IMO

Skeleton-ear-face

Posts like this appear to be market manipulation IMO, why spend hours writing a post to assure other people?

Hippos4ever

I personally give 0 fucks about regulation and traditional investment funds showing interest or lacking in it. IMO what I like most about bitcoin is it’s successful without governments and banks helping it.

TrueBirch

It's always been hard to buy stuff with crypto. Especially if you self-custody. IMO that's the fatal flaw. I still have a little bit of Bitcoin on a paper wallet that is hardly worth the effort to try to monetize.

Sybertron

its an unwinding of why crypto is down. Dollar and stocks were more attractive, well a lot of that was the AI buildout; and a lot of that was just NVDA. That unravels, dollar less attractive, crypto more attractive. Same thought for Iran war winding down since that lead to global money pumping US stocks as a safe haven this summer. AI competition and pricing hindrances getting removed that have been hurting crypto. Chips coming down and less general competition would make for a lot more freedom for crypto to operate. And make it less initial investments for miners. Just something to watch for IMO.

booyakasha_wagwaan

IMO some of the best investigative journalism on the net. the material is produced for a popular audience and maybe a bit over-dramatized but the info is clearly presented and logically analyzed.

hpaynecrypto

Full disclosure, I work at Casa, so factor that in. I get this exact question a lot at work though, so figured I'd chime in. The way I think about self-custody: find your single points of failure and get rid of them. Every option you listed has pros and cons and a lot of it comes down to your risk tolerance, but most of them have one thing that, if it goes wrong, you're cooked. \- Sealed letter: fine if it only explains the process. If it contains (or points to) a seed, whoever finds it has your coins. OR if the letter burns up in a fire/damaged by a flood/etc, your coins are gone. \- Hardware wallet + separate PIN: the device can die, the PIN can get forgotten/lost, and then you're back to needing the seed phrase, which is the same single point of failure again. I see a lot of people with devices that die (screen or buttons stop working, etc). Important for me to call out here that a passphrase is also not a great idea imo in that it falls into the same problem as the PIN. \- Spouse knows where the steel plate is: simple, which is good, but anyone who finds that plate (or pressures your spouse) has everything. Also this potentially makes your spouse an attack point. Truthfully, I used to be a non-believer in multisig, but after seeing first-hand some of the events this last year has really converted me to a believer. Something like a 2-of-3 is where I point most people when they ask about this: you hold one key, your family member holds one, and the third lives somewhere separate. Since lawyers are a non-start, that third key could be in another location you control, with a trusted person in a different city, or with a collaborative custody provider (Casa, financial advisor, etc). No single key can move anything, so your person can hold their key from day one without being able to touch funds early. It also handles the legal authority vs technical access split pretty cleanly, since nobody can act alone. The part people underestimate is "can they actually do it," and that's where multisig has real footguns: \- Make sure to save the wallet config/descriptor, not just the keys. Lose that and recovery gets a lot harder. \- Devices sit in drawers for years, firmware changes, PINs get forgotten, other people who hold keys die/move. \- A stressed non-crypto person following a 12-step guide when something happens is a real risk on its own. Your instinct about testing whichever setup you go with is spot on. IMO self-custody is an ongoing security practice, not something you just set up once and call it good. Regularly testing and checking-in on the process helps a TON to mitigate those issues - regardless of how you set up your wallet structure. Biased obviously, but hopefully this is helpful and gives you some things to think about and consider when choosing what works best for your situation. Whatever route you go, I'd personally put more effort into making sure the setup is actively tested for recovery than into getting the setup theoretically perfect. Best of luck :)

evgbball

Always think long term. IMO bitcoin is a very high risk asset with very little reward. I’ve been in the space for 10 years and see no benefit to further invest - there just isn’t the same investment or innovation in the space anymore. Bitcoin is the safest investment in crypto but even that is risky.

wolfwood43

Strike gives 3.6% on cash held paid out in BTC, better option IMO

Romanizer

Look up the recent JPMorgan report. According to them, Bitcoin will be the fastest growing asset class of the next ten years with a Sharpe ratio similar to large US equities. IMO, they overestimate volatility, so growth projection may be very close to your 15%.

6thcoin

Long term investment requires long term thinking. IMO btc is the longest term investment i can make. However while most pay management fees and property taxes, I pay learning taxes. There has to be learning involved while you are hodling.

TimSylvester_

The problem with crypto is that people created coins to have an inherent value, and created chains to register that value for the coins. What they forgot to do was to create actual use cases that would provide value to the coins, and produce transactions that need to be registered. That's not how money or accounting work. Money exists because people have uses for denominating transactions, and created money to be that transfer agent. The solution is to create *uses* that *drive the creation of transactions* so that the *tokens have an actual value in their utility for completing transactions*. Until crypto is *usage-driven* through a killer-app use case, tokens can't "store value" because there's no value to be stored because there's no reason to engage in a transaction that denominates value. This isn't an impeachment of crypto, this is an impeachment of the implementation choices made by the early implementers of crypto. Existing coins should mostly be viewed as a proof of concept or proof of ability, not as an actual full fledged economic system. IMO, that full fledged economic system doesn't yet exist, and won't exist until someone delivers a *use case* that is self-evident and justifies the use of crypto for the case that will use it.

cedarrapidsiaus

If Quantum computers are able to surprisingly hack the bitcoin network, the Bitcoin price will be the least of our worries. They'll more easily be able to hack all bank accounts, national classified security, pretty much any data across the globe. IDK if they are about to hack or not. My guess is not even close. Though I do believe the general public is always many years behind what actual technology is truly out there behind closed doors. Anyway even if there is a quantum threat its likely from government/military employment, and it wouldn't make a lot of sense to hack the BTC network. Hacking the BTC network wouldn't destroy nations or be something to ruin a government over. It would just make peoples value in BTC go down and their own if they own BTC lol. If you're a country like North Korea (or any country with malicious intentions), it would be in their best interests to steal and hoard BTC, not try to hack the Network itself. IMO 1. Bitcoin will make quantum improvements and be quantum secure without a quantum attack happening prior. 2. Major names claiming BTC is worthless and will be cracked quantumly are doing so to try to suppress price, get the general public to sell, and buy and hoard it themselves at cheaper prices.

