Even though technically you are correct that "bitcoin" is a subsection of "crypto," you better not be using that word unless you are clear about what the fuck you are talking about. 

If you mean to talk about bitcoin, then use the term bitcoin, and if you are talking about something other than bitcoin, then say that, but you better not be using the term "crypto" if you are talking about bitcoin, because either you are 1) being vague and ambiguous in regards to what you are talking about, 2) you are trying to sound smart for no good reason, 3) you are (either purposefully or inadvertently) deceiving and misleading people (perhaps even innocent people) in regards to either what is bitcoin or what you are talking about.


That part is true.


Even if that is true, that does not excuse you for using vague, misleading and/or pretentious language.


There are also a lot of shitcoiners who purposefully use vague ass language in order to make it seem that their coin is the same as bitcoin, so if you are talking about bitcoin, it is better that you make it clear rather than making the same mistake that others make..

So the mere fact that other people (even smart people) speak dumbly and use such dumb and misleading language does not mean that you or any of us in this thread (or forum for that matter) should speculate that we should be able to get away with using such... if we are talking about bitcoin, then what is so difficult to use the term in order to clarify what you are talking about?


So what? 

Fuck crypto, shitcoins and the use of such term to speak vaguely, mislead people and/or to come off as pretentious.


If he uses the term crypto we have no clue about what he is talking about, unless he specifically describes what he means, including using the term bitcoin in order to contextualize it.

There are many of us who use the term crypto, but we usually specify what we mean and whether we are talking about bitcoin and various shitcoins or just shitcoins or if we might be referring to something else... so there are reasonable ways to use the term, and using the term to refer to bitcoin is not reasdonable for the reasons that I already outlined above..


Who cares what he might think?  Each of us is responsible for our own words, and we also might be responsible to point out to others when they are using  vague, misleading and/or pretentious language, especially if there may well be easy ways to avoid such problems with their language by specifically using the term bitcoin in order to clarify what you mean, and if you are not talking about bitcoin when you use the term "crypto" then that would be helpful to point out, also.


Exactly.


There is probably nothing wrong with using the term "crypto" as long as you are clear about what you are saying, even if we might not agree with you and even if we might not agree whether or not you are on topic. 

I, personally, get aggravated when it is either used without any context or it is used in such a way that it is either unclear whether bitcoin is included or it could be a substitute for bitcoin, and if you wanted to say bitcoin, then why not just use the correct term so everyone knows what you are talking about?


DCA (dollar cost averaging) and diversification are different concepts, and DCA is not necessarily used to diversify their investments, even though optionally DCA could be used to diversify investments..

The idea of diversification tends to involve investing in different asset classes, such as these would be different asset classes:  equities, properties, bonds, commodities, and cash or cash equivalents.  Of course, you could diversify within the asset class or you could diversify across asset classes.  Some folks consider bitcoin as it's own asset class, even though there are some ways in which bitcoin might cross over some of the traditional asset classes.


This part of your post makes sense and sounds correct.


The reason to NOT diversify when you don't have very much investment tends to revolve around that it is not necessary.

The reason that people tend to diversify is to take risk out of their holdings, especially if the size of their investment portfolio starts to grow to significant sizes, so if you are just starting out you may well not need to diversify, and also you may not need to diversify beyond cash and bitcoin until after you might build your BTC investment up to a size that you start to feel uncomfortable having too much in bitcoin and/or cash and nothing else... but there are some folks who choose not to diversify beyond bitcoin and cash, and that is not completely wrong, even though it could have some problems by not having a bit more value spread out, especially once your investment portfolio might start to become the size of several years of your income/expenses.

In the bitcoin (and/or crypto) space, the use of the term "diversify" is frequently used to wrongly proclaim that people need to get into shitcoins, and sometimes it is misleading in regards to the concept of diversifying across asset classes rather than within the same asset class, which surely in the "cryptospace" bitcoin is the leading asset so it hardly makes any sense to diversify within the asset class to other assets within the same class, unless you might want to limit such exposure to a small amount .. or maybe if you are just distracted and you don't know what the fuck is bitcoin, then you might conclude that there is some value in buying shitcoins.

Another misleading part of diversification seems to be that some folks want to argue diversification for the mere sake of diversifying, but they have no clue about the reason why they are diversifying, and if they end up doiong that, then likely they are just diluting their investment, and it is worse in the case of people who might not have a lot that they are able to invest... so if those people with small amounts to invest end up diversifying (or overly diversifying) then they are not able to advantage for their knowing a good asset such as bitcoin and they end up not putting enough into bitcoin and putting way too much into crap and they are not starting out with much value in the first place.. whether we are talking about $10 per week or $100 per week or some other relatively small value amount.


It may well become the case that if you spend 4-5 years accumulating bitcoin or otherwise investing responsible, you might not even want to put any of your investment at risk because you come to realize that it takes a long time to build up your investment portfolio, so why screw around with parts of it.. even 10% is going to seem like way too much to put at risk.