This is what you would intuitively believe about Atalanta, but I remember it was the same when last season Bayer Leverkusen came with a perfect record to take on Atalanta in the Europa League final and I still know how nobody thought that Atalanta could have a chance against them. But it was quite the contrary and Atalanta made Bayer Leverkusen look very small instead and beat them with a clean sheet. The most stupid thing that Liverpool could ever do if they play against each other is to think the same of Atalanta as everyone did last season as I described. You can still lose although you are superior in the public opinion and with the shape that Atalanta now is in, they can beat every team in Europe.

Are we talking about the odds that bookmakers provide or are we talking about our personal opinions? Considering how these two teams have been playing, if somebody asked me whether I put my money on Atalanta or on Real Madrid if I had to, I would without a doubt go with Atalanta. It is a home game in Bergamo for them, Real Madrid has to leave half their team at home because of injuries, Mbappe isn't performing and they are out of alternatives. No question for me, Atalanta is the slight favorite in this game.

Man are you serious about talking that nonsense? Mbappe has been there for about 3.5 months now and you describe his situation as if he was sitting on the bench every game because Ancelotti wants to get rid of him. He is not in great shape, which I agree with, but that has nothing to do with a wasted talent at this point. That is ridiculous.

Then talking about Hazard, he had severe, really bad injuries all the time and missed almost all the games there. There is nothing anyone can do about that. There have been players that are extremely susceptible to injuries and nobody can find a proper solution for it.

A really example is Gareth Bale. He was healthy and yet he was willing to sit on the bench, waste his talent, play golf and take the salary. That was a real waste as you mentioned it here, but you took the wrong players to convey your point.

They are not equal, Barcelona has taken on the status of being the favorite after everyone thought that Real Madrid would dominate La Liga from day 1 because of Mbappe, but quite the opposite happened and Barcelona is the team that plays the best football and has the most exciting players like Yamal. There was one clasico and it spoke volumes. Barcelona took down Real Madrid like a school class in the Bernabeu stadium...

No way that the game is a 50/50 game. Atalanta is the favorite in that game because Real Madrid is in shambles with all those injured players while Atalanta is going through a real hype. I think playing against them in their home stadium in Atalanta right now could be a huge problem for every team in the world. Not only Real Madrid, but I think Liverpool would have problems as well. They are in an outstanding condition and win their games with some much confidence that they won't fear Real Madrid for a second. And also, Real Madrid can't lose while Atalanta plays with much less pressure.

Username: fulcare
Bsc Wallet Address: 0xA446A777F46927f5a698119e3e500119EB6A304e

This is an important point to mention as altcoins often times don't lose much, but they lose it all. They are dead in the most cases. Bitcoin has been a psychological challenge several times I admit, but knowing that it is not hot air like those altcoins, there has always been confidence that it can and will go up again. The Bitcoin is dead headlines are countless, but that doesn't make it become true and I noticed it has been a while that someone dared to post such a headline.

Too bad we will now never find out based on real data whether your prediction was nonsense or not. But your prediction hasn't been very convincing anyway. I don't see how the election of Kamala Harris would have wiped out 60% of Bitcoin's market capitalization... China tried to ban it, nothing happened, Biden is the president that is nowhere to be seen and nothing happened even when he said he would prefer a more tougher stance against Bitcoin. Now you conclude that the election of Kamala Harris would have wiped out 60% of its value. What's the logic behind that?

It is beyond doubt manipulated, but I think that manipulation maybe lower these days than they used to be as single players in the market have less weight and therefore less impact. Unless there is a very high level of collusion going on, it is far more risky these days to try some shenanigans as you never fully know what the market will do next. Assuming that someone wants to crash the market, what could that be good for other than harming their own portfolio or risking that the market rebounds much quicker than expected and the person dumping would have to buy back at a higher price?

I know that OP is a little older, but predicting what Bitcoin will do within a particular year isn't expedient at all I think. It can be fun, but that's it. Rather focus on what Bitcoin will do in the long run. Having an eye on what it is doing in the present is good because it keeps you in the loop, but giving weekly estimates as to where the price will be on a Sunday, meh.

I'd rather not speculate on whether or not history repeats itself, but simply have a look at the fundamentals and how Bitcoin is perceived by various actors in public. Talking about 2020 to 2021, that was still a time when Bitcoin got bashed by most politicians, now it gets embraced at least seemingly or they pretend to embrace it. I am particularly talking about the US politicians here, but in other countries as well. Bitcoin is not the rat poison anymore that it was once said to be. Some people would still like to get rid of it, but by now understood that there is no getting rid of it.

Your analysis or assumption could be true, could not be true. I would rather stick to my guns here and come up with my own assessment, which is not so much focused on the timeframe, but on the yes or no. Will Bitcoin go up? Very likely yes. Does it matter when? Not so much.

