BTC

LionRivr

I want to agree with the 110 because I believe BTC should be a monetary asset. Can I legitimately ask though: if someone is willing to pay the fees or whatever to get their “spam” onto the chain, then what does it matter if its a valid transaction? How much does it hurt the network? And at what point does it become a precedent for censorship on what could otherwise be “valid” transactions, whether it’s “spam” or not?

Federal_Pie_8864

BTC is decentralised, USD, EUR, and other fiat are not…

Hfksnfgitndskfjridnf

I don’t think you get what actually has happened because it’s obscured by the fact that they started with over 600k Bitcoin before they issued STRC. If they didn’t have any BTC to begin with and simply issued STRC at IPO they would have 0 Bitcoin at this point, so Bitcoin could go up 100% a year forever and it wouldn’t matter. MSTR will be forever worse off from what they’ve done with STRC so far because they waited until Bitcoin tanked and then raised 3 years worth of dividend coverage. If they had done it at the same time they bought the Bitcoin this wouldn’t be the case. And future issuance of STRC may be accretive long term depending on how quickly BTC appreciates. But the STRC IPO shares have already lead to a permanent decline in BTC per share.

Ornery-Plankton9844

Every muppet thinks that they are buying Monero, until years later they realize thats what they should have, not BTC

devCheckingIn

I don't want to tell Saylor his business, but maybe a better Strategy is to sell BTC in the bull market to build up the USD Reserve so he can buy more BTC in the bear market? 🤔

CreativeMap2917

Appreciate this, exactly the feedback I wanted. To clarify it's BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, not meme coins or stables. But your point still stands, majors go through regime shifts too, trending vs choppy, high vs low vol. Did you build in any regime detection, like something that flags "conditions changed, pull back" before PnL actually drops? Or did you mostly just notice after it already slipped? I don't have that built in right now, feels like a real gap after reading this. Did you find a way around it or is it basically unsolvable, is that why you moved on from these systems?

LaBeloMall

When BTC is at $250k the avg mag7 and gold will be 10-20x bigger yet BTC maxis will again ignore opportunity cost and be like "it doesn't matter up is up".

RoaringDragonSword

Duckling, let me say something that you are clearly missing. This is a perfect example of someone that has proven to everyone their "strategy" was not rock solid. The cracks are forming. The guy who said sell your kidney before BTC is selling BTC. Do not ever use that 3.3% to show that he sold little. Same thing was done when he was proposing to sell like 100 btc first time ever. It was far less than 3%. Stop trying to make this positive. It is not.

GrX69_

I think we are going to see BTC around 200k mc on June 2027.

SheikYerbouti_

How exactly does BTC allow the first one? You can't barely buy anything with it.

Happierdante19

holaaa gracias, la verdad la curiosidad me entro desde el 2015 que conoci algo de btc queria saber para que funciona esos numeros, en 2020 volvi a toparmelo pero no sabia como comprar ni como funciona el p2p, me deje llevar por los comentarios de mi familia y no compre BTC en 2020, (en ese momento tenia muchas ganancias de la panademia por vender en la tienda), obvio que en 2025 por ahi recien empece a aprender, pero llevo años queriendo entender como funciona, tanto los mineros, las verificaciones en los nodos (Creo que asi se podria llamar), la parte de enviar recibir y tambien lo de recuperar (no sabia que se podria recuperar), el punto es que lo veo algo increible me gustaria contruir un pequeño exchange de prueba, la verdad no es tan por dinero, sino por aprender (aunque tampoco tengo mucho dinero creo que solo me queda $20 mas o menos en mi cuenta ajajjaja), bueno seguire aprendiendo poco a poco, de igual se que necesito aprender a programar, por cuestiones de seguridad y demas, en verdad gracias

Objective_Digit

> But why would you suspect the exchange to freeze that BTC? Why would an exchange have to adopt the philosophy of Bitcoin?

Typical-Snow3034

Hey. CoinRabbit team here. Whether Bitcoin is “early” depends on which layer of adoption is being measured. As a recognized asset, Bitcoin is no longer experimental: it has deep markets, institutional custody, regulated investment products and global awareness. But practical financial infrastructure around the asset is still developing. Payments, collateralized lending, recovery models and everyday wallet usability remain fragmented and unfamiliar to many holders. At CoinRabbit, we see this transition in users moving beyond simply buying and holding BTC. Some use it as collateral to access liquidity without selling, while others want to store, exchange or spend it through an account-based wallet. That does not necessarily mean Bitcoin itself is still early. It may mean the asset has matured faster than the services required to use it comfortably. “Established asset, developing utility” is probably more precise than a simple early-or-late label.

youcangotohellgoto

I'm assuming you have poor understanding of the economic system based on your blind and simplistically binary assumption that fiat is bad. Why would anyone lend Bitcoin? What's the incentive? Will a deflation currency the incentive is just to hold. And even spending is discouraged. Something that costs 1 BTC (new car, for example) will cost like 0.9 BTC next year. The whole economy is based on consumerism. Bitcoin works against, rather than with, that paradigm.

ScaleneZA

Who told you BTC is private? It's the opposite of private, every transaction is on a public ledger. As for KYC, that's compliance regulation per country and its for fiat on ramp and offramps. You don't need KYC to send and receive BTC.

Current-Champion7572

To buy bitcoin people are generally going to deposit from their legacy bank accounts, which will arrive in their crypto exchange as a stablecoin (e.g. a deposit into Coinbase will show up in the account as USDC by default). And then if they go to sell their BTC, they’re likely swapping right back into that stablecoin. So by promoting/pushing BTC, the on-ramp (stablecoins aka US debt) are being purchased more and more.

