Reddit Posts
Got $600... what crypto should I buy?
Optimism OP token slips 10% in week ahead of $30M token unlock
Polygon Emerges as Suitor for Celo’s New Layer-2 Blockchain, Competing With OP Stack
Polygon Emerges as Suitor for Celo’s New Layer-2 Blockchain, Competing With OP Stack
Why do people still actively buy and hold inflationary tokens?
Optimism Foundation Sells $157M OP Tokens, Citing 'Treasury Management'
Optimism to sell $160M in OP tokens to 7 purchasers via private sale
Empower Yourself in the Crypto World: Embrace On-Chain Data for Informed Decisions
Optimism has sold 116M OP tokens for “treasury management purposes”. This is the only reason alot of these tokens exist
Optimism airdrops 19.4m of free OP tokens
Top 10 r/CC content posts that have been recycled every couple days for years now.
Been meaning to say this for a while, but put it off cuz it's hard to find: all major bitcoin ETFs first, then global debt bonds market later (Greg Foss).
TIL Something easily searchable is easy to find.
Hi r/Cryptocurrency, let's talk: State of the Subreddit, Mod AMA, Reminders
$PEPEFORK Announces Launch Of NFT Trading Card Game
There was a post earlier today about “worst case scenario” for bitcoin, and it got taken down?
The modular Revolution in the Ethereum ecosystem
Circle deploys USDC on Layer 2 networks OP Mainnet and Base
Circle deployed USDC on Layer 2 networks OP Mainnet and Base.
Can OP Keep Its Momentum? on Bankless
Token Unlock Worth $225 Million in September 2023: HBAR, APTOS, OP and more...
Are there any desktop or mobile wallets that allow you to import a private key, create a transaction but not broadcast it, and add OP_RETURN data?
help to unlock P2WPKH Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash address
Even if Bitcoin is accepted in every country (aka the whole World), there will still be an adoption problem from a universe standpoint. I will explain:
There’s an attempt to clean Binance name in this Reddit
No, the supposed 150k "Matic" you get on your wallet is not real Matic. It is just a scam token on Polygon network trying to phish you.
No, the supposed 150k "Matic" you get on your wallet is not real Matic. It is just a scam token on Polygon network trying to phish you.
Coinbase outlines decentralization plan for Base with fault proofs and OP client diversity
The OP_Return Wars of 2014 - Dapps Vs Bitcoin Transactions
Won some crypto (Thales) on Optimism, need some help with it
Looking to diversify my crypto portfolio
L2s? You Arb the Op auto-Matically at the Base? ELI5?
Can we still send text messages over the BTC network?
Concerns About MATIC's Future
I think my brother got scammed by a co-worker. What do you think.
Ethereum DeFi Dashboard DeBank Launches Layer-2 on Optimism’s OP Stack
Bitcoin's New Feature OP_Vault Can Help Protect Users From Scams and Theft
Mentions
Sounds like an interesting read. Will save it for later thanks OP
I primarily use Orbiter when trying to place Arb Nova ETH (or withdraw it out) since I swing trade moons. The exchanges I use don't support Nova so I have to withdraw ETH via Arb One or OP first then use Orbiter. I don't have many "transactions", but hopefully they consider value/amount as well 😂
I wasn't responding to the OP. I was responding to Tasty_Action5073 who didn't know how to validate that gold items are genuine. It doesn't require "multiple tests" as someone claimed. The thing about gold is it stores a lot of wealth in very compact packages. You don't need to "sit on a large amount" of gold. A 10 oz gold bar that sells for $19.2k or 0.71 Bitcoin is 60 x 37.5 x 9.5 mm in size. Very easy to hide. A 1 oz bar or coin is even easier to hide. Gold coins are available in 1/2, 1/4, and 1/10 oz sizes that are really small. A 1/10 oz Canadian maple leaf gold coin is 16 mm in diameter and 1.22 mm thick, smaller than a US dime. Gold bars are available in 100, 50, 20, 10, 5, 2, and 1 gram sizes. The lower weights are really small in size.
