Is anyone else starting to become a bit excited?

Dnxncofiruwvx wrote: »

This thread reminds me why I don’t come on Boards more often, what a cesspit!

oh come on. no one's having a big go at you.. but misinformation about taxation should be corrected.

Whelo79 wrote: »

$59,500 to 58,500 is a dive????

In short time yes.

Dnxncofiruwvx wrote: »

Converting Bitcoin to Euro isn’t a taxable event that needs to be reported to revenue? Whatever you say Tarzan.

Yes. Because that’s what I said. :rolleyes:
Woeful attempt of digging your way out there.

olestoepoke wrote: »

Now in fairness he did go on to explain in the proceeding posts

Sure we are still waiting for poineerpro to give us a pick and the reasons why it will make us money.
Get the feeling we will be waiting a long time.

What is the acceptable format for picks round here?
Is any synopsis of why required?
Is the the following style of pick acceptable?

Give me a A
Give me a N
Give me a K
Give me a R

Certain postErs Looking foR a moon mission will get on this rocket!

The bar is set very low round these parts, the two above would be classed as a deep dive into why to purchase

cnocbui wrote: »

You are not doing yourself any favours and are digging yourself deeper with almost every post. The €250 has been explained to you by several people and you still don't get it. The million satoshis wasn't profit, it was their weekly buy to add to their pot.

Not explained by the OP , because they where exposed as plankton larping as a whale.
Making so much bank, going to quit day job and move to Portugal to avoid CGT.

€250 in a week..... bragging about it and posting about quitting day job to trade full time, moving to Portugal to avoid CGT, think about that for a few moments........€250 be it profit or DCA into BTC.......in a week during a BULL MARKET

The Titan made a big move of €250 into BTC after a week of trading in a BULL MARKET!
Should be called out for the quit job move to Portugal BS, if the post was about making €250, i would be impressed if it was not for the facade of being a Titan, i was super impressed and delighted for the poster in the Theta thread who made €20k and was going. to now convert the attic, he was honest, no larping and leading newbies astray.

dirk_dangler wrote: »

Not explained by the OP , because they where exposed as plankton larping as a whale.
Making so much bank, going to quit day job and move to Portugal to avoid CGT.

€250 in a week..... bragging about it and posting about quitting day job to trade full time, moving to Portugal to avoid CGT, think about that for a few moments........€250 be it profit or DCA into BTC.......in a week during a BULL MARKET

The Titan made a big move of €250 into BTC after a week of trading in a BULL MARKET!
Should be called out for the quit job move to Portugal BS, if the post was about making €250, i would be impressed if it was not for the facade of being a Titan, i was super impressed and delighted for the poster in the Theta thread who made €20k and was going. to now convert the attic, he was honest, no larping and leading newbies astray.

You haven't a clue what other people's crypto holding are.

makeorbrake wrote: »

I agree with Dirk insofar as I would prefer to see people giving their rationale

"Post you reasoning" is a perfectly valid question.

But at the same time. "I just have a hunch". It a possible (albeit misguided) response.

On someone DCAing in €250/week, that's a decent wedge of cash to DCA in - if that's being pursued on a regular basis.

Well if it's not regular it's not DCA to be fair.
As I said above, that amount in the longer term and you've be sitting on a 6 figure stack right now. If we make a habit of validating people posts by their investment we're only inviting the spoof brigade.
And if you are going to crap on somebody elses DCA . Post your own FFS.

How about Siacoin?

Hi folks; what the general consensus on here about BTC? yes or no? Many thanks.

Lorne Malvo wrote: »

Hi folks; what the general consensus on here about BTC? yes or no? Many thanks.

I can't speak for the consensus, but it's a yes from me.

As a newcomer to the crypto game, (2 months actually is a complete newbie), I just want to say that I love seeing a post by an experienced player recommending a specific coin along with a few lines about why its worth considering. (I presume a brief explanation of why a coin looks a good investment means more to the likes of me than it does to the experienced poster).