Such-Elephant-9943

I went 75% net worth into BTC late last year, avg entry is around $98k. Still have enough cash and stocks runway to cover expenses if I get laid off. Glad I didn’t take on debt or YOLO money I can’t afford to lose. I have a really large buy order at 58k and i buy some every month regardless of the price

Odd_Balance7916

The reason it’s hard to understand is because it hurts your ego. You think you’re smart, most of us do. Turns out you’re far more gullible than you thought. Once you understand that you can accept your mistake more easily. “Oh I’m a dumbass, that’s why this happened”. It sucks, and it’s an expensive lesson, but it seems the mental aspect of it all is the more challenging part. Props to you for fighting as well as you did to retrieve the BTC and start the legal process. That takes conviction and a great never give up attitude.

CommercialDuck7496

That was not false! We are actually agreeing here. you already understand the mechanism, and explained it well. You just highlighted the inverse of what I was saying, not realizing the mechanism also applies in the other direction (which is what I was saying before). In the same way that issuing common stock above 1x net mnav can be accretive to net SPS today, and dilutive later if bitcoin rises, issuing STRC can also be net dilutive tdoay, and and net accretive later when bitcoin goes up. A simple example Say Strategy issues $100 of STRC but only receives $90 because it is issued at a 10% discount. They use that $90 to buy Bitcoin at $100k. They acquired 0.0009 BTC, but created a fixed $100 senior claim. At $100k BTC, that $100 claim is equivalent to 0.001 BTC. So initially: +0.0009 BTC acquired − 0.001 BTC-equivalent claim = −0.0001 net BTC Net SPS went down. By your framework, the issuance was initially dilutive. But now Bitcoin doubles to $200k. The 0.0009 BTC they bought is still 0.0009 BTC, while that same fixed $100 STRC claim is now only equivalent to 0.0005 BTC. So now: 0.0009 − 0.0005 = +0.0004 net BTC The exact same issuance that was net-SPS dilutive at $100k has become net-SPS accretive at $200k without Strategy issuing or buying anything else. Obviously, dividends raise the actual break even price, so I'm not saying every STRC issuance is profitable at $200k specifically. The point is that the result is not permanently locked in at the bitcoin price when the financing occurs. STRC creates a fixed dollar senior claim while the asset purchased with it is bitcoin, so the bitcoin equivalent burden of that claim falls as Bitcoin rises. A cleaner example would be something like this: Assume Strategy issues $100 of STRC at par and uses the full $100 to buy Bitcoin at $100,000, acquiring 0.001 BTC. At issuance, ignoring dividends, that is exactly net-SPS neutral because the 0.001 BTC acquired is offset by a $100 senior claim worth 0.001 BTC at that price. Now Bitcoin falls to $60,000. The 0.001 BTC is still 0.001 BTC, but the $100 STRC claim is now equivalent to 0.001667 BTC, so the tranche appears net dilutive. Then assume STRC costs 12% per year for two years, or $24 in dividends, and Strategy funds those dividends by selling Bitcoin at an average price of $60,000. That requires selling 0.0004 BTC, leaving only 0.0006 BTC attributable to the financing. At $60,000, the tranche now looks deeply net dilutive: 0.0006 BTC of remaining assets against a senior claim equivalent to 0.001667 BTC. Gross SPS has also fallen because Bitcoin was actually sold. But if Bitcoin later rises to $200,000, that remaining 0.0006 BTC is worth $120 while the STRC claim is still only $100, or 0.0005 BTC at the new price. The same tranche is now net accretive by 0.0001 BTC. Its exact break-even is about $166,667 BTC. So a tranche can be net-SPS dilutive today, pay years of dividends, even force Bitcoin sales at lower prices and reduce gross SPS, and still become net-SPS accretive later if Bitcoin rises enough. That is why saying the tranche is “permanently at a loss regardless of Bitcoin’s future price action” does not follow from the fact that it is dilutive at today’s Bitcoin price. That's exactly why I said being accretive in bitcoin/SPS at a particular point in time is different from being economically profitable in dollars over the life of the financing. Your argument demonstrates that net SPS is price dependent. It doesn't demonstrate that an STRC tranche which is net dilutive today is “permanently at a loss regardless of bitcoin's future price action.” In fact, the price dependence you described is precisely why that conclusion is incorrect.

Nice_Material_2436

I'm using "they" as a placeholder. How am I supposed to know which Youtube channels you're watching? It's not like you stumbled upon Bitcoin yourself, someone must have orange pilled you. What's wrong with "favorite fork"? Some people prefer BCH over BTC so yeah the concept of a favorite fork exists.

No-Head1851

Markets tend to follow up trends, not fundamentals in the short term. Speculation chased BTC a while, with the "friendly to crypto" Trump administration, then it got bored and is now chasing unprofitable AI projects, not only with the promise of future profits, but the wild dream of "AI is gonna solve everything and destroy millions of menial jobs to increase profits".  Relax, the World financial system still has an unoayable cross-debt and is running on cheapened paper money.  Once short term delusions and FOMO are perceived for what they are, what asset do you think everyone is gonna be after? Gold? The yellow metal that was already stolen by goverment from private hands in the XXth century?  If you have strong convictions aboit an asset fundamentals, and good risk management, that's all you need to have tbh.  If you are silly enough to believe the pyramic scam bs as with most people who jump on this market thinking bitcoin and memecoins are the same, then not even God can help you, cuz He won't help people unable to help themselves. 