Ghimbaw

Very good IMO. I usually DCA the dips. 100 bucks. $25 market order and the rest limit orders. Good luck!

Dubb18

Sounds like you might be out of the loop. Waters released a package that highlighted crypto legislation. Some saw it as an olive branch to the industry since she has been working on the legislation over the years. [https://x.com/BrendanPedersen/status/2118706324812755174](https://x.com/BrendanPedersen/status/2118706324812755174) There's Dem interest, but the lobbyists have set fire to some bridges over the past couple of years. The right industry voices will have to approach someone like Senator Brown to attempt a reset with him to educate him on how the industry has evolved and can be beneficial. IMO, that should not be someone like Brian Armstrong. Would have to be someone who didn't ignore Dems' concerns over the past couple of years. Also, someone like Senator Talarico could be an asset during this since he appears to be pro-crypto. [https://www.standwithcrypto.org/politicians/person/james---talarico](https://www.standwithcrypto.org/politicians/person/james---talarico) Ms. Terrett had a Spaces discussion with people that are linked to the industry. They discussed the crypto industry's path forward with a Dem Congress. [https://x.com/EleanorTerrett/status/2118723618825965761](https://x.com/EleanorTerrett/status/2118723618825965761)

RevenantHaunter13

I think the big banks know and have known that Bitcoin is gonna be huge, like the internet. Problem is they have been quietly trying to suppress Bitcoin because it hurts banks when people don't want to save and transact in their fiat crap anymore. I am betting Bitcoin thrives even under this democratic Congress, especially because there will be gridlock in Washington now and the banks can lobby all they want and get nowhere, IMO.

FoucaultCareofSelf

I think I understand ethereum/eth's fundamental *questions* (big picture, I am not technical at all) better than Bitcoin's. But for Bitcoin, I believe the only thing that matters is: will major institutional pools of wealth (huge asset managers, sovereign wealth funds, endowments, hedge funds) allocate a meaningful (1%? 2? 3?) percent of portfolios to Bitcoin as an asset class? I don't believe anyone can say whether or not they will. I can't stand all the smug hand-waving about Bitcoin's inevitability, nor do I like the "bro it's totally worthless" shit either. But the question of Bitcoin's attractiveness to those players is entirely open as of now. It cannot be answered. I do believe IF some threshold is crossed, IF Bitcoin IS seen as a pristine store of value type asset, there could be a game-theoretic institutional run in that could send BTC prices skyrocketing. But this is the only way it happens, IMO. TA will tell nothing about this, zero, unless you count actual indicators that wealth pools are starting to allocate meaningfully to BTC.

Kommandant_Milkshake

Yes. I acted similarly, I was greedy and waiting for the promised “October bottom” which never came. I gave in and bought at an average of $77k. IMO, according to the technical indicators, July was the bottom and I don’t think we’ll see a new low. So yes, buying at $75k makes sense. If I wasn’t already in, I would be buying rn.

Jsc_TG

Pretty much. Not selling for years is much more satisfying IMO

olduvai_man

Democrats won't need Republicans to pass legislation in the Senate because they hold a 4-seat majority at a minimum and are leading in the remaining 2 races. To override a veto they would require a lot of Republican support in both chambers are unlikely to find that much IMO. Much more likely that they would be more pressured to make accommodations with the President directly.

Dubb18

IMO, reaping 2 years of certain parts of crypto gloating about the 2024 election while Trump rug-pulled the industry for billions and getting bribes from foreign nationals before he took office ( [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/02/trump-uae-crypto-deal](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/02/trump-uae-crypto-deal) ), will sow much tighter restrictions and more oversight. Someone on Twitter commented that we'll see unrealized gains taxes now. Keep in mind that Democrats will still need Republican help to pass anything in the Senate. They'll also need Republicans to pass any veto-proof legislation (2/3 support in both chambers).

hit_me_up_30

Well, Mark was altering records to cover up the money the exchange was losing. Mt. Gox and CB are incomparable. Gox had high volume and was popular, but it was a very poorly ran operation. That whole situation occurred when the landscape of bitcoin was still majorly the wild west and btc was majorly less mainstream. CB operations and GOX operations are entirely different situations. It would he like comparing a child’s lemonade stand operation with Starbucks (IMO). If that lemonade stand somehow exploded in popularity and the kid did not adjust for it, that lemonade stand would eventually crumble under its own success. Imagine being 12 years old and trying to manage a multimillion dollar lemonade stand operation from your driveway.

Serenaded

IMO Kraken and Coinbase are the only exchanges for store of value. Keeping your coins locally is restarted as you are totally liable, you want the exchange to be liable and that's why they require MFA, block new or suspicious IP's from logging in to your account and withdrawing, etc.

TheVeloRebel

How will they stand out and attract demand? By clearly being the only chains that can make it possible. That's where 'Crypto agility' comes through IMO Only a few projects are built for that kind of witchcraft. 'The battle of the flexi chains' will come out as a narrative, mark my words!! Crypto agility is the actual differentiator in this dude, not just “we will support post-quantum someday. and the chickens won't come home to roost” Most major chains will hard-code signatures into consensus rules. Most of this shit requires soft/hard forks, multi-year coordination and arguments, wallet/exchange/custodian upgrades, and political fights over lost or abandoned coins. BTC has never been shy of a political uproar, neither will be others. That be the friction Bitcoin is navigating now with BIP-360, Coinbase and others are publicly prioritising flexi designs precisely cause rigid systems will fuck up migration. Complete nightmares if you just want to change something. Bitcoin will however succeed because its the biggest and only project with the most to lose IMO It affects the whole market. Google’s Cloud KMS work makes the same point outside crypto: they are shipping ML-DSA, SLH-DSA, ML-KEM (and hybrids), emphasising 'cryptographic agility' as the bedrock, targeting internal readiness milestones around 2028–2029. They are treating algorithm swaps as an engineering capability rather than a one-time protocol event. Projects that baked crypto agility in from the start that can treat new signature schemes as deployable bytecode/scripts rather than consensus changes. Or projects with audited SPHINCS+ (SLH-DSA family / FIPS 205) lock scripts on mainnet, with self-custodial wallets supporting (Quantum Purses) supporting it will bring this FUD to close....for now!! lol Even AI throws up a top 5 of Algorand, Nervos CKB, Quantum resistent Ledger, Sui and NEAR. SO I think people will be racing to get in that top 5 or crash and burn. PoW hashing itself is already outside the quantum threat model for signatures so It'll be wayyyy easier for those types of projects to adjust. Providing they jump the consensus hoops.