I've been learning as much as I can about doing DD, so I use that info to start me off on a search of a project. Somebody came on here and called Boards a "cess-pit". i don't agree at all. I have learned so much from the various posters here its hard to explain.

We are all in here for the same reason i guess, and that is to make some €s from investing in cryptos. (well the likes of me are also in here to learn). If we can help each other, that's great for the boards crypto community. And I speak for all the newbies when I express my gratitude for the free advice and helpful posts that appear on the forum.

basically, I just want to say that not everyone thinks its a cesspit round here.

Lorne Malvo wrote: »

I was thinking a big dump in value would incur a big surge in buyers thus propelling the value 2 or 3 times the current value...only a freakish event can stop it moving forward imo.

An interesting video released by 'Guy' yesterday on why he thinks the USA allowing EFTs related to BTC will propel the price this year, I'll see can I find it and post. I don't understand all of what he said but looks promising

connie147 wrote: »

As a newcomer to the crypto game, (2 months actually is a complete newbie), I just want to say that I love seeing a post by an experienced player recommending a specific coin along with a few lines about why its worth considering. (I presume a brief explanation of why a coin looks a good investment means more to the likes of me than it does to the experienced poster).

I've been learning as much as I can about doing DD, so I use that info to start me off on a search of a project. Somebody came on here and called Boards a "cess-pit". i don't agree at all. I have learned so much from the various posters here its hard to explain.

We are all in here for the same reason i guess, and that is to make some €s from investing in cryptos. (well the likes of me are also in here to learn). If we can help each other, that's great for the boards crypto community. And I speak for all the newbies when I express my gratitude for the free advice and helpful posts that appear on the forum.

basically, I just want to say that not everyone thinks its a cesspit round here.

Well in that vein:

Bitcoin has a track record. It's the sector leader in capitalisation, whether one likes it or not, it has a definite utility as a digital store of value often compared to gold. So similar is it to gold, that many analysts believe at least some of the recently expected rise in the value of gold that didn't eventuate - that was expected due to fiat money supply increasing - was because investors turned to bitcoin instead.

The other thing bitcoin has going for it and it's future is the steady and relentless adoption by conventional financial markets and institutions. Where talk of third party financial interest is aften mentioned in the schill spiel for dross coins, it's actually a case of active participation when it comes to bitcoin.

Visa, Paypal, Tesla, Grayscale, Microstrategy to name some of the top players now.

Previously successful and sceptical investors are almost falling over themselves as they rush to recant their early scepticism and criticisms:

Howard Marks, co-founder of alternative investment manager Oaktree Capital, says he has reconsidered his previous “dismissive” stance on bitcoin.

The investor, who is worth $2.1 billion according to Forbes, previously said in a 2017 memo that cryptocurrency was “an unfounded fad.” The comment was “a knee-jerk reaction without information,” Marks conceded in a video interview with the Korea Economic Daily on Monday.
...
Saying his early comments hadn’t been proven correct so far, Marks added that, with bitcoin now over $50,000, people who bought at $5,000 “look right.”...

Marks also said in a recent Oaktree memo that his son “thankfully owns a meaningful amount” of bitcoin.

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/billionaire-investor-howard-marks-warming-144147871.html

Others billionaire investors who have changed their tune on Bitcoin include Mark Cuban and Jeff Gundlach. The investment bank Morgan Stanley has changed it's mind and is offering bitcoin investments to it's clients due to the huge demand from it's clients. Other investment funds are now positive, like Jeffries.

This stuff isn't the 'partners' rubbish you get with dross coins, this is actual real investment, and it's just getting started and barring a general financial collapse, will most likely keep snowballing, IMO.

olestoepoke wrote: »

An interesting video released by 'Guy' yesterday on why he thinks the USA allowing EFTs related to BTC will propel the price this year, I'll see can I find it and post. I don't understand all of what he said but looks promising

I think a US ETF would be a long term game changer in the way it would effectively be a clear acknowledgment from one of the US financial regulators that Bitcoin is a legit asset (I.e. it would ease fears of government bans).

