't a market for this and a speculative war drive the price down on the new fork coin that the security(hashrate really as security is much more than merely hashrate) will return to the original chain >And the non-miners don't have incentive to switch either. Many will sit on the sidelines with both sides of the fork until clarity comes after many coins are sold > miners have a choice, they can keep securing the old chain, or they can move over and secure the new chain. This is a false dichotomy . Miners will mine both chains when its economic to do so . How much they mine from each chain depends multiple variables. >when they could just kill the new chain by doing a 51% attack? There are multiple ways to defend against a 51% attack, and performing a 51% attack is very dangerous for them to do because of the 100 block maturity rule >So it brings us back to why would the humans switch chains? Most will sit on the sidelines until clarity is made from an economic majority(not miners) >This worked in the blocksize wars because BTC wasn't a financialized Wall St asset. You are also making the false assumption that only companies, governments and ETFs hold large amounts of Bitcoin. There are many individuals that also hold over 100k BTC as well Also you need to consider that these companies also have many motivations. Some of these motivations are influenced by keeping the status quo of users happy so they can profit off them. Some of these motivations are keeping the devs happy because they depend upon them .

TheSneederOfSeethe

Of all the people who could hold my BTC, these would be the last people I would want holding my BTC. Don’t get me wrong, Cash App is useful, I even buy BTC on it. But, it’s almost always for immediate spending. Anything left is what I didn’t spend so like $1 or 2 of BTC. But I would never keep any large quantity of BTC on cash app.

Aggressive-Spirit265

We talk a lot about Bitcoin as a store of value, but I'm more interested in where people think it actually becomes useful in everyday life. Holding BTC is one thing, but using it for real things like services, payments, or business expenses feels like the bigger test. What kind of real world use cases do you think could actually push Bitcoin adoption forward?

reddit4485

This is a stupid article. It ignores the fact that the value of Bitcoin increases by the time of each halving. This gives the value of the subsidy right after the halving. It does not include transaction fees, which are tiny now. Halvings will occur long after we're dead. | Halving | Date | Subsidy in $ | Bitcoin Subsidy | |---|---|---:|---:| | 1st | 11/28/12 | $312.50 | 25 BTC | | 2nd | 7/9/16 | $7,987.50 | 12.5 BTC | | 3rd | 5/11/20 | $52,968.75 | 6.25 BTC | | 4th | 4/19/24 | $199,275.00 | 3.125 BTC |

TheresNoSecondBest

2017's concentration was hidden by pool labels. AntPool, BTC.com, BTC.TOP, and ViaBTC were all effectively Bitmain aligned. Counting them as separate pools understates how much of the network answered to one entity. **By operator concentration, 2017 was arguably worse.**

TheresNoSecondBest

>It sounds like you didn't read my post. I read and replied to your ridiculous statements, mate. Also I read your comments here. They all sound like something from Luke's or Kratter's videos. >It's okay to debate and explore options. That is what makes open-source technology like BTC great. That's also the exact opposite of what Luke has wanted and historically operated on Yet, you're happy to run his software, while calling the [Bitcoin Core compromised](https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinKnots/comments/1vjh390/comment/p2nvt5q/) just a month ago. >So if you're unwilling to even have a discussion Again, I've replied to your post and comments with facts. You're the one not replying back. >He's been a hardliner, hard to work with dev for over a decade. Agreed. It was good to have someone with opposite views in Core but we was IMHO a net negative.

No-Masterpiece2246

Ehh in 2017 they were just printing a couple billion Tether and wash trading every time BTC went down. That's why it plunged from $20k to $3k.

AnywhereSavings1710

Yes, pools and corporations are different, of course. As for your comments about miners being more centralized in 2017, just plain untrue mate. If you mean by region, that's fair. 2017 was China dominated. But by pool? Nope. Here's the facts: |**Metric / Feature**|**📌** The 2017 Landscape|**⚡** The 2026 Landscape| |:-|:-|:-| |**Top Pools by Hashrate**|**AntPool** (\~17%)[**BTC.com**](http://BTC.com) (\~16%)[**BTC.TOP**](http://BTC.TOP) (\~13%)**ViaBTC** (\~11%)**Slush Pool** (\~7%)|**Foundry USA** (\~26%–31%)**AntPool** (\~18%)**F2Pool** (\~13%)**ViaBTC** (\~10%)**SpiderPool** (\~9%)| |**Centralization Index**|**Highly Distributed:** The top 2 pools controlled less than **30%** of the network.|**Highly Concentrated:** The top 2 pools control roughly **45%–50%** of the network.|