djscoox

Monero doesn't need to replace Bitcoin to succeed, and that's fine. They serve different purposes IMO.

lobhater

If you bought it directly from ledger probably but wtf do I know 😂 the supply chain attacks seem to be recent. But if you have both ledger and cold card as part of multi-sig it would take 2 hacker groups getting together for them to have both keys. Even then they would need the wallet descriptor. Or if you used both ledgers and they were both compromised same deal. A physical robbery is your weakest point IMO. But unless you're being targeted a random robber properly isn't going to know what a qr code with a bunch of letters and numbers is. You just always need to confirm the address on the device screen matches the address of where you are trying to send funds. You can't trust the computer

MrMoo151515

That’s perfectly fine and I think diversifying your BTC exposure is best. IMO the majority of your ownership should be in self custody. Leave some on a reputable exchange. And maybe grab some ETFs or BTC treasuries. Don’t do the bare minimum with self custody. Every self custody hack was due to bare minimum security.

Not-the-best-name

I work in software. I used to worry about quantum cryptography. After the last month I am not anymore. The real threat is all the holes everywhere that we were only protected from due to no one looking. AI is great at looking. One of the trusted CA certs installed on every mobile device, servers, applications etc had a private key of "4". Literally 4. For a year. That means that effectively HTTPS has meant nothing for over a year. The only reasonable protection you have with money is to make sure your banks are backed by your government IMO. The crazy thing I didn't realize about cold storage is what happened the other day, you could have perfectly sealed of cold storage and still lose all your funds due to specifically how cryptocurrency works (public chain protected by private keys).

Lost-Do73

What about the BTC praque environment? Thought this were a bunch of young(er) guys working on it? Maybe just online talks but better as nothing, IMO ✌️ Also younger podcasters ….

FundamentalEnt

IMO it makes it worse because the aspect of financial gain has been removed. The entire goal can be just to lock them away forever. Never profit just cause chaos. You aren’t dealing with the normal level of risk. Normally nation states don’t fuck with your money. If it takes the resources of a nation state to do it is it really the same risk level? The NK hackers are no slouches. Like seriously top five globally. To act like this was L337 and his team of squeebdicks and this stuff is easily done isn’t honest.

Kommandant_Milkshake

In my opinion, yes, and I'm biased because 77k is my average cost. The reason is that I don't think it will go much lower than current levels, as the 50 week MA is at $75,717. We've closed above it for 6 weeks in a row now, and every time that has happened coming out of a bear market, the low is in. So IMO, it won't go to a new low, and if it does drop again, the 50 week MA will be major support.

nosimsol

IMO it seems sooner or later Quantum will arrive. Not an emergency right now, however everyone should be preparing. Don’t get caught with your pants down.

Hug0chka

IMO governments want you to spend your fiat on goods and services (obviously that’s what keeps the economy going) they are not interested in you investing it.

IndependentSpeck

Very good points. This is my response: I am not as educated as you on business/economics. What I do know is what I see in my everyday life: you are correct about most things you said except (IMO) that the economy of the United States is not operating under a conspiracy. It is my opinion that that is not correct. Here's why: In November of 1910 (this from an AI that I asked for the factual specifics), America's most influential bankers and financial figures secretly met at Jekyll Island in Georgia to discuss plans for a new financial system.  This is where I get my belief that there is a real conspiracy where the elites have control over the government and economy... 1. The bankers met in secret to discuss a system where the new organization would be able to provide emergency liquidity to the US financial system in response to repeated financial panics that occurred over the previous decades 2. They came up with what is now known as the "Aldrich plan" where private banks would have substantial control over the institution responsible for supporting the US monetary system 3. December 1913, president Wilson signed the Federal Reserve act 4. This is documented fact: Wall Street bankers secretly drafted a proposal to create a powerful national, private, monetary institution. This is where the facts get unclear: the Federal Reserve was (again, in my opinion) a deliberate takeover of the US economy by the financial elites and they have ever since exerted secret control over the US government (which in my opinion supports my other idea that both Republicans and Democrats are at the whim of the financial elites, which would explain why they behave the same way as they typically do- instead of acting on left/right-wing interests, they instead act in their own interests and at the expense of the American people - for example, when was the last time a congressman actually represented their constituents??? Spoiler... they do not). So, I will admit here that my arguments on this subject are not all based entirely on fact. This is what I believe to be true, though, from everything I have seen: The Federal Reserve is a private institution and they really do have a huge and secret control over the US economy and government, there's a secretive ruling class that acts entirely in a self-sustaining manner to deliberately force everyday Americans to work for their money, where the financial elites and whoever is closest to them benefit from the money printer. This I believe is fact: The American people are being forced to work in a system that they have no actual control over. Elections are an illusion and we are all cattle to the elites. They don't care we are struggling. They don't care that life is only getting harder. They will do anything and everything to keep themselves in power and they do not care that the world could crash and burn at the rate things are going. Everyone in the US is working so hard, and for less and less benefit every year. Everyone is working harder and productivity is increasing substantially year-to-year, but life is just getting harder for everyday Americans. Now to your other point, about inflation on debt... Yes, inflation makes taking on debt easier and more reasonable financially. I agree that the effect is that it allows businesses and government entities the ability to borrow and be able to use the proceeds from that loaned money to create jobs, goods, and services to benefit the entire country/world. My counterpoint there is this: I believe (no facts to support myself here and I understand that that undermines my credibility on this point) deflation would encourage people to save their money and only spend it on things that are not frivolous. So, for example, if an economy went completely deflationary, we would see huge businesses fail and governments unable to pay down their massive debts. However, I believe that 'too big to fail' is a poor excuse to prop up business or government that's failing and I believe that, if a business is not providing adequate goods and services to be worth spending money on in a deflationary economy, then they should fail and not be bailed out. Instead, in a deflationary economy, only the strongest survive, and over time, the difficulty of starting a business would drop. A bail-out for a big business might save jobs and prevent loss of economic activity, but at what cost? The American taxpayer pays for that. Instead, failing businesses should fail and new businesses born from the ashes of the failed ones. So, the current US economy is operating like an experiment where all the extremely wealthy are pulling the strings. In the best case scenario, I am completely wrong and the trajectory of the US economy can be fixed naturally, through the invisible hand of capitalism guiding the movements of both businesses and entities that operate \*like\* businesses within the confines of the government. In the worst case scenario, I am correct, and the cantillionaires continue to control the world even if it means there are things like a civil war where we are all fighting one another instead of focusing on the root of the problem: the extremely wealthy elites. That's my point. I should also express, I agree that in a deflationary economy, it would likely be much harder for debt to be serviceable in real terms. In my opinion, there should be studies on a small microcosm of the United States to determine the actual effects of deflationary policy in a scientific experiment on people who live in a deflationary system and do not know that they are living in that experiment...they would have to be selected at random and only know the bare minimum what the experiment is about. It would shed light on the actual effects of inflation and deflation, but it's unlikely to happen because, unlike in China, the US government guarantees certain inalienable rights to American citizens, and this experiment would violate those rights for a segment of the population. In reality, I will be completely honest, I don't know that deflationary systems would be a perfect, or even better, solution. Maybe Bitcoin would be a bad example of a currency to use on a large scale because of this, I don't know. But again, it's something that should definitely be studied. Science that isn't pseudoscience would require a lot of experimenting that we simply cannot do unless it's already happening on a scale we couldn't have imagined was possible. The most important point here is this: economies and governments are constantly evolving and proper science would help to determine whether deflation would actually be as harmful as everyone seems to think it would be. In the meantime, we need to solve the problem of extreme financial inequality, because regardless of the truth about these points, the ultra-wealthy are immune to the pain and struggle we experience today, and that makes them numb to our pain.