Capable_Swordfish_30

The consensus rules should not be easy to change at all, this is a feature. We cannot give the impression that filtering data in BTC is easy, because if it were law enforcement would be there the next day asking for black listing in the protocol and things like that. The inflexibility here is a good thing.

kljsandjb

If the big stock market crash happens, I'd rather shift my attention back to the feared market instead of half dead crypto lol, don't think BTC can outperform QQQ or even SMH in long run from now

No-Head1851

I wouldn't put all my life savings into BTC. Not because its volatility, the BTC fundamentals are strong, but simply cuz... it is my life savings.

HodlusHereticus

Totally wrong. Cost of production has no relation to market price, ie what someone is willing to pay for it. BTC trades at whatever buyers are willing to pay. Miners can sell below cost, just as producers of any commodity can. Saying sellers are “acting against their own interests” because BTC is near production cost is a non sequitur.

Laukess

>....money flowing to BTC is essentially minting more stable coins. Care to elaborate?

Joe_In_Paris

Just wait until the USDT, BTC or ETH funds get confiscated, frozen or siphoned! For anything else, there's always Monero.

shleebs

BTC Pay Server

chainglance_cm

probably dumps hard at first tbh, BTC still trades like a risk asset when stuff like this actually happens, not some magic safe haven after the initial panic it depends. If china capital starts trying to flee (sanctions/capital controls type stuff) you could see BTC catch a bid from that, kinda like what happened with russian money in 2022 also random but worth remembering, taiwan = TSMC = chips = mining hardware, so a real conflict there isn't great for miners either short term: bad. long term: depends how ugly it actually gets

AutoModerator

Post is by: Beginning_Health9584 and the url/text [ ](https://goo.gl/GP6ppk)is: /r/CryptoMarkets/comments/1vmgpdt/i_spent_6_weeks_grading_crypto_kol_calls_against/ Rules I set at the start: a call only counts if it has a level and a date. It gets logged while the outcome is still unknown, graded at the deadline price by a fixed rule, and the result never gets edited — misses stay on the record next to the hits. Six weeks in, 33 forward-logged calls have settled. 7 graded HIT. What I've learned so far: 1. Most influencer "calls" are unfalsifiable on purpose. No level, no date, or hedged both directions. Maybe 1 in 5 posts survives the intake rule at all. 2. Both directions get punished. This morning a BTC-downside call missed its deadline quietly while everyone was busy with CPI. Nobody reposts their misses; a ledger does. 3. Hit rate is less interesting than call shape. The survivors are mostly short-horizon, single-level calls. The dramatic "generational bottom/top" posts almost never carry a date — so they can never be wrong. Honest caveats: n=33 is small, my KOL selection skews to large English accounts, and deadline grading punishes early-but-right calls. I count that as a feature, but reasonable people can disagree. What would a grading system need for you to actually trust it — independent price source? Pre-registered rules? Public misses? *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.*

Romanizer

Alright. Imagine quantum computers get build out step for step and they become commercially viable. Large corporations rent their compute to calculate logistics route, research material design or new forms of medication. Wall Street may pay for compute to calculate financial models or trade more efficiently. All these use cases are allocated across the total compute while the quantum data center is growing. Now at one point of that growth and development, quantum computers may become cryptographically relevant, when their total power and capabilities is enough to calculate a private key out of a known public key. Now to use this power, the operator needs to tell all their clients that they don't want their business anymore because they want to crack Bitcoin. Revenue drops to 0 immediately and likely won't come back. The first cryptographically relevant quantum computer will likely take one day to calculate one key. Satoshi's wallets hold about 50 BTC per key. At current prices that would mean $3 million of sales per day for investments of $50-100 bn or much more, depending on timelines. Assuming the price stays stable and there is no fix implemented. Payback time for investments would be unacceptable for any investor or shareholder. Cracking all of Satoshi's wallets would take about 60 years for the first cryptographically relevant quantum computer or about 70 days for the most aggressive assumptions of the final stage of development. That's why it's more of a thought experiment than an immediate threat.

quintavious_danilo

Nope. Why would BTC go out over freaking Taiwan? 😂

scaleordietrying

Compared to now, the ‘fear’ at 90k was nothing. Only the people who just got in BTC felt fear. More experienced people felt faith at 90k, thinking it was just a quick bear trap.

CheddaKnottz

Just hold and DCA. Could take awhile tho. I'm assuming you truly believe that BTC will hit 200k someday. Just think, what if you would've bought last cycles top?

MCL-Jonathan

1 BTC could be a very meaningful retirement asset one day, but I’d still build more around it rather than assume 1 BTC alone is enough. If you’re young with a good income, diversification can help reduce risk. Personally, I’d also separate Bitcoin into two buckets: **HODL bag** : long-term, ideally untouched. **Swing bag** : buy lower during bear markets, take some profit during strong bull phases, then recycle that capital back into Bitcoin or other investment later. Rinse and repeat. The key is not to trade your entire stack. Protect the core, but let a smaller portion work harder for you. [Bitcoin Bear Market DCA Playbook](https://youtu.be/JXvr49ECTuo)

SoggyMacaroon5623

When it will make you happy regardless of the price — that's a mindset thing, not a price target. Nobody here can tell you the number that lets you retire, and anyone who tries is guessing. If you need 3 BTC to hit a specific number to feel okay, that's worth sitting with on its own, separate from the market.

mrb000

I mistakenly sent 1 BTC years ago to the huobi cold wallet, do you think it is recoverable?

para1131_F33L

October with barriers at 45-48k BTC. This much we can predict with what little we know. At some point in the next two months it will steeply drop. I would hold off buying until Oct or late Sept. I'm basing these predictions off the BTC chart but I think the community agrees.