AnywhereSavings1710

Yes I agree with you here. But the problem is still that the mining corporations, such as Foundry, still account for a huge chunk of (centralized) hashrate and % of the network. As for the "large hodler running a full node" who "gets both sides of a fork", yes I acknoweldge that's how the network works, however, the economic incentive doesn't exist for that to be a meaningful change. If all the hashrate to secure the network is pointed at the larger chain, there is no incentive for anyone to switch over and start using a new, "little brother" chain, if you will. It will be far less secure. So while there may be plenty of users with those new coins from a fork, why would they begin to transact on the forked chain? They are taking a much larger economic risk. The miners HAVE to make the switch, therefore the miners HAVE to be incentivized to do so. And the non-miners don't have incentive to switch either. Continuing on the economic incentive train (because that's how the world works), let's say that as rational humans, we believe that the cost of not switching to the forked chain is actually HIGHER than the cost of switching to it, even though it has much less security and could be co-opted by the current mining cartel. So we all do it. In that case, miners have a choice, they can keep securing the old chain, or they can move over and secure the new chain. But why would they do that, when they could just kill the new chain by doing a 51% attack? They'd certainly have the resources. So it brings us back to why would the humans switch chains? This worked in the blocksize wars because BTC wasn't a financialized Wall St asset. Now that it's a part of that system, it doesn't matter. Wall St can survive without "us". And by survive, I mean they can keep the network running as a store of value, without needing plebs or whales to transact on it.

inadyttap

Bought some more BTC 

AnywhereSavings1710

I don't disagree with you. When did I ever propose that that should be the case? It sounds like you didn't read my post. I don't support Luke, never listened or read of Mechanic other than hearing others talk about him, and have watched Kratter but again don't support his sentiment and actions. It's okay to debate and explore options. That is what makes open-source technology like BTC great. That's also the exact opposite of what Luke has wanted and historically operated on. So if you're unwilling to even have a discussion, you're closer to Luke Dashjr in mental framework then you may even realize. He's been a hardliner, hard to work with dev for over a decade.

AnywhereSavings1710

That post was from 2 years ago, and was intented to serve as a hypothetical thought experiment. If you read my replies on it you'll see that. Additionally, I've spent the last two years studying and do understand BTC on a much deeper level at this time. This is why I made this post.

Tall-Ad1293

Michael Saylor is probably looking at that even 25,000 BTC balance right now thinking: 'Amateurs, that's just a Tuesday buy for us.'

MrKillerKiller_

Or protect your BTC and never hold extended downtrends.

Objective_Basil_8414

The value overflow bug is the best case study in this whole list if you write software for a living. The output values summed past int64 and the sanity check was comparing an already-wrapped total, so a fully conformant node happily validated 184 billion BTC as legal. Five hours from report to patched binaries, and the bad chain only got orphaned because enough people actually ran the new build. Nobody's 2010 threat model said "a missing overflow check is the monetary policy", but that's exactly what it was, and it's why shipping a feature into consensus code is a completely different sport to shipping one into a web app. Good to see it walked block by block instead of retold from memory.

Objective_Basil_8414

The extension only ever works in one direction though. It will happily tell you that latte cost 0.00004 BTC, but it never opens a second panel for the nine times you sold early. Real financial therapy would price everything in the sats you already paper-handed back in 2017.

MrKillerKiller_

Everyone knows utility and fundamentals and news and all that bullshit is just noob fuel and doesnt matter whatsoever. Its fleeting moments of BTC profits looking to sweeten the bag briefly before cashing out.

DiamondHandsDarrell

I don't have the time to go into it, but this is a terrible take and it goes against the core belief, because it sounds like you're saying we need more BTC produced. That's the system we have in fiat now and it doesn't work.

AutoModerator

Post is by: DazzlingNet1516 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1wh261q/two_big_catalysts_this_week_the_clarity_act_vote/ Crypto has two pretty big events coming up almost back to back. The Senate is voting on whether to move the CLARITY Act forward, and then we’ve got the Fed rate decision right after that. The regulation side feels important longer term, but I’m wondering if the Fed still matters more for price in the short term. If the bill advances but the Fed comes out hawkish, does crypto still sell off anyway? What do you think will actually move BTC and ETH more this week? *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.*

Ok-Software3522

The calendar cycle argument has always bothered me when people treat it like a law instead of one historical pattern. Bitcoin is operating in a completely different market structure now with ETFs, institutional positioning and much deeper integration with macro liquidity. I would rather build the cycle thesis from those variables than assume October has to behave a certain way because previous halvings did. I have Moon pull those pieces together when I want a reality check on the narrative, especially liquidity and rates against BTC.

