well people use stablecoins because it’s easier to do transfers even though it’s backed by fiat compared to if we used fiat in banks not to mention the fees are quite higher as well in banks but not much with stablecoins

I think this could be a good competition for echanges in the future cos it's definitely hitting up imo.. I think more will follow, someone said Bybit has tradfi too.

I didn't know about that cos probably hype wasn't created yes? So I think it's gaining recognition rn.. and easy mate, it's an open discussion not what you're thinking.. there's freedom here to talk about crypto/exchange happenings yes?

I guess that majority especially the new investors don't really move their coins at all. They're keeping it to the exchange and that's one mistake that's being passed on to the other users thinking that it's a norm.

Once got scammed, that's already enough. But others don't have to experience that when there are the experienced ones giving them an idea on how to avoid it.

The problem with that after hearing such tips and they don't listen, falling for it is a choice by them.

Safety of your money is more important than any investment plan since when your security fails, you lose all money. Most people leave their Bitcoin on exchanges and may not understand that they are not in control of their coins, they are just getting promise from company that could vanish once exchange is attacked or once company closes its doors. Although new users tend to remain on exchanges due to fear of losing their own passwords, great middle solution would be Multi-Signature setup. This method uses several keys to move money and as such, even if thief takes one key, you are still safe with your money. Families can also recover money  future with ease using this plan without having to use one master password. So moving your coins out of exchange is habit that you need to get into as investor with serious interest.

Yes, we realised that and we were talking about it in my local board, although it is something that anyone who has been following the services section regularly will have been able to see. It would be interesting to see how the various managers have evolved over the years. An evolution of managers' dominance so to speak.

I think we've been in the balance since regulation was introduced after the bull run of 2017. So there's a lot of changes since then, as the Bitcoin market has evolved with countries accepting it, but then there are regulations at the side to have certain control because it could go on to become a wild wild west style of environment.

As for the cyberphunk privacy focused side, there could still be some of them still in the crypto sphere, using different methods to hide their identify. But overall, I think they could have achieved their goals as we all know that Satoshi was inspired by this movement and even take acknowledge most of them in his white paper.

I remember that account used to post BCH stuff and mislead people into thinking Bitcoin actually refer to BCH. Now they don't even create Bitcoin or cryptocurrency related post.


Since few years ago, check mark no longer means verified. You could get mark by buying the paid subscription, although i don't know which tier that give the mark.

It’s a different Betking. There’s a popular Betking.com casino but a local bookie on Nigeria while Dean Betking.io is still a scam.

He once plan to refund all the affected investors here probably to revive back his old casino but it failed since he still doesn’t have enough funds to cover all the investors.

Thank you for sharing this your explanation makes a lot of sense. I agree that Bitcoin has already embedded itself into the global financial system long before governments even understood what it was. It really is something they can’t fully control anymore, only regulate around the edges.

     What you mentioned about regulation being a form of acknowledgment is very true. In some ways it gives legitimacy and makes traditional institutions pay attention. But I also share your concern that the more regulated the space becomes, the further it moves away from Bitcoin’s original vision of decentralization and open access. It’s ironic that the services aligned with Bitcoin’s core philosophy—like non-KYC platforms or decentralized exchanges are now the ones struggling the most.

     It makes me wonder: as Bitcoin continues to grow, do you think it’s possible for the ecosystem to balance both compliance and decentralization? Or will the industry eventually split into two separate worlds the regulated, institutional version and the more cypherpunk, privacy-focused side?

One of the reasons why the 2017-style forks like BCH aren't currently that "en vogue" anymore, is that they would work like a gigantic airdrop because lots of users would get coins for free.

Airdrops have created selling pressure always from their invention on, starting with Auroracoin (although there may have been earlier examples). But a Bitcoin fork would "benefit" even more people than Auroracoin back then (where 200,000 residents of Iceland were benefitted). So the selling pressure would be inmense.

BCH was a bit different back then because at least a small part of the community believed that it could become "the true Bitcoin". There were some former Bitcoin developers who supported it or were at least critical to the "Core" decisions of that time (Gavin Andresen for example). Thus is was able to gather 10% of the BTC market cap for some time. (There were also less Bitcoin hodlers back then that could claim "forkcoins".)

But not even a fork by Luke-Jr (another "former dev critical with current Core leadership") would nowadays have that effect probably. At least the amateurish fork proposals like "BIP-110" (the temporary softfork mentioned here by @Darker45) or "The Cat" are completely unattractive for everybody who has at least a minimal serious understanding about how Bitcoin works and is not completely ideologically blinded (like Luke may be). Because they could create a lot of chaos and confiscate coins. So even if somebody is brave enough and begins to run a BIP-110 Bitcoin-fork client, it would convert into one a small shitcoin in no time.