Also thank you OP for your contribution helping page the way to where BTC is today.
Tl;Dr OP didn't do due diligence; made a risky investment; now mad about things that were already explained to them. Then misrepresents circumstances to gain sympathy. What OP doesn't mention is that this phase of recovery is for clients with assets in the BlockFi Interest Account (BIA) and loan products. Clients with assets in the BlockFi Wallet have already been able to withdraw their funds. For US customers, assets in the Wallet could include not only customer deposits but also any earned interest from funds held in their BIA account and credit card rewards. BlockFi asserted early in the bankruptcy process that client assets in the BlockFi Wallet were unambiguously theirs and should not be locked down as part of the full bankruptcy resolution. This position was upheld by the courts which allowed Wallet assets to be withdrawn. The BlA was an interest generating account backed by crypto loans. Put simply, you gave BlockFi your crypto so they could then loan it out for you, giving you interest in return. These are the funds that are currently awaiting resolution. This was an investment security. BlockFi attempted to argue it wasn't a security well before the bankruptcy but lost that case in the US and was in the process of registering the BIA as a security as a result. All of this was transparent and communicated to BlockFi's clients. When investing, it's always possible to lose money including 100% of your principal. This isn't unique to crypto. Loans were made, companies defaulted on the loans. This is what happens. Everything so far has been well above board. Furthermore, BlockFi has sent out a lot of information outlining the priority order in which client funds will be returned in the event that they can recover assets as part of the other bankruptcy cases that impact them. This was communicated, thoroughly, months ago. OP either didn't bother to read these documents or doesn't remember. The only question remaining to determine if any client investments will be returned is how much BlockFi is able to recover. This is obviously well outside of their control. It sucks, but the outcome and current status is far from unexpected. BlockFi has done a lot to return what client funds they can. Sorry OP but you should have done your due diligence. You're lucky BlockFi appears to have been run well, otherwise you wouldn't have any chance of getting your investment back at all.
I’d be looking at SCAM, BOT, LIE or a combination of these, OP.
For real OP should be dishing it to us
OP is being sarcastic right? Right??
OP did not say that, you're making a strawman argument. Scarcity impacts value, that is logical truth. You can say "well bitcoin has no value" but there is a global market that proves this wrong.
I've been on this thread about 5+ years now. I can always tell who are the new ones by seeing questions like this. To OP: it goes up, it goes down. I hodl no matter what. Even when prices are over 6 or 7 figures this cycle will continue in my opinion, so it's irrelevant to me.
> There is no official price you can buy btc for. Except there is. WHich is what OP did. He placed a market order and got filled at the current sell limit order's prices. Which is the official price anybody on that exchange could buy it for at that time.
Not so fast ... they signalled clawbacks. OP and others may need to also pay money back from their principal. So OP and others had better hope that BlockFi can recover as much funds from insiders, loans and investments as possible, to decrease incentive for clawbacks. But wait ... >So once they’ve “recovered assets from FTX”what happens? Actually, OP, that's backwards -- and BlockFi knows it, but it's lying and misleading you like they have always done -- it's FTX who will likely claw back money from BlockFi, not the other way around. BlockFi received a big loan and payment from FTX (who was about to acquire it, but then decided to fork them some dosh). It could be worse though. You could be an FTX customer with locked funds and clawback exposure. The FTX case is a much bigger mess, and the FTX estate lawyers and leadership have postured far more contentious and outrageous actions.
What if 94.6% of Bitcoin exchanged hands in the last 30 days? I'm sure OP would be super bullish on that.
> it's scarcity does make it valuable. It enhances it's value a small amount. OP's claim is bullshit. They are saying stock to flow proves scarcity = value. That's wrong.
Much like yourself OP I had to do a double take when I read the email, as I wasn’t quite sure if was satire or they were actually serious with that nonsense. JFC it’s like the never ending shitshow of 2022
How is it not? Hell, your OP even says no one is talking about this event XD
OP i would never ever ever search again for anything that says “a large amount of something “ RIP inbox
This one was obvious if people read the body of the thread where OP just shilled a phishing link 3 times in the post. But people just read the title and comment without even glancing at the post sometimes which is ridiculous.
