IMO

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

Prof4Dank

If he’s getting physical with you… why would you stay with him? IMO if he’s making 150K a year and doesn’t have a car and still lives at home isn’t husband material. How will he be able to start a family? How would he treat the kids? Long story short he needs to INVEST and leave it be… and you need to leave him… and possibly buy Bitcoin

Objective_Young_1384

Hell nah my friend, you can say that it can also drop 40% in 4 months, but stay in some price range for 4 months its already hard > 3 years? This never happen (it can, but probably not base on history and volatility) maybe in 10 years or more this can become normal IMO

Alfador8

It just broke through both the 50wma and the previous high set back in May. This is the bullish breakout traders have been waiting for, especially the momentum guys. Dangerous time to call for short positioning, IMO. I just buy and hold and don't worry about it so either way works for me.

DRAGULA85

Enjoying your prime years while also securing your future is definitely the ultimate dilemma. There has to be a balance. But striving for your future doesn’t necessarily mean just sitting on your money and watching it accumulate. You can take calculated risks that actually increase your earning potential, like putting some capital into building a business with no ceiling on what it can earn. I actually made a thread about this a while ago that went pretty viral. The meme seemed to hit a nerve with a lot of people: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kfhufq/chased\_it\_your\_whole\_life\_now\_what/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kfhufq/chased_it_your_whole_life_now_what/) That said, being at absolute zero or carrying bad debt is a completely different story. You need a safety buffer. You never know when a medical bill, job loss, or some other unexpected curveball is going to hit. Having nothing to fall back on leaves you incredibly vulnerable. The goal, IMO, is to enjoy your life **without sacrificing your future**, while taking smart risks that can actually improve it.

TheVeloRebel

I would defo start with the gateway drug of BTC LOL BUT Having said that, if you're new, you haven't made your choices yet, old projects are evolving, new projects are evolving. I'd suggest looking into other narratives like Institutional connections, RWA (Real World Assets), Quantum Resistant projects and the other narratives like "Crypto Agility" that align with blockchains that are able to adapt over time to new protocols. Most Blockchains arent very flexible and need generations to change to the new threats, this will be a future issue IMO. Be careful with most crypto and spread risk. Perhaps try LLM's to search for these narratives to get a rather simplistic and sterile answer that's not too emotional? Look for common knowledge bytes/answers of information. Ask them to list top 5 etc and do the research. Be carfeful out there. It's very easy to be swayed by slick talkers who own projects and influencers looking for liquidity lol I own a few from the narrative of Crypto Agility, some from RWA and a few of the main staples like BTC and Eth. Learn about the tech and their history. Visit their socials and Reddits.

Spirited_Vehicle_543

Nothing. It’s 30% down from all time high. It will stake now for months and months. IMO

kobriks

Anything under 100k is a steal IMO

kev_huynh

IMO can't beat X money with 3% cash back and 6% APY on savings.

Topspeed_PT

Rainbow charts can be ajusted so tale them with a grain of salt. IMO one of the best charts today are Bitcoin Halving Spiral (and also the one with blocks)

RandomJoe7

IMO it's gonna start bleeding out more and more. Yes, during bull run it will go up again (but like last cycle, not as much as others or how it used to). It's just going to bleed a lot slower than the typical "alt/memecoins" because of how established ETH was/is, but I don't see it over-proportionally booming again. BTC is the main dog, and every cycle will have new random hype alts that come and fade away.

KateR_H0l1day

All of them, but you’re a bit late figuring this out, however it’s definitely a case of better being late than never! Just IMO of course 🤷‍♀️

Master-Fix-9382

All Bitcoin or else Solana and stake it IMO. Maybe a mix of both but I wouldn't touch anything else.  Solana is the eth killer and will probably leapfrog eth in the next decade or two. Everything besides sol and btc is just gambling imo. Eth isn't a safe bet anymore because Solana is simply far faster and cheaper 

Chrysalis1111

Why is 90K the new barrier? 82K was the last high so that was the barrier, also it is the limit where avf IBIT investor is back in profit. 90K is kinda arbitrary IMO.

