Quote from: Wind_FURY on October 29, 2024, 01:56:46 PM

Quote from: temple on October 29, 2024, 09:15:43 AM

[edited out]

...Plus from a another, more controversial viewpoint, Bitcoin is ACTUALLY a "Ponzi", but a sort of naturally-occurring "Ponzi" LIKE GOLD.

The concept of naturally-occuring ponzi seems to be a perversion of ideas and perhaps not even understanding what is a ponzi scheme, which seems to require centralized entities by nature in order to technically fit into the concept of ponzi scheme in which there seems to be some concealment that the new money is used to pay off the old money and there is no value to the underlying asset/investment.

If we stick with bitcoin, there are network effects that exist, so the longer that we are into bitcoin the more likely that we can advantage from that, and we can sell for way higher prices to newer entrants, yet those are still market forces dictating prices and there are a variety of ways that we can buy and/or sell so our buys/sells are not going through any entity that is manipulating BTC prices.

I don't know what you mean by gold being a natural ponzi, and I doubt it even matters to much in the relevancy of this thread. Over the years gold has been the most sound of money, yet even gold ended up getting perverted by paper gold, and then gold is hard to move, so bitcoin ends up being different from gold in that it is easy to move, yet we have normies entering into bitcoin contracts in which they are agreeing to not be able to withdraw their bitcoin directly.. such as the proliferation of ETFs, which could create some paper bitcoin dynamics to the extent the third parties might not be required (or enforced) to be having the bitcoin that they claim to have.

Quote from: Samlucky O on October 29, 2024, 03:44:20 PM

Quote from: MusaPk on October 28, 2024, 10:36:20 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 26, 2024, 06:44:39 PM

Snip

Not many take Bitcoin security serious unless they lose Bitcoin by becoming victim of hacking or through other scams. There are many security measures available but it largely depends on how serious your are in securing your Bitcoin. If someone is serious in Bitcoin security then he will defiantly learn ways on how to secure his Bitcoins whether it's 100$ or 100k$. We don't know when our 100$ will become 1000$ because of Bitcoin volatility.

Your bitcoin will obviously turn from $100 to $1k if bitcoin grows by 10x and Morover for $100 bitcoin to grow up to a reasonable amount of $1k will take alot of time because bitcoin is currently $71k and 10x of bitcoin will amount to $710k which is not possible anytime soon. So If you invest $100 and expect it to hit $1k think of when btc price will increase to $710k and above, then your $100 will hit $1k. But with that being said the most important thing in bitcoin investment is to focus on continuous accumulation provides you have your discretion readily available. Because since bitcoin is a long term investment your amount invested determines what you will get in return. Let's assume you invested $100 every week 5years ago, you will be able to have accumulated approximately $45k worth of bitcoin in your portfolio by now .and if luckily bitcoin hit 10x from now, you may be inbetween $450k ish. Although we must invest according to our Level of discretion and or our financial capacity, but a reasonable amount invested result to a reasonable result. But I don't advise you overdor when there is no Increase in your discretion.

Sure, we might proclaim that it is difficult for BTC prices to 10x from our current price, yet there may well be guys who had bitcoin in 2022, and there were periods in which the BTC price was below $20k, so going up 10x from $20k is around $200k. Another thing is that we might continuing to add to the value of our BTC, and even your example actually showed $21.4k invested over 5 years, and so the quantity of BTC accumulated would have had been 0.6663, which has a 200 WMA value of about $27k, but has a BTC spot price value of nearly $49k, and yeah, we like to go by the spot price value since that would be the price we would get if we sold right away or if a hacker took our coins how much he would be able to receive for our stash.

When we are assessing the value of our BTC stash and considering how we might hold our coins, we might also need to consider that they may well be changing in value, and they may well be worth way more than the value we put in, and also we might become even more nervous if (when) our coins become way more valuable than any other assets that we own and perhaps way greater than all of our other assets put together.. which is making us more nervous about how to protect our coins or what security measures to take or maybe even questioning whether we might feel some need to diversify out of our BTC investment with nervousness of having so much value within one asset class.

I woudl not suggest that the answers and/or the balancing are easy, but it can be good to account for a variety of scenarios including considering how changes in price (likely or less likely) could also affect the value of our BTC holdings.

Quote from: Samlucky O on October 29, 2024, 03:44:20 PM

Quote from: MusaPk on October 28, 2024, 10:36:20 AM

One must keep this in mind that we constantly need to upgrade our security measures all the time.

Sure it's really important. When you think of investment, think of security because whatever has an advantage also has disadvantages.

Sure there are balancing of tradeoffs, yet sometimes the benefits will out weigh the costs, so we cannot treat all balancings as if they were equal or "damned if you do" and "damned if you don't" kind of thinking, since there probably are preferred courses, of action for people based on their particulars, even though I am not going to know your details and you are not going to know mine unless we share some of the particulars.