Also, if you interact with CBDC in any way, the CBDC issuer can actually develop a full financial online profile of yours. They might be developing very sophisticated interfaces for CBDCs and cryptocurrencies such that they ultimately get to know exactly who you are and what you are up to. The herds will fall for it I guess.

Well it never really full recovered back to its ATH, but congratulations who bet on oil big time when it his its ATL. Wasn't it that you could get oil at negative prices? That the paid companies to put oil on their tankers and just park it in the ocean to keep production going despite lack of storage space? Oil was so low that I can't believe I didn't play a nice long position with leverage at some point. Who knows how far it will recover, gasoline prices are about to go to ATH.

If we try to extrapolate a little bit what we have seen so far that blockchain is able to do and what it is not able to do, I think we can get at least an idea where we might be heading. Blockchain can sure solve certain problems or deliver services that banks are used for these days. Algorithmic loan provision based on reputation systems and so on, but those need time and data to develop. There will be a lot of prototyping to make sure the credit default rate is in range with what can be accepted compared to the banking system and their rigorous screening procedures, but still I do believe we will see certain banking functions be replaced blockchains or let's say protocols and algorithms.

It is even worse than that... I think they published only a sort of pie diagram and provided the % for each of that asset classes they hold to back their Tether, but nobody knows how much value the assets they hold to back Tether really have!

They could provide a pie diagram and have less than a million available to back billions of Tether. What a ridiculous report!

We will never have a sound financial system, we can only thrive for a system that is less rotten than the last one. That is similar to what Musk said: Whether Bitcoin is the perfect solution that we are looking for to become a global currency. He answered no, Bitcoin is just less bad than fiat. I think I see some truth in that. Bitcoin will also be far from perfect because there is no perfection. Whenever it is about money, you will see powerful actors try to get control over it. This time it is just much more difficult as Bitcoin is way more resilient to power-drive attacks due to its decentralized nature and its incentive system.

I agree and we are actually ver far from having a stable a crypto market. The dynamics in the market might also lead to crypto never becoming a more stable market. When you have some innovation in the car industry, authorities inspect everything closed and either allow a certain innovation or not. In crypto this different because it is unstoppable. You can't regulate something that you on the one hand don't see coming in the first place and on the other hand don't know where to go to because innovations are published as open source code in a decentralized manner. This will cause an ever ongoing uncertainty that will ultimately lead to market volatility. That is just my stance on it. I am not mad about it, I am happy to be part of this as Bitcoin or the Bitcoin code seems to be the sincerest realization of the freedom of speech principle we have seen so far. You can't stop it, you can just try to undermine it.

Patience and especially stress resistance. You need to have the mental state to watch your investment go down by 40% and still keep your fingers calm. Understandably, many people lose their nerves and out of a sudden feel the urge to save whatever there is left that can be saved in that moment. It is definitely hard sometimes to be into Bitcoin.

Alright, let's assume you go to a store and a certain bottle of well known cheap whiskey has a certain price. You go to that store seven days a week and buy that bottle, most of the time between 6 and 7 pm. Maybe you add some other stuff that has a price everyone could pretty easily identify. Now you ask your bank for a loan. Don't you think they might have a clue because of your spending habits? What if you attend a "certain" doctor three times a week and you pay privately? Do you think the doctor has a hidden company on the Cayman Islands such that nobody knows you are visiting that doctor three times a week when the transaction with all details shows up on our account every single time? No, it will say "Doctor Smith bla bla bla". What about paying in a whorehouse? Or going into a pub more often than the average person, paying your bill with digital money there? Or you frequently have to pay a lawyer, anything wrong with you? Are you a criminal? Should I go on? I know I am mentioning stuff that might reveal so called "weaknesses" of some people. But as long as they don't harm anyone when they drink 7 bottles whiskey a week and have usually been paying back reliably, are you sure that insurance companies and banks won't use that data?

That is a one-sided point of view in my opinion. Yes the cryptocurrency space shows that people desire for something that is different from what they are used to, which is first and foremost something that does not support quantitative easing and also raises capital mobility on the individual level, but we shouldn't forget that we are also all better off if we do indeed have some tools in place to get fraud under control as much as possible without sacrificing freedom at the individual level. I know that is a dilemma and it can never really be fully controlled for, but it is in our best interest to find the sweet spot. Crypto has its own set of problems that needs to be addressed.

That is one important aspect and the other one is that even stable coins aren't a solution to that problem because the hassle is too big as hardly any business accepts Tether. Also, why use Tether if you can just use the USD in your bank account. Less explanations to financial authorities, overall less trouble. We are not quite there that more and more people get paid in crypto because it is more practical to them. Some do receive or take crypto as payment because they want to drive adoption, which is a good and important endeavor.