I usually check the OP history and if its suspicious i report the post. Most of the time its taken down within minutes.
Elon told OP that Doge is goin to the moon this run
OP what do you know about Doge that we don't, spit it out
Someone just posted a phishing scam thread (some NFT watch scam), that got 50 points in 10 minutes (has a phishing scam link on it) and 2 genuine users mindlessly comment on their post as if OP is saying a good thing which is obvious they just read the title and then mindlessly commented which just increases chance of someone getting drained.
Trezor should be a pretty safe option OP, but make sure to keep it well hidden in a safe place.
It sounds like customers that do not hear about the news will have their remaining assets sold in 47 days. It could be for up to 5% less than the market value, plus fees, rebates or damages due to Gemeni. Thanks OP posting this helps people get notified. I'm wondering if we can learn the amounts held in which assets by those Netherland Gemeni accounts. This will produce liquidity in those assets and may drive prices down right? I'm also wondering if this is some sort of way for institutions to drive us little holders out of the market while they scoop up the remaining assets. There must be some HODLers in that Netherland bunch, hopefully, they just liquidate and rebuy.
You might be what OP is referring to? What do you stand to gain by saying "buh-bye"? How will this help?
I've lost 100% of my interest in OP''s post
Hahah what a joke. I'm a Celcius Creditor. We all lost. The only people who won are the lawyers. And the rich pricks who get to pay us pennies on the dollar to buy the rest of the assets. Also now that you mentioned Costco I kinda wanna go get a hot dog! Try and enjoy the rest of your weekend OP. I feel your pain
Who knows. OP is just pumping hopium and comparing gold and bitcoin. Relax.
I think it's much better to just consider that money gone OP, but if someday you get some of it back than thats great, but how many years has it been since the collapse of Mt Gox and people still have not gotten paid?
I assume the qualifiers are monetary properties. Which gold and bitcoin have. OP could have been more specific but I think we should be able to understand he's not talking about collector cars.
Honestly, you can tell what part of the cylce we are in. There are 100 comments shitting on OP. We get it "just because something is scarce doesn't make it valuable" we're not talking about *something*, we're talking about bitcoin and **it's scarcity does make it valuable**.
Love the data included. Nice one OP. Looking forward to the halving
This is a very crude scam, but the Luna subs is still full of believers. So, I am quite happy to see this one doesn't seem to take off. I have stopped talking about crypto irl because I was called a crypto bro, a Trump supporter (I don't even live in the right continent), a crypto-fascist. So, yes, it's nice Vitalik took the time to put out his paper. And that Cryptoslate does such paper. Meanwhile where are the anti crypto "whistleblowers"? I am not gonna give names because it leads to them being harassed on Twitter (which should never happen), but I O haven't seen much from antibweb3 activists. Maybe because their predicted economy collapsing in 2022 because of crypto didn't take place? Anyway, thanks OP and thanks to those in the community who speak up.
just realize that OP's y-axis is doing major work here..
*OP is beasting ChatGPT into overdrive…*
Except that our brains and collector cars aren't a distributed global decentralized network with a positive growth exaflop hash rate and 120+ terawatt of brute force encryption security. Your comparisons are focused on any things that are scarce to us. But what OP is highlighting is Bitcoins underlying nature of scarcity (by design) and therefore its potential as a store of economic value. Trying leaving your ancestors a century from now a billion "dollars" - how are you going to do that outside of Bitcoin? It's the only immutable asset we know of.
Hey everyone, OP gives away free btc because energy is free for him !!!!! My adress : bc1qku5kdhzguu6ntmkz5m0wvvvddjwem3wzuryrct If I don't update this message with how much he send, you can assume OP is a liar/scammer
I live for these types of posts and ideas. Thank you, OP.
 OP...
saved us a click and time, thanks OP
What a great story. Thanks for sharing OP. Buy low sell high really exists ha ha
I understand we haven't necessarily read all the same articles, it's the cynical moon farming from the OP that I could do without.