But in terms of short term accessibility and capital flow into Bitcoin I am not sure it would be as important as it would have been a couple of years ago. There are now dozens of options for individuals to purchase crypto in an easy way from a company they trust, and for institutions there are multiple investment trusts, ETPs, and ETFs available internationally (as well as recognised institutional-grade crypto trading desks and custodians if an institution wants to hold the actual asset rather than shares in a fund).

Surprised no one is talking about UNI, top 8 now.

I bet many cursing themselves selling that airdrop :pac:

Irish_rat wrote: »

Surprised no one is talking about UNI, top 8 now.

I bet many cursing themselves selling that airdrop :pac:

Yep. One of those guys here. Sold at 5 dollars. Bought back in a small bit. It sickens my stomach every time I look at it. :(

Room1o1 wrote: »

I can't understand how bitcoin is compared to gold constantly. I understand it's a store of value based on proof of work and is limited so protected against inflation but to me it's still more similar to a fiat currency in that it requires peoples confidence in it to hold its value.
Maybe for investors and speculators it's similar to gold in the short term but gold will still be gold in a couple hunder years where's I doubt bitcoin will be around in 500 years.
I'm I thinking about this the wrong way. Why are alot of people thinking it will hold its value forever or are they just speculators in it for the ride to the top before jumping out which could next week or next decade or longer.

Surely you can say the very same about gold, to me anyways a gold billet is nothing more than a heavy shiny lump of metal that I cannot really do much at all with, other than hope that everyone's belief in it is higher the day I sell against the day I bought it. Bitcoin certainly has a much shorter and more volatile history than gold, but otherwise it's not much different, it's simple a digital version of gold, limited supply and it certainly cannot be manipulated in the same manner a central bank can print fiat currencies if they want. Do I believe that it will hold its value forever, unlikely, however I know for a fact that a fiat currency in 20years time will be guaranteed to be worth less than it is today. Does that mean I want to put all my cash into BTC, hell no, however I will happily use it as a store of part my wealth in a well diversified portfolio of mine, that will also include fiat, shares and property alongside other assets.

Gold mining is potentially highly toxic, often involving considerable quantities of arsenic and it's not remotely CO2 neutral to mine and purify. After that it's ok.

I'm very happy with my share of tulips. That's the thing with etherium and it's ilk - very soon now someone is bound to want some for something.

Room1o1 wrote: »

I can't understand how bitcoin is compared to gold constantly.

Have a read of Vijay Boyapati's 'The Bullish Case for Bitcoin'. He discusses the characteristics of a store of value and a means of exchange (currency) relative to gold, fiat and bitcoin. You'll see that bitcoin scores well in both categories. Gold is stronger in some characteristics and weaker in others.

Room1o1 wrote: »

I understand it's a store of value based on proof of work and is limited so protected against inflation but to me it's still more similar to a fiat currency in that it requires peoples confidence in it to hold its value.

Hmm...no...in the previous sentence you acknowledge that it's very different to fiat currency. Fiat currency implicates inflation and money printing. It's centralised with stakeholders who will always (by and large) resort to money printing. The only thing that fiat is backed by is a gun to your head (in that the powers that be force you to use it). Bitcoin doesn't hold a gun to your head - yet it is slowly increasing in network effect. That should indicate to you that there must be something more to this.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Maybe for investors and speculators it's similar to gold in the short term but gold will still be gold in a couple hunder years where's I doubt bitcoin will be around in 500 years.

I can't speak to 500 years - but lets deal with the next few decades - both will be around insofar as I can see.

Room1o1 wrote: »

I'm I thinking about this the wrong way. Why are alot of people thinking it will hold its value forever or are they just speculators in it for the ride to the top before jumping out which could next week or next decade or longer.