Quote from: Samlucky O on October 29, 2024, 03:44:20 PM

Quote from: MusaPk on October 28, 2024, 10:36:20 AM

Hackers are defiantly more interested in 1000$ but that doesn't mean that they will spare 100$. Think from that perspective.

Hackers don care how much bitcoin you have, they are not specifically into any amount, even $5 is important to them provided there is a possibility of moving it from that wallet.

Some hackers (or attackers) are going to be more blind than others, so we cannot necessarily know in advance regarding how much information a hacker might have and how far the hacker might have been able to see within our transactions and/or our wallet prior to attacking, so if they know how much is at stake, then they might be inspired to hack or not hack based on that information.., and if they know the level of the security, or if they know something would be relatively easy to break into, then they might not know how much is in the wallet, yet once they are in, then they would just take whatever is in the wallet, yet prior to breaking in they might not know if the amount is going to be $5 or $50k.

Surely some of our security might be to keep some funds separate and with higher level of security and potentially more hoops to jump through before being able to access those funds, and then we might have medium level and then more hot wallets. So we might have 3 or more levels of wallets and/or funds. We also might not share information regarding how much we have in each of our funds, yet sometimes if we are interacting with another person, there may be some abilities to see our transactions, so we might want to make sure that we are spending from UTXOs that don't overly expose our wallet sizes.

Maybe I have 20 or more different addresses that are in 6 or more wallets that might be something like this:

Wallet 1) has 6 addresses with varying amount of between 0.15 BTC and 0.5 BTC in each of the addresses (perhaps a cold wallet with higher security)

Wallet 2) has 6 different addresses with varying amounts with between 0.001 BTC and 0.1 BTC (perhaps medium security wallets)

Wallet 3 & 4 ) has 4 different addresses with custodial and non custodial amounts between 0.002 BTC and .02 BTC (quasi-hot wallets)

Wallet 5 & 6) has 4 lightning addresses with custodial and non custodial amounts between 0.0001 BTC and .01 BTC (quasi-hot wallets)

I think that security is going to be different with each of the classes of wallets, and if the person is transacting with a stranger, he might move from one wallet to another or he might already have an address that he has determined to be adequate for the transaction with the stranger. Of course, if he is buying a big ticket item, then that might be different from a low ticket item, and if he is spending most if not all of the BTC in the address, then the person might not know about his other addresses, only the one that he chose to use... so he might not want to use one of his cold wallets if he is buying a low ticket item since then the person engaged int he transaction might be able to see how much BTC was in his spending wallet and how much change he received.

Quote from: $crypto$ on October 29, 2024, 04:06:46 PM

A little more bitcoin ATH, we are a little excited for those who HODL but not now the goal because it is still long to expect big profits, by continuing to do DCA it is still worth it rather than selling early or staying silent.

Maybe you saw your portfolio increase above 50% or even 100% more since DCA started last year, we feel our goal is successful happily but I'm sure you will still HODL until you can afford it maybe until the next cycle.

I know that guys were batting around long term versus short term investing, and surely if we are considering ourselves to be investors, then at minimum we would be investing, and the shortest that we might invest would be 4-10 years, so 4-10 years might be short term investing and greater than 10 years would be long term investing.

So yeah, if there are ideas about whether or not you are in profits, and you have not even gotten through a whole cycle, then you are likely trading rather than investing, and bitcoin seems more like a long term investment rather than a trade, and the only reasons that guys might be able to do short term investing rather than long term investing is based on health and/or age considerations.. so there should be no compelling motivation to just get out of the investment based on profits that might come in less than a cycle... so surely there could be guys who have average cost per BTC that are decently below $30k and who have ONLY been in BTC for 2-3 years, and maybe they are contemplating taking profits because they are 2x or 2.5x up on their investment (their trade), and surely those seem like short-sighted decisions, even though surely guys are tempted to engage in such short term plays.. and hopefully they don't end up regretting selling too much too soon and also failing/refusing to sufficiently and/or adequately continue to build their BTC stash size.

Quote from: Antonil on October 29, 2024, 05:55:47 PM

Everyone wants to be profitable. But currently a pump in Bitcoin has shaken the thinking of about 60% of DAC holders. Those who started holding DCA at $38k now have a clear portfolio of around 50%. And they decided not to continue the DCA, but to dissolve it. If you can afford to run DCA, I'd say it's smarter to run DCA rather than lighten your portfolio. Because experts say to continue DCA hold till next cycle.

So let us wait for a maximum ATH of reality without thinking

Yep. You describe a somewhat common error in which newbies make such mistake to discontinue or to lighten their DCA amounts, and there surely are risks in going down that path, including that they end up failing/refusing to sufficiently and adequately stack enough sats.. and they may also end up fomo buying at way higher prices, especially if the BTC price goes up and fails/refuses to come back down as they may well were anticipating it to do, and they ONLY have themselves to blame for such a gambling mindset that tries to outsmart the BTC price.. .. and then they end up with way fewer BTC than they should have or could have had.