Government did some crazy step just to make people think that they are adapting, but they have other plans since they are looking at it to earn money. That's why they try to regulate every platforms that they can control so they can do this taxation and people don't have a choice but to comply.

Now the growth of Bitcoin comes with government monitoring and they are slowly taking out the original things we enjoy before which is freedom to use it online on anywhere we want.

That's why I have doubts on their participation since they provably enter because they want to control and implement taxations.

Yeah, I think most people gamble in sports similar to any other games.

But, if you are really into research of teams, etc, then I think you can increase your odds a bit.

That's something you cannot do with other games, like blackjack for example, where the odds are fixed always.

Or we could look at it the other way round. Bitcoin has been an unstoppable force with more people knowing and joining it for years, and so the Government didn't want to be left out, and they had to force their way in as well.

To be honest, I was one of the people who never cheered for this 
I know how predatory banks and financial institutions can be.

Your thoughts is really valid because knowing that most of them are pathological liars. In Mujica case is different because he refuse to have luxuries life and donate his money to the people he govern.


On practice this one transform into authoritarianism, just like in that country on which there ideology has became a cover up for their concentration of power. Also it seems everything is driven by self interest.


I don't see any changes will happen after Rodriguez assume the seat since as we can see she continues to support Maduro and criticize US for his arrest. So with that people in Venezuela seems like cannot expect a reform but rather their current leader might just continue what Maduro does. I think the real liberation would only happen if they reshape their institution, not only swapping top positions.

If I remember correctly, yahoo62278 doesn't accept campaigns with short-term plans or just 1-4 week trials. As a legendary manager and with years of experience managing various campaigns, I think he's done a lot of evaluation and wants his clients to avoid wasting their money.

His integrity as a legendary manager is unquestionable. He doesn't focus on quantity, but quality.

Never gets old to be honest, there will always be someone in bitcoin's history that will tell us that it's dead and that we were all wrong all along. I'm amused by them and at the same time love that they exist because they are indicator in some way as to where bitcoin is going to be for awhile, with more people proclaiming the death of bitcoin, it can mean that there will be people that will get the FUD which means the price will be affordable to the point that you're making big value while everyone is scrambling to keep their losses at a minimum.

Some participants who retained their slots and also some newly accepted participants:

odunybiz
rezakurnia66
Jateng
JoyMarsha
DiMarxist
barbara44
nimogsm
CryptoYar
Darker45
SquallLeonhart

---

We are now CFNP.

---

Thank you all for your interest in participating in this signature campaign.

They're hitting two birds with one stone. Looks like a very collaborated plan from the very beginning. Crypto shouldn't be like this.

But I guess that this is part of the adoption that we've been asking for.

Yeah, that's likely to happen. And so, all of these ruling that they're doing for everyone to be attracted ends with a data and tax collections.

This signature campaign will now resume starting today. Some of the previously enrolled participants may retain their respective slots if they wish to continue participating.

Courtesy tag:

rezakurnia66
LastKiss
Mandoy
barbara44
nimogsm
terrific
Darker45
SquallLeonhart

Kindly confirm in this thread if you want to retain your slot.

Thank you.

People choose to believe more what is in front of them and they do not believe anything that is just speculative but at the end of the day this is what puts them in trouble because while others are already well ahead of them they are late to the party because they decided to believe only what it is they see.

The rate they say this is reducing, though. Previously, if Bitcoin dropped by 30%, we would have seen the multitudes of anti-Bitcoin soldiers coming out to say "I told you so" and whatever, but this time around, not many of them did. Bitcoin has slowly won over a lot of people. Of course, there will always be doubters and people who just want to oppose, but the rate has dropped a little. Speaking too soon has made a lot of them look stupid. Besides, it's difficult for them to say "bitcoin is dead" when it's at $80k.

People have now realised that Bitcoin is not mutually exclusive with traditional finance or investment. This is why we have seen big banks like JPMorgan thinking of ways to integrate Bitcoin into their services.

This proves that no matter how high its new ATH, once bitcoin crash its price, people will always say negative comments about bitcoin. And this is already a repetitive pattern, this only shows that negative people will always say bad comments for bitcoin.

I think this is not already how high the potentials of bitcoin may be, but how high its volatility every time. Bitcoin pumps, the next day it dumps, and people will assure that they will leave devastating words for bitcoin. But the real bitcoin optimists will not care either.

now may be the cheapest people will see but there will always be a time where it isn't the cheapest even for a moment before going back to the current price or even increase in price. Just like in 2018 where many didn't expect that the price isn't what many people expected. I agree with you that many did said the same thing during those years and there are also people who also said that it will crash or become bear market and yet they are proved wrong. As darker45 said that a weak man's doubt is confirmed which I definitely agree.