Oddsee

I think the best way to find your answer would be to read The Bitcoin Standard. Contrary to the title, the book is less about BTC and more about criticisms of Keynes and Keynsian economics. IMO the argument that we *need* inflation for growth is fundamentally flawed, due to the way we view/measure growth itself. For example, it's great when your stocks reach all-time-highs, but what about the rampant enshittification and mass layoffs used to get there? It's both unethical and unsustainable.

Equivalent_Ranger753

The safest way is proper self custody. Multi vendor with long, high entropy passphrases is more than enough for long term safety. Proper multisig is just as secure but more work IMO

Overall-Wishbone9292

Should be worth trillions IMO

adaptive-mal

At this point, it's basically free money to scrape for news reports of crypto hacks and buy XMR on the signal then sell just as it's jumped in price.. Only that there's a hundred billion different cryptos, I was gonna say you could probably also monitor trade volumes and look for signs of a hack (random crypto suddenly starts dumping, trade volume + price of xmr suddenly starts to rise).. Even if the hack turns out to be a hoax, or they don't even launder through Monero, you'll still be riding the hype of all the others doing the same thing lol Honestly I should just be talking to Claude about this instead of posting to Reddit, but IMO smart money's on stacking Monero.

Turbulent-Impress301

your assumptions all hinge around the hardware wallet working perfectly as advertised If i were to exploit hardware wallets i would do one of the two following things: 1. Assume there is some flaw in the design. Find that flaw, exploit it to obtain the private key. 2. Create a malicious "app" for the wallet, set it up so that the first 10 transactions behave normally. Once the user has grown comfortable with the signing flow and signs without fully checking, setup the next transaction to empty their wallet. Relies far less on sophisticated hacking and more on sheer complacency on behalf of the user Option (1) is likely to be very difficult. But in general, my thinking is, the more software and hardware, the more shit which can go wrong. Increasing the tech stack is the wrong way to do security, IMO There's also the practical aspect of losing your funds being the same regardless of it you were attacked or if you simply got affected by a bug. So if they push an update that bricks your hardware wallet... yikes. Or if there's a design flaw that signs things with re-used nonces, or simply fries the thing because its not grounded properly, that would really suck. It doesn't matter if a bad guy gets your funds, all that matters is if they're gone or not. I mention it because back in 2020, i was attempting to get funds off a ledger and due to some software update (I think it was my windows machine at the time) i all of a sudden couldn't. It was a massive pain, i had to install a new operating system in order to use my hardware wallet, and if i hadn't had my seed phrase stored because i trusted the device, i might have been in trouble. I've since abandoned ledger because they just keep having issues. Maybe its the reason i hate hardware wallets so much. But ever since i abandoned them in 2020 crypto storage and life has been much easier. Not gonna say how i store my crypto tho cuz... yeah

OrangePillar

No good reason to use Trezor Suite, IMO. Use Sparrow instead.

Training_Donkey_3625

Don't bet the farm on Bitcoin. It really has no true intrinsic value IMO.

SteveW928

Yes, to the extent that economics is a social-science and we can't fully predict the social aspect. We also can't guarantee Bitcoin stays decentralized enough not to fail. I'm totally realistic about the risks (probably more than you know... I'm part of the BIP110/XBT movement!). But, the fundamentals of Bitcoin in the theoretical form aren't unknown or IMO, uncertain.

Admirable_Wolf5207

The cycle, while still influential, IMO is just a fading whistle on the supply side while we now have a growing orchestra of institutional demand that will only grow louder from here Regardless, it is everyone’s responsibility to come to their own opinion

ratpH1nk

Here is the kicker, IMO. Inflation isn’t some natural rule. It is a made up decision to increase prices that people pay and that greed is exposing by economics using math and theories.

Botlenose

IMO Up. My thinking is market will prefer political gridlock and so will Bitcoin.