No_Fuel4693

You're right, but it doesn't work in practise like that until the price remains largely stable compared to other currencies - which it never will IMO. Think of it like this. I'm a US seller of goods. My customer is in AUS. The transaction is for $100USD. How much is that in BTC? Well it depends on timing right? So I can say, 'send me $100USD in BTC', but the customer then needs to find an exchange rate for that from one of many exchanges, get a BTC value, then buy that BTC in local currency $AUD, then transfer it. There are a lot of variables in the time that that happens. Prices in both currencies fluctuate and I as the seller, have to rely on my customers interpretation of what $100USD of BTC actually is. Sure we would have saved transaction and exchange fees etc but its still not a clean exchange. It works but it's not perfect. I think this is where stable coins have value. Customer can quickly buy and send $100USDC for minimal fees and when I'm ready I can exchange that out for fiat or BTC as needed. They wear the exchange rate on their end ($Aud > USDC) and i wear it on the other end (USDC to BTC/USD).

absinthiumxmr

i would never ever shield zcash, not after they froze the private pool for multiple days. you are begging to have your money frozen if you put it in after this, IMO.

Big_Championship7807

Bitcoin really took off today. Oil prices and yields eased, bringing some risk appetite back. Yesterday’s Fed rate hike was already largely priced in, so we got a bit of a relief rally. **There was also some positive crypto-specific news from the SEC around tokenized stocks.** Add a technical breakout and a short squeeze, and the move accelerated fast. So IMO, it wasn’t one catalyst, but several things lining up at once.

McDrunkin521

The true BTC holders don't care about the clarity act and know BTC is the future regardless of the clarity act passing. It would have been great but it's not a deal breaker IMO. We gonna moon!!!! 🚀 🚀

Botlenose

The 4 year cycle broke last year IMO. The first clue was that 2025 was supposed to be a green year overall, and it closed red.

TheVeloRebel

Dear lord this why BTC's design matters IMO BTC can learn a lot from other types of projects which will keep it as no1!! HAWK just got wreckt (key recovery reduced to SVP in dimension n/2 +1, security levels basically halved and the team withdrew from NIST). So the new shiny lattice assumption looks great for years of human review... all until better AI crypt0-analysis shows up and forces blow-ups that kill the performance advantages!!! It's the same pattern we've seen with early RSA sizes, MOV on some curves, SIKE, Rainbow, etc. King BTC (amongst all the other shit chains) hard-code a single sig scheme into consensus. Moving to PQ means a high-stakes, network-wide change, and they have to coordinate a soft/hard fork to trigger the change, everyone's gonna have to live with the consequences if it gets broken later whilst all arguing in between..reminds me of the 'big blocks debate actually', messy. Remember those days? Massive arguments and banter. Squeaky bum time on that decision, I wonder who will cop the blame if it fails. If shitcoins or BTC rushes that process, we risk exactly the irony described. The secp256k1 is still fine while the “quantum-safe” replacement is toast. Satoshi picked a solid classical curve so BTC has been in line so far IMO. If you look at already thought-out projects boasting the 'crypto agility' narrative, and already post quantum coding , they’re designed from day one so that “lucky” isn’t a long-term strategy. BTC learns from others at times. This will be obvious. We can wait for the dust to settle on post-quantum candidates, use the most conservative options first (hash-based), and still have a clean upgrade path when stronger, more efficient algorithms finally prove themselves. That’s the real difference for BTC, it has to get the post-quantum migration right the first time. This is key. BTC will learn to have Crypto agility in the future IMO

TheVeloRebel

'Crypto Agility' is the narrative that will coincide with Quantum application and upgrades. Are the blockchains even compatible with turning quantum-resistant? When you use LLM's to research Crypto Agility, the chains mentioned are very few. The ability to install new ways of working without having to hardfork, or built only with Quantum in mind from the start is the only way forward IMO If you have to hard fork too early and choose the wrong Quantum algo, will chains suffer huge losses of TVL before they can choose the right algo to switch too? It is interesting, and to some point, an uncertain future.