These stats from OP look a lot like Enron… the BTC ponzi cult is strong.
>Sidechains are not really L2s true, but considering that Polygon is often designated as an L2 i included sidechains >rollups inherit the security of L1 also true, but if we want to find a reason to use mainnet, as OP asked, is that while validated by L1, rollups transact and store off chain, some rollups might also use centralized sequencers and some users may feel safer to bridge back on mainnet.
Maybe OP is talking about waifu pillow
It doesn't mean the OP thinks in dollars, only that they acknowledge their existence.
> I apologize, and the use of the subreddit tag is demeaning, I agree. But it is true that you are misunderstanding how longest chain is applied, even though you are confidently arguing that you are correct. Thank you. I appreciate your time and commitment to explaining your position. > I'm not sure how you could argue this in good faith. The top comments all agree with the OP, and most of the rebuttal is specific to bad takes OP has on a bitcoin fork, and not the idea that longest chain doesn't matter when comparing two chains with different consensus. It’s because we can’t take a open discussion with no sources as a argument. I need to see what they are discussing. I can look at the white paper and see what it says. If the user interprets it different then that’s on them but that doesn’t mean it’s how it works. The arguments in the comment are the glaring issues with trying to roll back from 0.08 software and being unable to sync with the chain. You will never sync, which if what OP was saying is true, you should be able to sync. > I'm not pivoting at all. You made a lengthy comment that relied on the idea that if there is a hardfork to change algo away from SHA, that the longest chain would be bitcoin, and that is simply not the case. I’m sorry, but if it takes nodes to come to consensus and the nodes decide that the different algo hard fork is the correct fork then yes it will. They decide this by the longest chain rule. If the node operators upgrade their software to accept the new rule set and gain majority consensus in doing so then it will happen. > It's not trivial at all. You made the claim that if the mining hardware market is cornered, that there would be a hardfork to move away from SHA, and that the new chain would be the winner because it would be the longest. I’m saying that if the hashrate is cornered then it’s very plausible to think most node operates would upgrade their software to take a new hash algo to fork away. Then you have the economic factor of the chain that loses out becoming not-bitcoin. All of this is decided by the nodes. > After they upgraded, every node that also upgraded would accept the transactions, and every node that did not upgrade would not accept the transactions, because they were larger than 1MB, and were therefore invalid under the non-upgraded rules. Yes and every node that upgraded to the non-consensus gaining software became a new not-bitcoin coin. > It would not matter how much consensus there is, those blocks would be invalid to nodes that did not upgrade, so those nodes would not build upon that chain. They would accept the longest version of the chain that only consists of valid blocks. If the nodes that upgraded had majority consensus then BCH would be bitcoin. But they didn’t. Hence why it’s BCH now. The majority of nodes would reject current BTC in that scenario. > If a forked chain with a new algo exists, how do you quantify which chain is longest/has more work? Through the nodes. If majority upgrade to accept the new algo and reject the old, then the old algo “work” would not be submitted under the new ruleset that majority of nodes upgraded to. There for that “work” from the old ago would not hold in weight IE: chain work. > You seem to be arguing that the chain with the most number of users/largest community is the real chain, but aren't explaining how that equates to longest chain. You seem to be missing the point that nodes decide consensus in this event. Economic incentive does drive the consensus mechanism. Which just goes further to cement my point that people would upgrade their nodes to a new algo as the old algo would be subject to capture and therefore worthless. > There is no "orphaning" between forked consensus chains. After the fork block, there is no cross-communication at all. The chains cannot be merged with blocks from the other chain being orphaned off. They are two chains with two different definitions of what is valid. Agreed here. But it’s up to the nodes to provide consensus on what is the right chain. Which would be the longest chain rule based on chain work. If nodes are majority upgraded then the old algo is rejected and provides no chain work after the hard fork. If nodes are not majority upgraded then the new algo is rejected. It’s as simple as that.
It's next level graft to rehash an old article to moonfarm all the way from 4 years back I guess.. gotta give OP the props for that? 😂😂
OP username made me think I was in the starwars subreddit.