_speedoflight_

Gotcha. That’s a ballsy and brilliant move IMO as you are not using its entropy.

bitusher

Its already common recommended to use 1 UTXO/transaction per address regardless in Bitcoin which prevents multiple concerns . This has been the case since the whitepaper so is nothing new. Justin Drake has a conflict of interest because he works for a scam altcoin so is spreading FUD and if anything its his altcoin that is far more at risk from AI due to its large attack surface After the cold card incident Bitcoin has teams of Devs all using the latest frontier models to find bugs and exploits before anyone else There is no evidence with any of the recent AI work that ECDSA is at risk If anything the take away you should learn from this is update your software in general quickly during the next few years as AI advancements are effecting all software. The irony is Proof of stake altcoins are more at risk than Proof of work coins like Bitcoin from this threat. Here is a good discussion on the topic from a security expert without bias https://x.com/LindellYehuda/status/2107999859219587309 I wasn’t going to comment since this is a really bad take IMO, but since it’s taken off I feel the need to. To my understanding, there is no evidence whatsoever pointing to a break of decades old hardness assumptions like elliptic curve cryptography. The fact that AI can prove theorems that have been hard does not indicate in any way that problems assumed to be hard are not. Our assumptions on hard problems are not based merely on human fallibility but on a belief that inherent hardness exists. Of course, we can’t prove that EC discrete log is hard, since we haven’t been able to prove P neq NP. But just throwing out - AI is doing amazing math so elliptic curve hardness is in danger has no logical basis whatsoever. Furthermore, if it really would be broken, the ramifications to our digital world including the traditional financial industry would be immense. Once I can break ECC, I can generate fake PKI certificates and impersonate bank websites. Worse, I can generate malicious banking apps and even operating systems and sign them and push them to people phones and computers and completely take them over. But this is fear mongering since there’s zero evidence to this capability existing. And there’s also zero evidence that elliptic curve hardness is more vulnerable than hash function hardness. In fact historically hash functions have been more broken than elliptic curves. So this is also based on conjecture rather than any evidence. In conclusion, making such statements without any evidence is the opposite of responsible behavior. It is the very definition of FUD — it cannot be proven wrong but there’s also no evidence whatsoever of it being true.

Outside-Yam-1984

The problem is prediction markets imo. They have completely ruined btc and crypto imo The price of bitcoin matters less now all because of prediction markets. IMO

DRAGULA85

Gold wasn’t around at the time of the Internet. Virality can expedite adoption IMO.

semanticweb

IMO pumps activates lot of agents.

Figozinho4

IMO still beats any ETF performance out there over time

magical_battery

Yes, its trustable IMO. Have been using it for a while now.

Romanizer

I started buying around the 2013 bull run and was deep underwater until 4 years later. Those 4 years were full of doubt if Bitcoin survived, gets abandoned, flipped by some altcoin, gets 51%-attacked. Very bleak times. Only conviction gets you through this. Today we know Bitcoin is inevitable. Wall Street, Banks and governments have acknowledged the benefits of Bitcoin and the blockchain for reserves and transactions. IMO, the risk/reward ratio has never been better than today and I can't think of any other asset I would prefer to buy right now.

ScienceSuper7879

Bad timing IMO. They should have cancelled the launch and focused on current issue. Trust is the corner stone for any hardware wallet.

RareVibeDelight

That’s everyone’s problem (We’re human FOMO). IMO, I think we have 2 more years left. The halving comes and then it will pump up. Maybe it goes past 100K by the end of 2026, but nobody really knows. Keep DCA-ing, run a node + verify Happy Friday! 🧡🚀

Romanizer

The amounts shown at risk are very overstated, IMO. You should take out all addresses where you can be sure that someone has access, as they could be moved anyway. "Bunker mode" is nothing else than the Bitcoin community knows since inception. Ether I'm evidently has a bigger problem with that.

Kommandant_Milkshake

Is it really that different? The 2014 cycle had a bottom over 430 days after the top, so why can’t we have a cycle with an earlier bottom? IMO the cycle is still alive, but it doesn’t align perfectly like people hoped it would.

bdemon40

Sure, those guard rails will work, but there's a stopping peer-to-peer transactions. And there's always an exchange that will do the currency conversion. It's like trying to stop piracy, IMO.

anonymous-bear-5886

You know - I also had this approach. "You only use money you could afford to lose." And I was so stoic when I got whipped out last year, but after a few months I was like - no, this approach doesn't help. It was shit tone of money and I can't just shrug and move on. I know it's a common phrase "invest only as much as you could afford to lose", but "being able to afford to lose" sound like losing should be taken lightly, IMO it makes people less careful and invites them to play more risky/gamble.

fllthdcrb

> All these concerns are nullified if you use yeti 2.0 to set you up. It raises its own concern, though: trusting someone else's setup scripts, and whatever else is in there. Yes, I know it's on GitHub. But I doubt it's as well tested as Bitcoin Core itself. > You wouldn’t want bip 39, it has its own issues. Speak for yourself, please. > Core’s entropy alone is 256 bits hence rendering it unnecessary. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Software cannot create its own entropy. It must come from an external source. Of course, there are reasonable sources of entropy on computers, IMO. But things like rolling dice can be used if you don't want to trust that. Anyway, what are the problems with BIP 39, in your view? And how can a Core wallet be backed up on non-electronic media? > You’re over looking MANY attack vectors by using third party software and hardware wallets. Such as? If one were to use an air-gapped wallet with entropy from dice, what attack vectors do you see as plausible?

fllthdcrb

As a node, it's great. Not so much as a wallet, IMO. It doesn't support BIP 39, for one thing, so you can't easily import/export with other wallets. Are backups as simple and robust? That's a concern. Also, running a node takes significant resources, which not everyone is able or willing to commit. It's not that hard to pair another wallet with your own Core node, so you can have advantages of both. I suppose that's not what you're getting at, though. Well, if you're going to run Core, that means you have a computer with a "normal" (read: not mobile) OS, and can also run one of the software wallets available for it. You appear to have forgotten about them, and some are pretty good. An air-gapped setup to guard against malware stealing your seed is also a possibility, though you'd need a separate computer dedicated to signing. If you don't trust the RNG, rolling dice is an option, too.