DiamondHandsDarrell

I just want my % back in BTC on USDC held on coinbase that beats inflation 😭

Big_Professional9253

I've been expecting to test support at the structural lows since BTC hit $57.7k, and I've been looking for another leg down to the mid to upper $40k range. Obviously none of that has materialized yet, but as long as Bitcoin keeps getting rejected at the 50-Week SMA there is a chance for another support test, and maybe even another leg down. The problem is, the August 19th pump literally changed the structure, and last weeks pump from the CPI strengthened it. IMO, if this move proves to be legit, (pending the Monthly close) it reduces the likelihood of another leg down. At this stage, there is no denying that there has been a sequence of technical and structural r/S Flips that have opened my mind to the  possibility that the bottom could be in. However, there is also no denying that we still have no confirmation of a macro breakout, and until we do, there is still a chance to test support at the macro low, and potentially lower.  That said, the longer price stays elevated, the higher the probability that the bottom is in, so here are the levels I'm watching to gain some insight on how things are likely to develop from here. # 50-week SMA A wick above the moving average is not sufficient. Bulls need to reclaim the level, close above it and then validate it as support. Until that happens, the 50-week SMA remains resistance. When it does happen – algos and breakout buyers will long. # $78,380 Timescape r/S Flip Line This is the first meaningful structural test beneath the rejection. At the time of writing, price has dropped below it, but what matters most is where BTC closes. * Holding above $78,380 would show that the pump retained value despite failing at the SMA, and keeps BTC in range of another breakout attempt with a higher probability of succeeding. * Losing $78,380 would increase the probability that the move was primarily a liquidity sweep. # $77,200–$77,000 A move back through this area would surrender most of the post-CPI advance and place the market back inside the pre-release structure. # Approximately $76k A return to the CPI-session low would complete a near-total round trip. That would provide the strongest confirmation that the pump was a failed breakout and liquidation event rather than the beginning of a durable trend. # $75,000 No longer just a psychological level, it now has confluence with the macro support line – losing it opens the door to the $69k – $73k range. How price reacts at this level determines where the last accumulation range will be. Are we in it now, or is there a chance to go lower? Pro Tip: Keep an eye on [liquidity and order flow](https://materialindicators.com/firecharts/). # $69,000 – $73,000 As long as price fails to break above the 50-week SMA, revisiting this range or lower is a possibility. Save some dry powder. \#NFA

CyanDew

it's a marketing expense, not interest. they payin out of their own revenue the same way a credit card gives u cash back, probably to keep you as a customer using their BTC hot wallet. just remember the reward exists specifically to discourage you from withdrawing to self-custody. Block is a business after all, and every sat that leaves for a hardware wallet is revenue they never see again. you’re also accepting custodial risk for roughly 1.5% annually… plus the rate is variable and can be cut to 0% whenever they want.

SwapzoneIO

We wouldn’t call this outright bullish yet. I’d describe it as relative strength. ETF outflows are clearly selling pressure, but the more important question is how BTC reacts to that pressure. If BTC continues holding around $76K–$79K despite those outflows, it suggests there is still enough demand elsewhere to absorb the selling. That said, we wouldn’t read too much into the current stability on its own. For us, $80K is the level to watch. A clean reclaim and hold above it would be a much stronger confirmation of demand. If BTC keeps getting rejected there, the current range could still turn into another move lower. So rather than looking at ETF flows in isolation, we’d focus on the relationship between selling pressure and price reaction. That gives a better picture of whether the market is actually absorbing supply or simply consolidating before the next move

Previous_Valuable873

Now go check XMR in the last 2 years how it's tripled against BTC

Previous_Valuable873

All I am saying is if all the ETF, shilling, clarity act etc BTC can do only this much now, when everyone is shilling it, then when the AI bubble pops because you can bet your farty asses it'll, decreasing the USD 25% plus purchasing power minimum, plus global recession.... sub10k even

Pyroll2206

You can only get new BTC at the price of mining.

NiceInflation2483

Quiet Bitcoin is honestly where I find the market more interesting because everyone stops reacting to every candle and you can actually look at what is happening underneath. I would keep an eye on ETF flows, liquidity, hash rate and the rate environment rather than trying to call the exact cycle bottom from the calendar. Something like moon could come in handy for putting those pieces next to BTC and seeing which relationships are actually holding in this cycle. If Bitcoin continues absorbing bad macro days without making new lows, that would get my attention more than another random green candle.