The-great-phoenix

Strong selection indeed BTC and XRP will be more stable than the rest because already very mature

para1131_F33L

Meh I'd wait for the next leg down of BTC. Open up a BTC one year chart and you'll see what I mean and the others by saying October

Epictricker2025

Personally I think I will go heavy into BTC, XRP, some SOL, LINK and HYPE too.

digital__bits

Yes, "working as intended". That's what Satoshi himself wanted. Also as someone once said: "Bitcoin isn't for people that live on less than $2 a day". The hijacking of BTC would be its own disgrace in the future. See you on 20 years.

parcelwing

in 20 years bitcoin is likely to be worth 300-400k in today's dollars. Up to you to decide if 3x that's enough for you to retire. Don't listen to any clowns talking about a single BTC being worth millions

BuyIndependent2319

And for what it’s worth, if I had the Bitcoin, I’d pay you the 24.46 BTC that you lost just to restore some of the karma in this universe

leonidlomakin

> owning Bitcoin requires giving up your right to legal protection when it is stolen Bitcoin ownership is anonymous, which makes it hard to define "theft". The one who holds the keys is the one who owns the coins. You gave away the keys, someone else now owns those coins. But this is irrelevant because you decided to get FIAT (not the "stolen" BTC) from the exchange who had nothing to do with the "theft". I would understand demanding BTC from the thief but demanding FIAT from the exchange is just... well, absurd I would say. Just as demanding from the shop, which accepted the stolen money and sold something in return, would be to give another analogy. Again, appealing to some "Blockchain investigators" (what are they? Some Power Rangers coming to the rescue?) is a bit naive. Nevermind the judgement, do you really think an exchange should react to some anonymous claims and stop the transactions based on that? That judgement is just immoral.

Sad_Government_6534

Al momento il prezzo di BTC è pari al prezzo che serve al massimo per produrlo. Di conseguenza chiunque lo venda sta andando contro i suoi stessi interessi.

iloverunning11

It's never a good idea to tell others to buy BTC, much better to tell them to learn something about BTC if they find it interesting, they will invest if not, they won't, this is no longer a lottery ticket, it might easily reach new ATH within 5 years (still only 2x which is very easy to achieve with AI stonks in a couple weeks' time these days) but it could also collapse further

Capital_Situation961

That’s a fair question. Bitcoin obviously doesn’t carry my name on individual sats. The attribution comes from blockchain tracing, not from claiming that a particular satoshi can be visually identified as “mine.” The stolen BTC were traced from my wallets into 1GLef, and the subsequent movements from that address were analysed by CipherBlade and independently flagged by Chainalysis, Elliptic and CipherTrace. So I’m not asking anyone to take my personal interpretation of the blockchain as proof. That tracing formed part of the forensic evidence in the case.

Capital_Situation961

Sure: 1GLefw1owvMqs5azmjV79NH4Fgdwvq5sWE That’s the address the stolen BTC were sent to. I followed that address for a long time, almost daily. My BTC remained there until the funds started moving directly from that address to the Huobi deposit addresses in October 2021. And mine weren’t the only funds passing through it. At one point, the highest balance I saw in that address was around 644 BTC. It’s all on-chain. Feel free to verify it yourself.

Majestic-Penalty-433

Everyone stressing over BTC getting rejected at $65k again needs to log off and get a coffee. With oil surging past $81 and CPI data dropping later this week, institutional spot ETF demand is just getting swallowed by macro sellers. I'm just leaving limit orders at $61k and touching grass today. Anyone actually trading this chop?

Capital_Situation961

**No. The 24.465 BTC was the total amount of BTC stolen from me. It did not necessarily move as one 24.465 BTC transaction every time. The blockchain investigators traced the stolen UTXOs and their subsequent movements.**

Capital_Situation961

I’m really sorry you’re going through that. And for what it’s worth, I don’t think losing those Bitcoin says anything about your intelligence or your ability to think clearly. In 2009, nobody could possibly have known what 50 BTC would one day represent. The regret can become its own kind of prison if you keep replaying the decision with everything you know today. I hope you can find some peace with it. The Bitcoin are gone, but your life isn’t. Take care of yourself.

Capital_Situation961

It wasn’t simply “my word.” I’ve explained this several times already. Huobi was provided with the criminal complaint, screenshots and tracing evidence, independently backed by four blockchain analysis platforms. The investigators contacted Huobi within hours of the stolen BTC beginning to arrive there. Of course an exchange should not freeze accounts because a random person sends an email saying “those coins are mine.” That is not what happened here. Whether the evidence was sufficient to require action is a legitimate question. But reducing what Huobi received to “your word” simply isn’t an accurate description of the facts.

Capital_Situation961

That is an important distinction, but in my case there wasn’t a long chain of innocent downstream recipients. I monitored the address holding my stolen BTC almost daily after the theft. The coins remained there for months. They did not move through multiple exchanges, swaps or counterparties. Then they moved from that address to Huobi. So the issue is not that blockchain investigators followed some vague trail through dozens of transactions and later labelled unrelated BTC as “mine.” The stolen BTC sat at the same address for months and were then transferred to Huobi, where investigators identified and reported them within hours. That is why Huobi’s response, or lack of one, became such a central part of the case.