10kpizza

You say "third seed generated with dice rolls", but how are you meant to use that seed to sign transactions? You need some software and hardware. Multisig is a great idea for protecting against cyberattacks, RNG bugs, supply chain attacks, etc IMO especially N-of-N. If I were you I'd use the third seed on your main desktop computer with something like Electrum or Sparrow. If that online desktop gets hacked the other seeds on Trezor/Ledger will be unaffected. Multisig security is additive. If coldcard or ledger users had made a 2-of-2 multisig with their hardware wallet plus the most online malware-ridden windows machine you've ever seen, they would still have their funds today. And with N-of-N you dont need to store the descriptor. The seeds alone are enough.

Romanizer

Blockstream Mining has serious red flags, but financial trouble doesn't automatically mean Ponzi. The real question is whether new investors' money is being used to fake returns for earlier investors. That hasn't been proven. Would be pretty ironic to see that here. As for Blockstream supposedly controlling Bitcoin Core through GitHub, that's misleading. Blockstream-affiliated developers have influence, but merging code doesn't mean controlling Bitcoin's consensus rules. Node operators ultimately decide what software they run. If Blockstream collapsed, Bitcoin Core development could slow down, and projects like Liquid would face serious problems. But Bitcoin itself would continue operating. The bigger concern, IMO, is the concentration of developer funding, technical expertise, and influence within a relatively small group of people. Bitcoin's decentralization shouldn't mean these dependencies are beyond criticism. Blockstream's insolvency would probably be good for decentralization. However those are two different companies.

magus-21

GPU mining hasn't been profitable in years. ASIC mining would give a very thin margin, but IMO not enough of a profit to be justifiable.

TvAGhost

Strive is growing fast. The mnav is appropriate. Undervalued still IMO.

Designer-Beginning16

Most likely scenario IMO is $150,000 - $200,000 by 2030 with a potential peak on the $250,000s before 2032 or by then.

mosdam88

nothing less than 200K IMO

badjano

DXY is a better indicator IMO

oneothergamer

Paper BTC is a way bigger problem IMO

MrChicken_69

There are three power rates in the US: Consumer (that's what we all pay), Commercial (that's what office buildings pay), and Industrial (that's what mills pay) And those rates vary widely across the country. (And as many are pointing out, "farms" can get subsidized rates. But IMO, if you're wasting that power on a stupid bitcoin mine, you should be charged a premium!)

lifeanon269

2-of-3 isn't any different (and thus no easier nor harder) to set up than 2-of-2. 2-of-2 is cheaper than 2-of-3 since, if you're going with 3 hardware wallets, you'd only need 2 instead. IMO, there isn't a huge security difference between the two setups for most threats anyone would realistically face.

Lavayo

Til now no wallet was drained which 1. Was not tempered beforehand (recent ledger) 2. Had an insufficient key (coldcard), which while the device generated the key, the device itself was and is still secure. IMO a device from a "trusted" (no new startup) company with a seed that you created in your own home (dice) with a passphrase is as secure as it will get. Also you might use several wallets and devices so you don't have a single point of failure. I use trezor and bit box.

Jealous_Worry_4360

My gosh. You could be the biggest money maker in the West. (All four of those) and I wouldn’t trust to put a dollar into that ancient coin.  They is probably only half left because half the people lost it cus there’s been like 1 place to keep the sheet or sold it for a 50 bucks to a company. Not good distribution for something that functions as a currency. Why in the world would you buy this coin for almost 100k. I’m sorry but. That’s freaking nuts. No one here mined it. It would have been sold off for now I would assume. That crap prolly came out when I was in high school. I feel like the people investing in this stuff aren’t very good at investing or have a little too much money and are once again not very good at investing. 😂 Which now that I think about it is probably a lot of people. Yeah. Not a dollar. I’m good. You gotta have some pockets to money in to that thing. Who’s gonna buy THIS crypto for 100k+ guys. That’s not happening. IMO. You’re not gonna make any money here guys. If that’s what any of you were planning on doing. 😂😂😂

lifeanon269

You can always have multiple copies of your two keys. So redundancy isn't the main advantage here. What 2-of-3 gets you over 2-of-2 is a slightly decreased theft risk. With multiple copies of 2-of-2 keys in the world, it means an increased chance of a thief being able to come across those two keys needed to steal your funds (4 keys in the wild somewhere). Where as if there are just 3 keys in existence and stored somewhere, there is a slightly lower chance of theft. IMO, it isn't that big of a risk difference though and therefore I personally don't see a major difference between the two setups.

sup

will pass after midterms IMO.