Thank you for your question! More about underground. I'm looking for people to talk about core scripting on the mainnet. And to talk about how to apply these technologies in life right now. I want to start learning Script, OP; Now I'm learning everything about nodes, LN, DLC, Taproot, Nostr.
DCAing into BTC and ETH (mostly) and a portion of ARB, OP, MATIC, AVAX, BNB and a couple of gems.
>You missed the "long term" and "regardless when you buy". Yes, long term, even those who bought at $60k will beat your DCA. You guys continue to prove you are completely stuck in the mentality of this sub and refuse to read or understand. This one isn't even complicated. OK, let's see an example based on OP and my advice: One person buys $10k in Nov 2021 at $60k. The other buys $5k in Nov 2021 at $60k while buying $200 per week for 25 weeks. Both have spent $10k to buy Bitcoin. **Which person has more sats?** Answer my question, please.
Bad link, bunch of ads, paywall is there if you want to read the article. Wtf OP?
Learned a lot from this post. Thanks OP
Thanks OP, I look for your guides daily now. Keep them coming 👏
ExTrEmELy PooR PeOpLe great professional analysis of economic groups OP
No doubt about that, Dextools can be addictive and most times users get stuck in a loop looking for the next doge or shib. I'd rather go for altcoins that would keep growing over the long term like ARB, KREST, OP, and FLUX to save myself the stress and cost.
This is like Bitcoin for Dummies edition! I really appreciate your post OP!
CCIPs are ready to vote on. Don’t forget to read the comments section *before* you vote. Lots of smart people in this sub who see things you might have missed, and getting the full picture from the comments will help you to vote in an informed way. If you only read the (often biased) proposal from the OP and then vote, you might end up regretting it.
> This is uncalled for. I’ve debated with you so far with a sense of respect. If you are going to try and talk down to me then this debate is over. I’m not going to play little kid games. We are adults here so act like one or we just won’t have a discussion. I apologize, and the use of the subreddit tag is demeaning, I agree. But it is true that you are misunderstanding how longest chain is applied, even though you are confidently arguing that you are correct. > A Reddit post isn’t a valuable source. Though I did not link them, the previous two blurbs come from stack exchange answers. >Not only this, if you just read in the comment section you can see how the OP is widely criticized and debunked. I'm not sure how you could argue this in good faith. The top comments all agree with the OP, and most of the rebuttal is specific to bad takes OP has on a bitcoin fork, and not the idea that longest chain doesn't matter when comparing two chains with different consensus. There are some comments arguing against the top comments that agree with OP, but *those comments* are debunked. > I’ve posted an actual source, and the white paper confirms such, that the longest chain wins. This is calculated by the amount of “work” put in to the chain. You have tried arguing the literal longest part of the chain and now are pivoting to saying it’s “comparing two chains”. I'm not pivoting at all. You made a lengthy comment that relied on the idea that if there is a hardfork to change algo away from SHA, that the longest chain would be bitcoin, and that is simply not the case. >Let’s take a step back here and feel it back in. I can’t keep going to a new topic every comment. We first started with a rebuttal on ETH vs BTC in terms of security and decentralization and now you have moved the goal posts every single comment to where we are discussing some trivial aspect. It's not trivial at all. You made the claim that if the mining hardware market is cornered, that there would be a hardfork to move away from SHA, and that the new chain would be the winner because it would be the longest. This is a flawed argument, and I am arguing why it is flawed. > BCH split at block 478,558. After they upgraded and DID NOT gain consensus they were no longer bitcoin. Every BTC node from then on would not accept BCH transactions. Every thing before that would indeed be a single chain and it would “split off in branches that get orphaned off”. In no way shape or form was BCH ever it’s own separate chain until it forked and failed. Aka, nodes will accept the longest VALID chain. I mostly agree with this except some finer detail, but those finer details must be the barrier preventing you from seeing that this supports my argument and not the longest chain argument. I'll try to correct some of these details, and honestly I'm not doing this to have some nitpicking argument with you, but to help put correct information out there and hopefully convince you or others. >After they upgraded and DID NOT gain consensus they were no longer bitcoin. Every BTC node from then on would not accept BCH transactions. After they upgraded, every node that also upgraded