PAINFULL_TRUTH_GIVER

You wont be able to retire of this. BTC won't magically jump to 1 million. If you bank your hopes on this you will live a miserable life.

BDCRA

I bought as much as I could in 2020 when it was around 4.5k. I pleaded and begged my friends to take out a loan and buy as much as they could because its for sure going to $15-20k. I also bought into RIOT for like some loose change a share I bought 600 shares. I ended up going through tough financial times and had to sell all of it I had no choice. A few years down the road BTC was 60k and RIOT was $66 a share. I had unrealized gains of 100k or so life changing money for me. Makes me so sad but I had to do what I had to do. I still have all the receipts from all this. I rubbed it in my friends face when BTC hit $100k I went back and found those messages and sent it to them we are close so it wasnt offensive but it was a good I told you so. If you go now and look at my Coinbase history from 2020 its like a horror movie on paper. All that being said I wish I had more money back then to this day I DCA but I only have 1.5k of BTC. Things could have been so different for me. I also was an early adopter but its all gone now lost to old hardware. My dad loved technology and he would always get the newest tech magazines I read about BTC back in 2009/2010 and though it was interesting. I always laughed at the idea that something worth fractions of a penny would ever be anything it was so confusing to read about as well I had no understanding of it. A few years later I would begin buying off the DNM we all know how much money we lost there...all this had to happen for it to be where it is today not everyone could get rich! As a father of twin 7 year old boys and a single father I am slowlly but surely DCA for our future.

filenotfounderror

If its possible to bypass a verfiication, illegaly or otherwise. You dont actually have any verification. sim swaps have been a thing since before BTC and protecting 140 BTC (even though it was worth probably a lot less when this happened) was ill advised from the start. That being said, im pretty surprised the authorities refused to do anything since this is probably the easiest method to trace and track a specific individual.

Capital_Situation961

I bought my BTC back in 2012 and held it for nine years. Over those years, that investment bought me a car, paid off my entire mortgage in one go, funded travel, and much more. And then I got sloppy. I knew perfectly well that you never share your seed phrase. I’d known that for years. And yet, in one stupid moment, I did exactly that. So I think your point is a good one: knowing about digital security doesn’t make you immune to making a mistake. Sometimes all it takes is one. Despite what happened, I had a lot of fun being part of Bitcoin from those early days, and I’m still a fan of BTC.

BuyIndependent2319

I had 50 BTC back in 2009 and I lost the private key for them. And never bought them back even in 2012 when I realized they were gone for good. Thank God you’re not insane like me. I tore a private key written down on paper in a thousand pieces back then because it was “bothering me that I mined some bitcoin”. At the same time I wanted to buy some but I didn’t. Why? It was easier for me not to, and to just forget about it. You have a working mind. That’s all I wish I had. Even though you’re going through all of this, just be thankful you can think coherently. That’s all I want, and this endless nightmare to stop. And the pacing.

RKrugel

HODL, if you sell them, you are going to be sorry IF BTC makes new all-time highs again.

bitusher

With a decentralized ledger its impossible to prevent spam so we can simply drive up costs . BIP110 tries to do so in a very ineffective and harmful manner that also breaks many monetary use cases of Bitcoin and encourages spammers to hide their spam more which has nasty consequences Here are 5 better solutions : 1) The best solution as I often promote is to spend and replace Bitcoin as money. This is best done on other layers like lightning that use much less blockspace, but the more people that open and close channels the higher the fees exist for spammers which will encourage them to use altcoins instead for their spam. Yes , more l2 txs reduce onchain use which is why a large focus should be on adoption overall to increase both L2 and onchain transactions concurrently. 2) The second best solution is education which I have been doing for many years where I inform people that nfts/inscriptions are scams and don't do what people claim they do and are a waste of time. Another important point of education is pointing out the fact that Bitcoin is not immutable as many spammers like to market to sell their product. 3) A third solution is we invest more in bitcoin and bitcoin adoption which raises the price of Bitcoin and since fees are priced in BTC onchain fees will grow as well pricing out spammers . 4) You can set your op_return filter to any setting you want even with corev30 or v31. My personal node is set below the default of knots . Although my pool node is best set to the default of core for better block propagation 5) Spam is just one aspect when the overall concern is efficient block usage. Core is constantly updating to insure better efficient use of Blockspace usage and reducing UTXO bloat in many ways. If you are not a developer you can also help when a company or service misuses the blockchain. Common examples: a) coinbase initially used 2 onchain txs for every withdrawal instead of 1 and also didnt use batching. We shamed them and used other exchanges until they corrected this behavior. b) Some exchanges today still don't use batching for withdrawals . Shame them and use better exchanges until they change c) Some exchanges still don't allow lightning withdrawals .Shame them and use better exchanges until they change d) consolidate your utxos and or batch txs where its appropriate . Use lightning or other l2 options as much as possible e) Shame any miner or company that uses or promotes spam and don't do business with them. Those are 5 quick solutions among many more that I actively am involved in. Suggesting solutions that don't work at all or have very harmful tradeoffs is not effective. This being said I completely support your right to enforce any rules you want on your node and even fork off. Power to the node operators. Just do so with your eyes open because BIP110 supporters and their leaders often are lying or making misleading statements .