hpaynecrypto

Disclosure up front: I’m a Casa employee, so factor in my bias appropriately with this answer. I won’t pretend there aren’t other multisig providers out there (or that you can’t DIY this in Sparrow), but Casa is what I know best, so that’s what I’ll speak to. I personally use a 2-of-3 with my ledger, my phone, and the Casa Recovery Key, plus a 3-of-5 with two Ledgers, a Yubikey, my phone, and the Casa Recovery Key. Both have been running smoothly since I got started at Casa. It sounds like I was sorta like you in that I had been doing a single-sig ledger(s) setup for most of my crypto-lifetime since 2016; don't know if it was luck or me just being too silly to get hacked/compromised but thankfully I have avoided disaster (so far). Every client at Casa has a different setup, what works for one person, might not work for another. The common thread is multisig and the security habits that come with it. To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin: apologies in advance for the long-winded thread, I didn't have time to write a short one. First and foremost, I think its important to tackle Multisig vs. single-sig + passphrase (it sounds like you already are deciding/decided on multisig, but its still definitely worth highlighting some of the pitfalls of passphrase + single-sig). At Casa we emphasize multi-vendor multisig. Keys from different manufacturers mean you aren’t relying on one company’s entropy or firmware, and one bad key can’t move your funds by itself. A passphrase can work **if you treat it like a second seed phrase**, but IMO I’ve seen passphrases lock more people out than they’ve saved. A good analogy for a passphrase single-sig is basically a 2 of 2 multisig (which is super nuts to do if you think about it; one misplaced key or disaster with the passphrase and its all gone). I wrote an article the other week here on this comparison exactly (so I will save myself some words here) => [https://blog.casa.io/is-one-hardware-wallet-enough/](https://blog.casa.io/is-one-hardware-wallet-enough/) You can test a 2-of-3 multisig with Casa free for 30 days using a hardware device you already own (like a ledger) plus your mobile phone. One cool thing to callout here is during the ColdCard incident a couple months back, we had some clients that had a multisig that was entirely ColdCard wallets and no client funds were lost. All those clients did was rotate their compromised keys out while rotating in a new vendor. **How the collaborative part works for a 2 of 3:** Day to day, you sign with your phone key plus a hardware key. Casa holds one key, the Casa Key, as a backup if you lose one of yours or are on the go and need a 2nd signature. It can’t move funds by itself, and it only signs when you request it, after security checks and a waiting period. **Sparrow vs. Electrum:** One of my big selling points to come work for Casa was the idea of sovereign recovery where you can load your multisig vault into either as a watch-only wallet whenever you want. If Casa ever disappeared, you can rebuild the wallet and move your funds in Sparrow or Electrum without touching Casa software. (put some links below to read more) **Geographic distribution:** Regardless of where you go for multisig/your setup, the rule of thumb is to never keep enough keys to move funds in one place (and to generally be mindful of single points of failure, which can exist at different places in your setup). A common split is a home, your office, and a bank or private safe-deposit box. If a key is ever lost or compromised or lost, you rotate it out in the app, which creates a new vault and moves your funds over. A bank is particularly useful because if you are ever marched down to the bank involuntarily, there is probably no better place to be than a bank to grab a key and alert someone (armed guards, cameras, etc). **Inheritance:** To answer your question here quickly, Casa Inheritance is included with every paid membership. Your recipient gets a free account and requests access if something happens to you. I was on a client call this week and one of the things that the client really loved was that they could set up multiple inheritance recipients for their different vaults. So they had one recipient for their 3-key and a different one for their 5-key. Another important thing here that was REALLY important for me when I started working here was the fact this is all no-KYC. I personally pay in BTC, use a proton gibberish email, and got my vault set up that way. Additionally, for inheritance, your inheritors do not need to provide documentation either which is a big plus. (will link more about inheritance at the bottom) For me, the biggest advantage of using a service like Casa is that you can get on a call with someone on our team when you’re stuck, need help, or just reassurance. Last bit, I know you mentioned having a small amount of BTC to spend, one of the things that comes inside the Casa app (not to sound like a total shill, but I literally can speak to this option the best) is the Casa Pay key. Its a hot wallet (single sig) that you can use for everyday transactions/etc. read more about the pay key here: [https://support.casa.io/knowledge/casa-pay](https://support.casa.io/knowledge/casa-pay) If you want to do your own research, here’s where I’d personally start: * The Casa blog (lots of good nuggets here imo) => [https://blog.casa.io/](https://blog.casa.io/) * Multi-location key storage: [https://docs.casa.io/wealth-security-protocol/chosen-features/multi-location](https://docs.casa.io/wealth-security-protocol/chosen-features/multi-location) * Moving keys safely: [https://support.casa.io/knowledge/moving-to-a-new-home-and-your-casa-keys](https://support.casa.io/knowledge/moving-to-a-new-home-and-your-casa-keys) * Replacing a lost or compromised key: [https://support.casa.io/knowledge/key-rotation-replacing-a-key-in-the-casa-app](https://support.casa.io/knowledge/key-rotation-replacing-a-key-in-the-casa-app) * Sovereign Recovery with Sparrow: [https://support.casa.io/knowledge/sovereign-recovery-with-sparrow-wallet](https://support.casa.io/knowledge/sovereign-recovery-with-sparrow-wallet) * Sovereign Recovery with Electrum: [https://support.casa.io/knowledge/sovereign-recovery-for-bitcoin-vaults](https://support.casa.io/knowledge/sovereign-recovery-for-bitcoin-vaults) * Inheritance: [https://casa.io/inheritance](https://casa.io/inheritance) * My piece on entropy and multi-vendor key generation: [https://blog.casa.io/what-is-entropy-a-plain-language-guide-to-how-your-bitcoin-keys-get-made/](https://blog.casa.io/what-is-entropy-a-plain-language-guide-to-how-your-bitcoin-keys-get-made/) Hope that helps, and good luck with the migration. If there is anything I can elaborate on, just lmk and I will do my best to get back to you.

Canabull-

Alt seasons have proven to be disastrous for most crypto investors. I think its a fool me once, fool me 3 times kind of thing. IMO we'll never see (and for good reason) another alt season like we have in the past.

uncirculated_luster

I would at least move it from etoro to cb... it's a better exchange IMO

1FunkyFriedChicken

Higher lows will lead to higher highs IMO There’s more buyers now. Companies, investment funds, etc

avance70

> IMO it is now reasonable to brace for the possibility that ECDSA breaks before qday, in the worst case in months not years. By "break" I mean fast private key recovery (e.g. in one week) on available hardware (e.g. a large GPU cluster). the "IMO" and "reasonable" are doing some heavy lifting there

landsquid1234

Most bitcoin traders are terrible so yeah. Quit checking and play the “time in market vs timing the market.” Strategy. I went all the way to TV to check this and nothing noteworthy or catastrophic is happening. Bitcoin hasn’t been a buy since October 2024. It’s currently a buy again with exposure to 61,000.00. Which sucks. Second round entry incoming IMO. It will cut short most likely 77-72 targets for entry. Break 61 cut it. It’s been like this for two years just people don’t chart their fuckin levels.