The speculator accusation has been around for an age. Of course there are speculators - but it hasn't proven to be a one hit wonder. BTC has been through a number of cycles already. If it's a speculative bubble, can you name a similar speculative bubble that inflates and deflates cyclically? I guess property - but if we use that as the comparison, property doesn't go away, right?

Room1o1 wrote: »

Fiat will definitely suffer inflation over the years

Now that's understating things! I can't recall them all but there are some shocking statistical gems which have emerged in the past year. The current Canadian government has overseen more money printing than ALL previous Canadian governments put together. There's one. There are similar stats for the USD, Euro, etc.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Gold is a physical element (Au) with great properties and uses including as a store of value which is also why it's worth so much through history.
geology.com/minerals/gold/uses-of-gold.shtml

Gold gets its value because its finite. So back in the day (and today), gold was/is used for jewelry. There are plenty of ornate rocks in the world - they are equally ornate as jewelry. The only reason there's greater draw re. gold is because its finite...ergo - its a store of wealth and a display of wealth as jewelry.
Other use cases (industrial use) only came around in more recent years.
Over and above all that, bear in mind that gold also has comparative shortcomings as a store of value/means of exchange also...relative to bitcoin.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Bitcoin is proof that a very hard calculation was done and the answer is put on a Blockchain and sold based on what people believe it to be worth similar to fiat.

Your pet rock is no different. If it was valued as jewelry - then its price would reflect that. It's price is far, far in excess of that use case and reflects its use case gathering dust in vaults around the world (as a store of value).
Bitcoin has utility in its own right - such as the ability to transact it digitally, the ability to cross borders with limited risk of confiscation, the ability to act as a decentralised store of value (the gold market as a whole is centralised even if in principal, gold can be self custodied). I said that gold gets its value as its finite yet there is no financial asset on the planet that is more finite than bitcoin. If the gold price increases, then greater resources are thrown into extracting gold. That can't happen with bitcoin.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Using bitcoin in a diversified portfolio is good right now but is it actually worth anything to anyone other than speculators/investors?

See above. Of course theres a speculation involved there. The charge has been that this is a fickle speculation and that btc would fall away by the wayside. Maybe that will still happen but remember it's not without utility. It offers greater utility in many respects than gold. Gold can't act as a means of exchange. Whilst btc cant be used right now for microtransactions, it can be used as a settlement layer (think Fedwire) for real time settlement of large amounts. It's a base layer - on top of which other layers can and are being built. eg. lightning network.
How long does btc need to be around until you discard that notion of it being a fickle speculation? What does it's market cap need to be? Are you aware that its network effect has been growing each and every year of its existence?

Room1o1 wrote: »

Personally I think bitcoin has quite a high cost to the environment

A curse on the lazy, unprofessional journo's who have convinced you of this based on their tabloid/clickbait 'bitcoin uses more energy than country X' articles.
You realise that gaming accounts for more energy use than bitcoin? If so, where is the faux outrage? To my mind, there's far more utility for society in a decentralised global, permissionless, uncensorable, real-time final settlement system by comparison with gaming (if we have to go down the road of playing God as regards what people are entitled to use energy for). The current banking system uses far more energy. The US xmas lighting bill costs more than a central american country's energy spend (I think it's El Salvador).

Room1o1 wrote: »

and will eventually become too costly to keep the network running

The earth might also get hit by a meteorite a 100 years from now - should we give up and commit suicide now? Maybe you're right but that's quite a distance off. Secondly, maybe big ass transaction fees can be justified as it will be a base layer - on top of which other payment/settlement layers will be built out (including those that facilitate micro-payments).

Room1o1 wrote: »

plus will receive very bad press soon from the eco crowd.