OscarCorterz_20

I didn't even know BTC miners are of any use for AI... This is a bit concerning, no?

WillingCurrent3663

You don’t get it. The people who invest in $STRC don’t want Bitcoin and they don’t want amplified Bitcoin in $MSTR. They are fixed-income investors who hurt want a high yield. It’s the largest liquid capital pool in the world, which is why Saylor sells $STRC to that massive market to accumulate more capital to buy Bitcoin with. The people who buy $MSTR are the ones who believe in Bitcoin. And they buy $MSTR vs Bitcoin because they understand the mechanics and that it’s a leveraged play on Bitcoin that outperforms BTC in bull markets.

AvailableTie6834

to flex something, you have to show it, imagine showing that you own 1 BTC, an asset that can be stolen without the stealer being held accountable because of the nature of Bitcoin which can be transactioned without permission, and you literally flexing that you own that asset, seeking attention from the wrong people to you. Are you dumb, op?

BitterCommission3987

I sold some BTC at 16k, which I had bought when it was 6k. Do I regret it? Yes, but what was I supposed to do? If I could predict the market, I would have bought BTC back in 2010 and never sold. What matters to me is that I made a profit, and a big one at that, so there's no point in dwelling on what could have been.

Pasukaru0

I see it differently. I sleep much better with BTC that I know can't be drained because I took the time to properly secure it.

TheVillainInThisGame

Don't give people financial advice, ever. \- Guy who lost 12 BTC to VirWox "maintenance fees"

Slade_Duelyst

This isnt a great analogy, when you pay the fees for your transaction to go onchain you paid for some data to be put on chain, that has never changed, and with current 1sat/vbyte fees this is not a problem. Spam i s not a current issue, if it was we would probably have adopted BIP110. Problem with this analogy is bitcoin isnt being spammed, its a solution to a problem that does not exist. Game theory and BTC fees on the current model already are what you need to prevent the spam. It will always not be in the spammers best interest financially so if it happens it always will stop on its own.

Worldx22

To small of an investment to make a meaningful difference to be buying in pieces. Let's say BTC goes up to $300k. You get a 5x from current levels. Would that be life changing for you?

roamingandy

I would have thought some of the more obscure coins, privacy tokens, or new launches of shit coins, would be the best way to do that. BTC, ETH and USDT bribes are likely to be spotted.

OveHet

Not necessarily. One BTC could be someone's entire life savings. Otoh, someone who buys a $10k likely has far more in his bank account than just $50k or $60k

Fun-Analysis-182

Right, the fault line is what triggers the liquidation. A mortgage only forecloses on payment default, so the house can crater in value and you keep it as long as you pay. Most BTC loans liquidate on the collateral's value instead, a margin call that fires whether or not you're current. The mortgage-style version does exist, but only by starting at a low enough LTV that the lender can absorb the price swings, or by charging more for the privilege. So the immunity is buildable, it just isn't free, because someone still has to hold the volatility.

Oxymorix

There is one important part of the story that I think you are glossing over: **the time gap and the possibility of innocent downstream recipients.** You say the BTC were stolen in June 2021 and that *months later* they began arriving at Huobi. During that period, how many transactions, swaps, exchanges, or counterparties were involved? Blockchain tracing may establish that value can be traced back to your theft, but that does not necessarily establish that the person depositing BTC at Huobi was the thief, an accomplice, or even someone who knew the funds had previously been stolen. That distinction matters. Suppose the thief spent or exchanged the BTC and an innocent person later received some of that value in payment for goods or services. It would be problematic to simply say, “those BTC are still mine,” and expect that person to bear the loss. Transaction provenance and legal ownership are not necessarily the same thing, especially after multiple transfers or exchanges. I do think Huobi could reasonably have placed a **temporary hold** on the relevant account after receiving a credible criminal complaint and tracing evidence while the matter was investigated. But that is different from assuming that the funds in the Huobi account unquestionably belonged to you and should automatically have been returned. For me, the missing information is therefore crucial: **How much time passed? How many hops were there? Were there swaps or other exchanges in between? And was the Huobi account holder actually connected to the original theft?**Without those details, I think the claim that Huobi simply allowed “your BTC” to disappear is stronger than the evidence presented here necessarily supports.

Efficient_Range1156

You left bitcoin during the bear market because of a dodgy signing device manufacturer? 😂😂😂😭 Satoshi himself has locked up 1,000,000+ BTC for nearly two decades. You never had any bitcoin. Any one can secure their bitcoin with 100% certainty if they follow the correct steps.

Elsa_Holly551

Grifters will keep grifting. You can't do anything about it. It's just sad they can raise so much money for their grifts... I just saw Pomp reinvent his business again. He started it as a BTC treasury but when that didn't work he pivoted to an "AI lab" and is now posting charts how his chatgpt wrapper is better than chatgpt at finance... It's nuts out there

CheetahDazzling644

Right now we are using Shopify and it accepts only USDC not direct bitcoin. Are you annoyed if you have to switch your BTC to USDc to buy online? Or would you prefer to send BTC yourself?