would accept the transactions, and every node that did not upgrade would not accept the transactions, because they were larger than 1MB, and were therefore invalid under the non-upgraded rules. It would not matter how much consensus there is, those blocks would be invalid to nodes that did not upgrade, so those nodes would not build upon that chain. They would accept the longest version of the chain that only consists of valid blocks. > It’s incredibly irritating to start the discussion with ETH vs BTC and now we are talking about nuances on why BCH is not BTC. The fact of the matter is that if the hardware companies that produce ASICs go rogue then there is a nuclear option of forking to a new algo which does not require any hashrate from said asic companies as the consensus change makes it so. Consensus IS NOT DEFINED BY JUST THE MINERS and therefore the asic providers can do fuck all to change it but hope that the entire community rallies behind bad actors which is not likely to happen. If a forked chain with a new algo exists, how do you quantify which chain is longest/has more work? You cannot compare H/S, because the work to solve each hash is different with different algos. You seem to be arguing that the chain with the most number of users/largest community is the real chain, but aren't explaining how that equates to longest chain. If there is a consensus change, each chain's valid blocks are the blocks that follow the consensus of that chain. The old chain does not accept blocks under the new consensus, so they are not considered for contenders of longest chain. The new chain does not accept blocks under the old consensus, so they are not considering those blocks when deciding what the longest chain is. There is no "orphaning" between forked consensus chains. After the fork block, there is no cross-communication at all. The chains cannot be merged with blocks from the other chain being orphaned off. They are two chains with two different definitions of what is valid.
What OP is trying to say is, buy high sell low. WE SUCCESSFUL TRADERS!! 🦍🦧
It's too competitive in L2, there's Matic, OP, ARB, all backed by large VCs, and there's an opportunity cost involved. I'm not sure if it will be worth the wait.
> r/confidentlyincorrect This is uncalled for. I’ve debated with you so far with a sense of respect. If you are going to try and talk down to me then this debate is over. I’m not going to play little kid games. We are adults here so act like one or we just won’t have a discussion. > In the case of a hard fork, the blocks created in the longest chain appear illegal. So an un-upgraded node will not build on top of them, but will instead build on the longest chain created by its fellow un-upgraded nodes. and > Both chains continue to exist as they follow different consensus rules. Blocks on the bitcoin Cash chain are considered invalid by the nodes on the Bitcoin chain, and vice-versa. Since they have conflicting consensus rules, they are each the longest valid chains for their own set of the consensus rules. and > https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5zav4y/satoshi_whitepapers_longest_chain_is_bitcoin_rule/ > Satoshi whitepaper's "longest chain is Bitcoin" rule does not apply when comparing two chains with different consensus rules. A Reddit post isn’t a valuable source. Not only this, if you just read in the comment section you can see how the OP is widely criticized and debunked. I’ve posted an actual source, and the white paper confirms such, that the longest chain wins. This is calculated by the amount of “work” put in to the chain. You have tried arguing the literal longest part of the chain and now are pivoting to saying it’s “comparing two chains”. Let’s take a step back here and feel it back in. I can’t keep going to a new topic every comment. We first started with a rebuttal on ETH vs BTC in terms of security and decentralization and now you have moved the goal posts every single comment to where we are discussing some trivial aspect. Back to the topic you just brought up. If you are building off the last known history of bitcoin and trying to hardworking your own version it’s not “two different chains” until you propose the upgrade, nonce, and block height. Everything before that is literally bitcoin history. Everything after that is you trying to gain enough consensus to become BTC. Two separate chains would be just that. Two separate chains functioning completely different with no shared history. Just like with any reorg the useless chain is spit out and not focused on. Other people can focus on the chain with less work but that doesn’t mean it’s bitcoin. BCH split at block 478,558. After they upgraded and DID NOT gain consensus they were no longer bitcoin. Every BTC node from then on would not accept BCH transactions. Every thing before that would indeed be a single chain and it would “split off in branches that get orphaned off”. In no way shape or form was BCH ever it’s own separate chain until it forked and failed.