Let's resume our energy discussion then. So back to bitcoin vs. gaming (and all other energy intensive activities). You realise that bitcoin mining has a far higher renewable energy input in its energy mix than gaming or other activities? That's because that unlike those other activities, if a segment of miners tap into the cheapest of energy then, the rest of them are uncompetitive and will probably go bust. That's not the case with those other activities. Bitcoin mining is driving innovation as regards the pursuit of the cheapest energy on the planet.

Room1o1 wrote: »

When the 24 million calculations are completed where's the incentive to keep turning on the computers than run the network?

See above.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Gold just sits there not rusting or polluting.

You're joking right? Have you any idea of the horrendous environmental damage that is caused via gold mining? Lets think about the process in first principles. If aliens arrived and we explained to them that we expend immense resources and environmental damage in extracting a pet rock from the earth which for the most part sits in a vault gathering dust, do you think these visitors would get the impression that they had discovered intelligent life!?

Do you know how much it costs to transport gold and to custody gold? Please factor all of those costs in. I won't even get started on the counterfeiting issue that gold has (google counterfeit gold - and particularly an incident in China last year when millions of $ worth of fraudulent shiny rock was found to be the backing for a plethora of loans).

Room1o1 wrote: »

Other cryptos have improved on these issues where bitcoin can't.

Ok, so which crypto is ready to assume the role of bitcoin? BTC has a trillion dollar market cap right now. What market cap does it need to reach escape velocity?
Maybe you're right but I think that it has already won out through network effect. If ETH is successful in its move to proof of stake, maybe bitcoin will adopt proof of stake - but they shouldn't (and won't) look to do that until it has been used successfully for a decade.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Smart contracts will be so useful very soon.

I have no doubt. I think there's far greater potential in that space. To me, it's not quite in the bag yet but probably ethereum is the category winner in this regard. However, bear in mind that btc is limited by design in what it can achieve. This is deliberate. It has one job and it's already doing it.
I can well believe that ETH will be far more disruptive (goodbye wallstreet) than bitcoin - but to me they don't compete (and I hate that there's this perennial sniping between projects).

Room1o1 wrote: »

I would compare them to tulips.

Then you need to go back and look at the history of that episode. Two questions...
1. How long did Tulipmania go on for?
2. Compare bitcoin and tulips against the characteristics of what makes for a decent store of value or means of exchange. There's NO comparison.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Once the noise on this type of thing starts it doesn't go away.

You mean that misinformation can continue? Of that we are in agreement. The whole energy debate had disappeared but has re-emerged once again with the lazy uninformed narrative that goes with that.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Other crypto use far less energy and bitcoin could be considered the fossil fuel of crypto not the renewable of cryptos.

Other crypto projects emerged that claimed to solve certain shortcomings of btc. In doing so, they had various shortcomings of their own. We should never get complacent but the btc network is the most robust blockchain network that exists. If another network can prove itself over a decade, maybe it will take bitcoins place or maybe bitcoin will implement its algo.
As regards your reference to renewables, I think you're getting a bit confused. Bitcoin mining continues to utilise a greater proportion of renewable energy year on year.....driven by the pursuit of the cheapest energy on the planet...which is more likely to be unwanted/unused green energy.

Room1o1 wrote: »

Btw renewable engery costs money too

Ergo, bitcoin has considerable imputs and this energy input is converted into monetary energy. I guess it's not backed by nothing afterall then?

makeorbrake wrote: »

Firstly, this critique for the most part stems from folk who can't see any tangible utility in bitcoin. If that is how someone sets out in their consideration of bitcoin energy use, then it is no surprise of the conclusion they arrrive at - ultimately.

That’s exactly my point. It’s a flawed argument, and a flawed defence.
If I’m going to criticise the first, which I did above, then I should also criti

Finally, if btc used both stranded and renewable energy that couldn't be repurposed (because its harnessed in the back of beyond where there is no other use case for it), would you still have an issue with btc mining?

I never said I had an issue with BTC mining.

I have in the past pointed out the localised volume of hydro energy in China, the dams at capacity and the fact btc mining is dominant in those areas.