HeightDisastrous5130

Its clear a lot of people on here are thinking of standard Revolut - and yes, for crypto it’s terrible 🤣 But RevolutX is pretty good IMO: Fees are low, spread is relatively competitive, choice is okay, GUI is intuitive, functions like staking works. It’s not the best or most comprehensive, but if someone came to me wanting to dip their toes in crypto - I’d have no issues recommending

Alfador8

Volatility won't go down enough for broad use as a currency until bitcoin reaches its total addressable market and adoption stabilizes. We need several more hype cycles to bring new people in and provide liquidity for long term holders to distribute their stash. It'll take a relatively long time, IMO.

BlackberryKey6837

I don't have any crypto and don't ever plan on holding any. But I don't think this bill really mattered to crypto folks. They will be just fine IMO.

1Tim1_15

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

1Tim1_15

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

sgrinavi

IMO it's already priced in at this point.

Big_Professional9253

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

JoeSchmoe314159

IMO 60k was the bottom. Gonna trade sideways til the bull run. Already lumped in. Gonna DCA til 100k. Hold till 200k.

a_medley

Legislation doesn’t normally “directly” help consumers when it comes to Finance. It is normally an overpromised downstream effect. IMO this is no different.

Adventurous-Gur7524

IMO Once you get to 0.5 and 1 whole coin you’ve showed commitment to stack relentless. Anything less you still need to stack harder especially at these prices. Forgot any other investment unless you have 1 whole coin minimum then branch off if you want.

human_oil77

I think the most used chains have a chance, since they have real world use, revenue generation etc. That's the bottom line. They're treated like companies now with backers, vc etc... so look for the coins with the best product and funding. They'll survive. Same as the TRON's and XRP's of the old days still alive.... IMO I like , ENA, XPL, SUI, HYPE (not in any order as they all kind of touch on different future areas.) So in short the bets for Sui lets say working on A.I agentic scaling blockchain and finance tools, will be different than the market XPL is going after with their set of everyday neo banking products etc. I personally think XPL and ENA are primed and in great real world markets with actual products, and low marketcap relative to those products and their utilities. HYPE is ... well hyped... and Sui is awesome team and tech, but yet to find their product market fit, or accelerate their unlocks to get rid of their shit tokenomics. Keep an eye out on their october Sui basecamp for updates... But hey, Final word is this ... if BTC crashes to 50k , none of these thesis will matter. If BTC stays relatively strong however, then yes, give the next 1-3 year bull market a chance to sort out these technologies and winners. Alot of their success is almost irrelevant to how much money is in BTC anyways.

DeathScythe676

all sales and communication related third party tools these wallet companies are using IMO to not operate at the necessary cybersecurity levels necessary to operate in the bitcoin space. they're getting hit repeatedly, and will continue to get hit. email needs to be removed from the equation for these businesses. I know these companies have sales quotas to make and rely on email-blasting and advertising, but too often these sales tools and employees operating them ARE the weak link. I've been in IT for a long time. and maybe it's my particular batch of idiots I manage, but the sales and marketing teams are ALWAYS falling for phishing, where engineers are always seem more cautious. An engineer gets an unexpected email from either a known source or an unknown source, and they stop and think "who is this and why are they bothering me? I have shit to do. Go away." A marketing person gets an unexpected email from an unknown source and they go "OOO NEW FRIEND! PERSON TO MAKE SALES TO!" They see an unknown as a potential lead. Marketing people are financially incentivized to attempt communication with unknown parties. So they're the ones that always seem to click on the bad links first.