Vandeskava

HTX is not responsible of paying you. Other than facilitating resale of the BTC they have nothing to do with you. Google is the very responsible of the matter. They let scam website and apps live on their platform.

vplatt

> I don't think you can keep your freedom and get protection from official governing bodies at the same time in this space. Well, to be fair, even in fiat systems, you'll never have protection from "official governing bodies". But at least there you'd have some protection from fraud under the oversight of those governing bodies and / or through the financial institutions acting in compliance with the requirements of those governing bodies. It's the completely unforgiving nature of crypto that has kept me out of BTC. Bitcoin custody is not forgiving of mistakes and even as an IT pro, I was never confident that I could successfully safeguard my investments. I knew about the cold wallets, pass phrases, etc. and having read all of that I knew eventually I would make a mistake somewhere and it would only take a single mistake to lose it all. It's not for nothing that financial institutions have 24-hour response teams to attacks, fraud locks, dispute procedures, insurance, and more. It's not just a question of convenience. Most individuals don't stand a chance over the long haul, IMO, when it comes to securely managing self-custody. I know that this is just useless hand-wringing to those of you that have this shit locked down properly, and I'm not saying it's impossible at all; but it's easily "difficult" and I would advise most people do not try self-custody at all. Most of us simply aren't as smart as we think.

zante2033

Mt Gox collapse = 850,000 BTC lost / $54 billion lost Coldcard hack = est 2k BTC / $128.1 million lost **Photonic/quantum brute force transaction intercepts estimate to begin occuring in 2029** Address re-use operation risk EST 4.9M BTC / $313 billion lost

Capital_Situation961

That’s a fair question, but I have never claimed that the person behind the Huobi account was necessarily the person who originally stole my Bitcoin. They could have been the thief, an accomplice, a money launderer, or someone further down the chain. Establishing that is precisely what an investigation is for. The important difference with your $20 example is that Bitcoin leaves a traceable public transaction history. Investigators could follow the stolen funds from my wallet through subsequent addresses and ultimately into identifiable Huobi deposit addresses. And again, I wasn’t asking Huobi to decide that its customer was guilty or to immediately give me that customer’s Bitcoin. They were warned while the traced proceeds of a reported theft were arriving. The request was to preserve those assets temporarily, preserve the KYC information identifying their customer, and cooperate with the investigation. If the Huobi customer was an innocent recipient who had legitimately received the BTC in exchange for goods or services, that could then have been established through due process. That is why “just go after the thief” sounds much simpler than it is. The blockchain can lead you to a centralized exchange, but only the exchange knows who is standing behind its deposit address.

antiswe

I do agree with your point, i really do. The only thing that is really different is that your BTC is probably long gone. That exchange has unlimited funds to fight against that order and probably don't even care because of different jurisdictions. (All assuming this) A house could be claimed back as it location doesn't change. I really hope you will manage to get those funds back, But I honestly wouldn't count on it!

Capital_Situation961

I’ll answer this misconception one last time. You’re conflating two completely different things: the irreversibility of a Bitcoin transaction and the responsibilities of a centralized exchange once BTC is deposited with it. I have never asked anyone to reverse a Bitcoin transaction, nor have I asked a government to alter the blockchain. Bitcoin worked exactly as intended. Nor am I arguing that an exchange should reimburse anyone whose stolen BTC happened to pass through it at some random point in history. My case is very different. Huobi was warned while specifically identified stolen BTC were arriving at addresses under its control. The warning was supported by a criminal complaint, screenshots and blockchain analysis from four separate specialist organisations. The request was to temporarily freeze those assets for investigation, not to rewrite the blockchain or immediately return them to me. Once BTC is deposited with a centralized exchange, that exchange controls whether its customer can withdraw or sell it. Exercising that control after receiving a credible theft report has nothing whatsoever to do with compromising Bitcoin’s decentralization. Bitcoin is decentralized. A centralized exchange, by definition, is not. That is the distinction. I’m not going to keep explaining it.

Capital_Situation961

Bitcoin did exactly what it was designed to do. I have never argued otherwise. The transactions were valid, irreversible and recorded permanently on a decentralized blockchain. But Huobi is not Bitcoin. It is a centralized exchange that takes custody of deposited BTC, identifies its customers through KYC and has the ability to freeze withdrawals. I’m not asking for Bitcoin to be reversible. I’m asking why a centralized custodian, after being warned that specifically identified stolen funds were arriving, allowed those funds to move on. There is no contradiction between believing in decentralized Bitcoin and holding a centralized intermediary accountable for what happens while assets are under its control.

Unable_Review3665

sure. BTC did what it is expected to do ... make IRREVERSIBLE transactions and document them in a ledger for the whole world to see. Nothing more, nothing less.

Capital_Situation961

I understand that perfectly well. Nobody was asking Huobi to stop or reverse a Bitcoin transaction on the blockchain. Obviously, they cannot do that. The issue starts when the BTC arrives at deposit addresses controlled by a centralized exchange. At that point, the exchange controls whether its customer can withdraw or sell those BTC. That is exactly why exchanges have compliance departments and can freeze accounts and assets when they receive credible reports that funds are stolen. Bitcoin is decentralized. Huobi isn’t.

Capital_Situation961

No. My BTC was in a hardware wallet, a Trezor, not on a CEX. I was tricked by a sophisticated phishing attack into entering my recovery seed into a fake Trezor page. The attackers used that seed to empty the wallet. The stolen BTC only reached a CEX later, when it was deposited into Huobi.

Capital_Situation961

No, I don’t think it is the exchange’s job to investigate backwards through every transaction and determine whether every person in the chain is innocent or guilty. But that isn’t what happened in my case. The exchange was specifically warned, while the stolen funds were arriving, that these particular BTC were proceeds of a reported theft. That warning was supported by a criminal complaint, screenshots and tracing by four separate blockchain analytics/investigation organisations. At that point, the question isn’t whether the exchange should decide that Z is a criminal. It is whether it should temporarily freeze the flagged funds, investigate its own customer and allow law enforcement and the courts to determine ownership. If Z genuinely received the BTC innocently for goods or services, that is precisely something an investigation can establish. Allowing the funds to leave despite the warning makes that determination impossible and the assets disappear.