At least you bought the right asset OP... not some shitcoin eh
That's alot; Like ~$30 million a lot.. I'd have sold my bags if I had any $OP in my portfolio, which I don't.
to their Core Contributors and Investors a total of 24.16million OP (token) will be distributed
This is just to remind everyone that OP (Optimism) is gonna have a token unlock in around 4 hours from now so if you have assets you want to move out, now is a good time before some traffic builds over there
Imagine living in a country where your national currency is a degen shitcoin with a deathly slow rug pull, while you DCA into it with forced labor. Is that what you are saying OP is the situation and use case for a crypto like BTC?
Such a cool story OP, thanks for the education. We should have a contest for a new one.
Thanks, OP! Learn to spot these off-market indicators. You need them to survive in crypto. 2013: Rug'd by Butterfly Labs 2014: Rug'd by Mt Gox 2022: I put a substantial portion of funds not being staked in Anchor Protocol. Late March/early April things appeared *off.* Being burned offers many lessons. Follow-up on your instincts. I started watching Do Kwon's tweets closely. [This one set off all sorts of alarms.](https://i.imgur.com/Rfnudvt.png) That deleted tweet is a Terra fanboy who offered a hair-brained method to restore Anchor Protocol's 19% APR. Do Kwon hired the guy on the spot, to the acclaim of his mob. I couldn't get my money off that protocol fast enough! Trust yourself; you know more than you give yourself credit for.
I think we've seen a boost in BTC over financial crises (only really one or two since it's inception in 2010ish; housing crisis really hit in 2008 with effects lasting obviously into the teens). COVID was a bit of a black swan event but still, a crisis. But BTC was poised to take off after 2020 anyway. These crises seem to yes, catapault them very quickly (after they're oversold). Dollar amounts are Kinda meaningless as OP is talking about the "next financial crisis" which could happen in 7 years and BTC could be at 250k and lose 50k in a week. So as a %, that's more interesting. TLDR; OP should be using some more historical pricing and speaking in %'s gained/lost when making their argument.
No offense to you OP, or to many people in this sub, but it's relatively clear who lived through 2008 and who didn't. In 2008 this type of talk was everywhere. We all thought, that's it, it's over. The empire has fallen. They'll have to right the ship now. They'll have to rebalance society. The men in white hats are going to finally be free to clean up the town and chase the bad guys out. And you know what happened? Every policy was made in favor of the creditors. Every nation in debt had to sell their national assets to the private market to stay afloat. And the US just kept printing and taking on more and more debt. And even to this day, it keeps going on. The elites will HAPPILY let society fall apart before they lose control over the currency. Anyone who went through 2008 will tell you, everyone thought that was the moment... it spawned OWS, it spawned bitcoin, it spawned mass awareness of the bankers as crooks... and yet, nothing happened. Ultimately, don't count your chicken before they hatch. You think they can't "extend and pretend" any further, but they can print money to infinite.
I haven't read such in depth analysis on here in a while. Thanks OP. I think this just proves why DCA is more important than trying to time the market.
That's a good point, but OP's main points still stand. Bitcoin is not suitable for mass adoption, and almost no one really uses it anyway. Even if I wanted to, I can't pay anywhere with crypto.
Thanks OP, well done! Well-crafted post and useful information for everyone here on the sub!
Great post OP excellent write up!
Vague "buzz" words. No real economic analysis. OP is a hopium dealer
Was just about to quote the same thing. OP's definition of successful would lead most people to the poor house.
thanks for the advice OP.. as always I will do my research and study whether it is beneficial for my portfolio to invest further
I agree OP should’ve left the word Network out. OP is still a better Ambassador for bitcoin than I am. I just HODL and thumbs up articles I like.
These series of posts are what is needed to understand how the market works, it's really helpfull to put this into perspective, thanks OP for the quality posts.
I feel the same as OP. That's why I leave my shit where it is and just add to it. FOMO!!
Average John really teaching me how below average I am. Thanks for all these posts OP they are super informative and helpful
