Governments like blockchain, but not when there's a coin attached to it. Parts they like: being able to trace all transactions down to the individual. Parts they don't like: anonymity, not paying taxes.

If regulations for tabacco are an example, we can expect crypto companies to be forced to broadcast anti-crypto ads.

Facebook already banned crypto ads and Google may be following soon. TV is not going to happen.

Maybe it won't be a blanket ban. Alcohol ads are partially banned by Google depending on the country. Lots of people still buy and drink alcohol.

I think Bitcoin has more important weaknesses than volatility that Havven won't solve. Number 1 weakness: it's not created by a government. It will be taxed like property and regulated like securities, if not FUDded to death.     

We could have seen that coming after Facebook banned crypto ads. In February regulators asked Google to band crypto ads too. Maybe we'll get anti-crypto ads next, just like the tabacco industry is forced to do.

What happened in January that caused the crypto market cap to shrink by half? Was it the Koreans, the SEC and CFTC hearing or the tax forms sent to Americans? I remember there was bad news multiple times a day for almost 2 months.

Isn't there a fear and greed index for crypto just like there's one for the stock market?

I have a feeling there's still nervosity and a lack of mainstream adoption in crypto. Maybe even a decrease. Bitcoin dominance is rising, not because of new money coming in but because of people selling altcoins and ICO tokens.

What does it take for crypto to become appealing to the mainstream again? I think the banks and governments getting into crypto is like your parents liking the same as music as you: it's spoiled.

Posting in a megathread is pointless, but then so is posting in any other thread on this forum. Have you seen how many pages of threads there are just in this subforum?

By discouraging megathreads and encouraging new threads you just shift the problem.

That problem is that there's way too much noise on too little valuable content. The merit system is one attempt to curb the amount of low value content, but so far it still doesn't seem to be very succesful.

How do you get off the island undetected with that amount of equiment? Or maybe they're still on the island setting up their own mining operation. How hard would it be to find them?

It's the whole point. Bitcoin is designed to make you think twice about spending it, contrary to fiat money which rewards reckless spenders, bails out broke debtors and punishes thrifty savers.     

I think the hype around ICOs is fading. Unlike Bitcoin maximalists I don't see a need for any animosity to altcoins and ICOs. As far as I see it Ethereum helped to get crypto adoption at  a higher level. Why some feel the need for the tribalism puzzles me as it's clear there's a symbiotic relationship.

Bitcoin is not going to disappear, but I think there's a real chance of revisiting $6000 this week and next month. I think the biggest holders like the Winklevoss twins are going to sit it through, but the investors are going to cash out to avoid the risk exposure and the traders are going to short Bitcoin.

It will be like the SEC/CFTC hearing earlier this month, except maybe worse because the event on Monday also involves European banks who see their profit threatened by cryptocurrencies.

It's not something we like to hear, but I don't think he's wrong. ICO's raising over 100 million dollar just for showing a white paper. In the world before cryptocurrencies you had to have a healthy running business before going public.

Even if those modern projects manage to create a product with the millions they raised we still have to see if they'll make enough revenue to be worth the investment.

We're now in the phase of hopeful optimism. I'm not looking forward to the phase of financial statements. 

Today I came across another article damning the Bitcoin fees titled "Is Bitcoin getting better, and for five year-olds?"

What ticks me off about that is we just had news earlier this week about SegWit adoption across exchanges and more and more people adding Lightning network nodes. Clearly Bitcoin is still making progress but for some reason those authors are giving up on it.

I don't think it's a lack of experience, more like the opposite.

"Rule No.1: Never lose money.

Rule No. 2: Don't forget rule No.1".

- Warren Buffet

Kind of vague, but the gist is you shouldn't focus on the potential upside but on the potential downside. Now we have some very big events coming up that can rock the Bitcoin boat. The smartest thing to do is to get out of the market to avoid the gamble.

They can also directly profit from prices going down using the Bitcoin futures.

Go short. Dump 1000 coins. Price goes down. Profit on short futures contract and buy back the 1000 coins for a lower price.

What you're seeing is people selling Bitcoin because of the uncertainty in the next days. On Monday there's a discussion about the regulation of virtual currencies in Europe. And in March there's the G20 in Argentina talking about global crypto regulation.   

If one country bans Bitcoin while another country welcomes Bitcoin, then who stands to lose the most? That is the game we see unfolding right now.

For governments it's a balancing act between preventing a crisis (citizens getting mortgages to buy Bitcoin) and missing the benefits of a whole new industry.

Did you read the news about president Jacob Zuma resigning over corruption?

South African banks are now switching over to blockchain technology. I hope that will curb corruption and debunk the myth that Bitcoin causes corruption, instead helps solving it!

Strange time to move some many Bitcoin to a segwit address. In light of current regulatory events around crypto as well as the timing around a bottom I think it's more plausible to be a transfer of risk than wallet maintenance.