Capital_Situation961

It wasn’t simply an unsupported tip from a private investigator. The freeze request was backed by a formal criminal complaint, screenshots and other evidence of the theft, as well as blockchain analysis from four separate specialist organisations all tracing the stolen funds. It was to alert the exchange in real time that funds identified as stolen were arriving there. I’m not suggesting that a private investigator has the legal authority to order an exchange to freeze assets. They obviously don’t. But there was more than enough documented evidence for the exchange to place a temporary hold on the funds while the matter was verified with law enforcement. That distinction is important: I wasn’t asking Huobi to hand the BTC back to me based on an investigator’s word. I was asking them not to let clearly flagged funds disappear while the evidence and criminal complaint could be examined.

Capital_Situation961

Put my BTC from paper wallet to Trezor years later

tenor_tymir

I’m just a guy stacking sats. What does BTC and pedos have in common. What?

Traditional_Most105

Well i think you're wrong. You either lost money in alts, or you gamble with no research based on hype. You can';t say all coins are memecoins. Memecoin is a coin with no real usage based on hype and no project or company behind it to back i up with a purpose. It has a community that hype it up with jokes and memes and if someone famous mentions it, it gains attention. On the other hand there are altcoins that have a company behind them that's developing, the token itself has usage in the network and it don't wait on hype but on real adoption by companies... Then the hype comes in.... There are many coins with strong and developing projects, with strong tokenomics and with their token used in the network. If the project gets adopted and the token is necessary within that network then it's demand will rise. Companies will buy more of that token increasing it's demand and if you're early on it with your research then you'll make money when the first people hype it up. Don't get me wrong. I did not experience a crypto cycle yet but i made sure to read and learn a lot... and what i learned is if the project has a purpose, if the token has a usage with strong tokenomics, if the project gets adopted by big companies and the token is needed then its demand will rise also and you'll make money... The hard part is identifying which coin that will be by researching. And if you do research is not guaranteed cause many factors could prevent if from succeeding like hacks, or anything that nobody can predicts but still it's better strategy than waiting for hype and speculation and fomo.... cause if we talk about uncertainty then btc and crypto market could disappear one day and be replaced by something else completely new. It's just BTC is the safest bet, ETH the second and if you do your research you might find the 3rd which might have higher upside but also higher risk....

Old-Committee944

Winning in court and still cant get your BTC back years later is crazy. On-chain tracking means nothing if nobody can actually enforce it 😬

Wrong_Bumblebee6992

u can send BTC to me if u dont like it

cubeeless

BTC to $400k!

BetterSeesaw

It is stolen or criminal BTC. Least the exchange could do is flag it or something

PirateHunterZoro252

Fidelity or River is good option in my opinion. Ive held 0.22 BTC in river for 2 years now. Never had an issue. Although I will say my password and email are exclusively for this use only. And i have 2 device with 2FA connected to river. The chances of me hetting hacked are low, but not 0. My password is somewhat strong and i do not have the password in an online password manager. I used Keepass XC, completely offline for that password. And i have this password manager file in 3 devices that can be used offline. I strickly avoid uploading the file on any cloud service. I hold about 80 percent of my BTC in self custody. It took me time to understand self custody. And the only thing i recommend is to generate your seed phrase completely offline via printing the 2048 bip39 wordlist on paper. Use Jade (blockstream) dice roll document or Bitbox diceroll document for the print out. Afterwards once you have generated 23 words your last word(24th word) is a checksum. There is only 8 possible words you can pick from so you need a hardware wallet to compute the last possible 8 words. The wallets that i know that can do this are Bitbox02 and the Jade wallet (made by blockstream). Self custody is indeed difficult and i would suggest you really study this in and out before you try it. Once you do decide to try it start with a relatively small amount like $5-$10. There are also other things you should know for self custody such as UTXO's, Network fees, & seedphrase security. Seedphrase security should also be on another level paranoia when it comes to protecting it. For example i do not have my seedphrase stored in any electronic device such as a computer, phone, or other internet connected device. My hardware wallet is the only thing that stores my seedphrase. You have to understand what this statement means. It is indeed possible to extract thw seedphrase from a hardware wallet. For example, the ledger CEO has said in one occasion that all that would be needed would be a firmware update on the ledger device or other hardware to extract the seedpgrase should they really want to.

spacetimeshare

Just one country has to accept it as payment. The purchasing country just has to make the payment on BTC. This could also help mitigate the resource curse many countries face and not inflate their local currency.

Always_working_hardd

Patiently waiting to replace my unforgettable past losses memories with BTC lambo.

69rambo69

But why would you suspect the exchange to freeze that BTC? You said it, it was an investigator warning the exchange. What are the blockchain investigator credentials so the exchange freezes the BTC? They are not a law enforcement, why would the exchange follow any tip coming from a blockchain investigator?

Capital_Situation961

That’s brutal. 140 BTC is an enormous loss, especially knowing there was even camera footage of the person who did it. I know how frustrating it is when you have evidence in front of you and still can’t get anyone to act on it. I’m glad you managed to get something meaningful out of the mobile provider in the end. I’ll definitely look up your case. I’d be very interested to read what happened.