Remarkable-Log-1809

Taxing unrealized gains is bananas IMO

Lost_Ship_6428

Until you realize that 32+% of the S&P 500 is 7 tech companies all relying on AI. I like the keep it simple principles of Bogle. However, buying the S&P 500 today is not (IMO) in the spirit of Bogle. For me, buying something more diversify would is the play

suspicious_Jackfruit

The reply is even an LLM. OP can't human anymore. I work in an AI heavy field and use it all the time, but not like this, this is just unsupervised claude with a few more steps. Actual engineers who use AI properly as a tool do not use it like this for very good reasons, and if OP has no actual formal experience in cryptography and high level engineering then they are just playing make believe blockchain engineer and ultimately someone else will pay the price for that. OP can't just say "audit later" if something is foundationally wrong because the AI did it's part implimenting what op asked for e.g "make it quantum secure" but op didn't know the ramifications of that or how the AI implimented it, then it could be dead at first audit and op or the community this may spawn would be the costs of that audit and the demise of the token. Obviously it could also be fine, but this is why OP needs to choose transparency IMO. The novelty of a pure AI generated experiment might actually make it a success but it needs to be communicated

Relevant_Election530

Mark Cuban is playing a different game than (pretty much) everyone on this subreddit. He's wealthy and not in the scene, so if he's going to invest his wealth in riskier things then  he's probably going to do it on passion projects like professional sports  IMO 🤷‍♂️

jawni

My alts have not been disappointing, just pick better coins IMO.

Romanizer

Both can be frozen but there fundamental difference in issuer, governance and monetary control. Calling stablecoins CBDCs misses the point, IMO.

SuleyGul

This is a bad take. This time around there is actual protocols with significant revenue generations and RWA applications that are set to do extremely well this cycle. Projects like HYPE, PUMP, AAVE, UNI, ASTER, SKY, LINK to name a few. IMO this is the cycle where crypto is maturing from memes to actual real world utility and revenue generation. I don't expect a broad based alt season but projects with actual utilityz revenues and adoption to significantly outperform.

EquivalentHuge9874

Anything AI can do a human can do relative to stocks.AI.may be much faster and thorough as a net positive - but do those positives outweigh the potential disasters AI can create? Not even close IMO

Financial-Milk-7488

Do it, but fund it with fiat. IMO, no need to sell your Sats. Especially with an income like you have, that type of money will go very far in the areas you’re describing. You’re young, done well for yourself, clearly qualified and could get another job after. I say go for it

EducationalAuthor539

Current price is still a good price to buy bitcoin IMO.

HesitantInvestor0

"Also I know I’m not right or the smartest, I actually posted this to get better insight from people who are more knowledgeable and see why people disagree. I said your statement wasn’t really backed by anything and the examples you gave weren’t the best" My criticism is that the bands are absolutely massive, and that it takes supply into consideration while assuming demand that doesn't have to materialize. That's valid criticism IMO. If you want to address it, feel free.

patatepowa05

blockchain is the solution that enables decentralized protocols, using it without a use case for decentralization is futile IMO. Decentralized protocols aren't having their big productive adoption breakthroughs, but electricity was around as a novelty for nearly a century before it really took off with largescale adoption, so not all great inventions see immediate adoption.

Automaton9000

They take your house.... *IF* you don't take responsibility for something YOU did or something YOU used. I'm 100% fine with that so long as you are truly under obligation. That's the distinction about all this I have a problem with. Your usage of roads, schools, parks, etc has no relation to the value of your house and so losing your house because you don't pay a number that bears no relation to your real responsibility is unfair IMO. I'm not defending freeloaders. I'm arguing for a more fair distribution of the burden.

greglogan84

Comparing individual assets by market cap gets weird pretty quickly because some things on these charts are companies, some are commodities and some are entire asset classes. The more interesting comparison for Bitcoin IMO is how much additional capital it takes to move from one market-cap range to another as it gets larger. Percentage gains naturally require much more absolute capital at this scale.

JAMGlobalStudio

One underrated use case is actually **using crypto as infrastructure rather than treating it like an investment**. For example, depending on where you live, it can be useful for sending money internationally, receiving payments without relying on traditional banking rails, interacting with decentralized applications, or holding/transferring assets directly without an intermediary. If you're interested in the broader technology/business side rather than just buying coins, I’d also check out this book: [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0HKY9JYBY](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0HKY9JYBY) It’s not specifically a crypto book, but it covers AI systems, automation and digital business workflows, which IMO is where a lot of the interesting practical applications of decentralized tech can eventually connect. And yeah, I think your question is fair. If you're just buying BTC and staring at the chart, you're mostly treating it as an asset. The more interesting question is what problems the underlying infrastructure actually solves for you.

northernguy

I think it’s great for you to learn about bitcoin and consider investing someday. But IMO, as a previous judge at many science fairs this is not a winning project. For one thing, it isn’t science. For another, some judges will be inherently biased (irrationally so) against bitcoin. Personally, I would score it higher if you would do a more generally useful analysis and perhaps implementation on a pi of some sort of blockchain function and demonstrate how it could be used in science. Good luck!

choicehunter

This post is mostly AI generated with some added personal polish, but AI formulaic enough that it is classified as an AI written post on all the AI detection sites I checked. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, given the personal polish added in which make it not entirely automated and at least overseen by a real human who gives it direction and details to implement. The biggest downside is blatant direct self promotion which makes the motivation of the post nearly obviously an ad for personal gain pretending to be a regular discussion. People hate that kind of misrepresentation. If you had made the exact same post with no mention of writing a book and no link to your product for people to buy, in your post would have had a very different reaction. Lots of people would have upvoted you and asked you questions and been interested to hear what you had to say including your perspective and insights and engaged with you instead of being critical. What would have been better IMO would be to simply leave your references to your book and the link to your book in your profile, and let anybody who is interested. Go look you up in your profile, or ask you directly if you could share more information, and then you could mention to them that they are welcome to to see all of your sources and details in your book on your profile, but that you wanted to keep the thread separate and clean of such motives and self-promotion. Consider that for posts in other places. I wish you success 👍

fishyairbrusher

Negative IMO As fast as quantum can crack it, quantum will secure it. First quantum hacks will not be individual accounts but high value dormant accounts. By the time they are trying to snatch someone’s .05 BTC a solution will be in place. My 2¢

miner_guy_22

Lol, no. With a small screen and only 2 buttons I would consider this the worst in terms of form factor. IMO Cold card Q has the best form factor with a large screen, full physical keyboard, Air-gapped with QR support, and runs on AAA batteries. Krux would be second on my list for form factor.

Optimal_Jump_8395

DCA regardless of the price is the best approach for most people. IMO NFA