Search the Community

The use of AI chatbots like ChatGPT is becoming more prevalent now, and it is inevitable that some forumers might figure out its application to this forum. On whether or not this will prove beneficial or detrimental to this particular forum, I'd like to hear from Cryptotalk members like you. The points where AI chatbots may be used on are the following: Topic generation Comment posts Replies, confirmations, rebuttals, etc. Posts/topics are not limited to news, inquiries and discussion threads. It can be used on such things as bounty campaigns as well. Any comments? Let me do the first stone throw. AI chatbots on an online forum is freakin' CHEATING!!!!!

Source: https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/cryptocurrencies-to-takeover-online-gaming-world-says-new-study For some people, they consider online gaming to be a waste of time (in the case of online gambling, even a waste of money), and there may be some truth in it especially in cases when it becomes an obsession where it is unprofitable and gravely affects one's life. But in the case of the rise of e-sports and transactions of in-game items, there is potential in profiting from what is usually deemed as just a pass-time. Online gamers are known to be knowledgeable to current digital technology. That is a given, knowing that they are constantly exposed to the computer screen and can find the occasion to browse the computer for information when they are not playing games. It is therefore no surprise that they caught wind of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency even in its early days of its development. Fast forward to today, there are now online games that are being developed to take advantage of what cryptocurrencies can offer, allowing them to make hassle-free transactions with other gamers on the planet. However, progress on its adoption is seemingly slow. This may be due to the observed notion that the major game producing companies have not made enough major strides to adopt and promote crypto, and the smaller game companies who do just that find that their games are not viral enough to prove to be a game-changer in the online gaming industry itself, so to speak. Thus, it may take some time before cryptocurrencies become fully adopted in the online gaming industry. It may as well be tied in to everything else, that is, if the world economy has already considered crypto as a major currency, then there should be no reasons for the other sectors of our world not to do the same. It would be a pleasant surprise though if the online gaming industry becomes the spearhead to eventual widespread adoption. After all, it is the youths of today who are the most active members of society involved in playing online games, and the chance of exposure to knowledge about cryptocurrency is high. And those youths are going to be our future leaders, pioneers and innovators, and they will be the ones who will become the future proponents of crypto in the years to come. So, what do you think of this article? Will the adoption of cryptocurrencies in the online gaming community become successful and widespread on this present day? Or do we have to wait a few more years for it to happen? Share your opinions and thoughts on the matter. ... ... ... Other interesting topic-related articles: https://medium.com/@worldopo.io/5-games-that-will-get-you-into-cryptocurrency-2ef1037e7eea https://blockonomi.com/blockchain-games/ For the latest news and articles in the cryptocurrency relationship to online gaming, go check out this link. https://cointelegraph.com/tags/games EDIT : My personal 'Top Answer/s' picks!!! P.S. I will update this topic with new related articles whenever I find them. Look forward to it.

With the detection of yet another COVID-19 variant (designated as "Omicron") of particular concern, global markets have sank down once again, as Alpha and Delta did before it. The internet has been chock full of news concerning its effects, and here I'll provide a couple of links to the latest of them. source: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/dec/01/oecd-warns-new-covid-variant-could-cause-severe-global-slowdown-omicron source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-29/economists-wargame-how-omicron-will-impact-the-global-recovery Meanwhile, the cryptocurrency market has already dipped in a state of 'fear' since November 19. The announcement of the new variant on the 26th, where the WHO designated it as "a variant of concern" apparently made the situation worse, as the news of the virus variant may have influenced Bitcoin's tumbling down from its previous ~$60,000 a few weeks ago. If there is any winner of sorts here, its a coin of the variant's namesake: the Omicron token, an otherwise obscure crypto coin. source: https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/omicron-cryptocurrency-rides-new-variant-rollercoaster-2021-11-29/ Questions of concern for this topic (at the moment) are the following: How severe will be the impact of the Omicron variant for the weeks and months to come, particularly for cryptocurrencies? What would be the next best move for crypto traders and investors to cope with the current market situation? You may post your comments below. Thank you.

Yesterday (as of this writing), I posted a comment asking why cryptocurrency prices are so easily influenced by celebrities. The news was about Elon Musk and his Twitter account. https://cryptotalk.org/topic/344028-elon-musk-updated-his-twitter-bio-to-bitcoin You think only Bitcoin can be affected by such tweets? Not to be outdone, the same thing can happen to altcoins too. This same Elon Musk caused DOGE prices to rise after his few tweets about the coin. https://cryptotalk.org/topic/338350-statement-by-elon-musk-on-dogecoin-investment/ This topic is not just about Elon Musk, this is about every celebrity who can move crypto markets with just a simple message on social media. Nor is this about BTC and DOGE alone. The above is just an example. There are a lot of news over the years where famous celebrities posting on social media cause crypto prices to rise or fall depending on the person and his comment. This forum alone is chock full of those topics, there are lots more on other forums. You'd think that crypto users would have become fed up with this pattern by now, but they don't. Paypal finally including crypto in their transactions, that's really big news. Release of ETH 2.0? That's also big news. The new US Treasury secretary "threatening" to "curtail" the use of crypto? Maybe, if the US government gets serious. Those kind of news alters the way cryptocurrencies are used, and it wouldn't be a surprise if crypto prices rise or fall as a result. But celebrities giving simple and vague comments? It would be an entirely different story if they themselves bought crypto and transform themselves into whales, but did they? After a quick search, I picked up on a couple of articles trying to explain how celebrities and social media influence crypto prices. https://www.stevens.edu/news/social-media-influences-bitcoin-price https://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-and-cryptocurrency/ I will discuss more about these articles in another post. For now, a particular line in one of those articles caught my interest. It says: Not all crypto users have a Twitter account, for one thing. I myself don't have one. So not all crypto users will be able to reply to a tweet by a famous celebrity. But that doesn't mean that they are not influenced by it. So if for example Warren Buffet pulled another publicity stunt on Twitter all the while denouncing Bitcoin as a "worthless piece of s***", Bitcoin prices might plunge. Not because of the negative replies to that tweet, but because crypto users read the news somewhere else, and now they got scared of others selling off before them, they went with the flow, and BOOM! we got ourselves a short FOMO period. All because of one person's tweet. But really now, are the majority of crypto users a huge bunch of "sheep"? Can't we think of these celebrities as less of deities *cough*, and more of a regular person, like you and me? I get that celebrities are necessary to promote cryptocurrencies to more audiences, but should the potential of cryptocurrencies to change the future be good enough already? Let us see what you think in the comments below.

More on this article: https://medium.com/@clinicallhealthcare/cryptocurrency-in-healthcare-gold-rush-or-bad-news-889e73cd9142 For cryptocurrencies to become fully adopted, every sector of society should consider whether it will provide further benefit to their services. The healthcare sector is one of those. Patients and hospital staff can use crypto for transactions like hospital fees, medical supplies, etc., and hospitals can use crypto's blockchain technology for their databases. Just imagine if in the future, if I get old and sickly, and have collected a lot of Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies in my youth, I can use them to help pay for my medical bills. But then again, if hospitals decided to create their own coins, and that coins they created turns out into shitcoins, they might place their institutions into financial jeopardy. And if that happens, there will be severe repercussions, as we all know that lives can be literally at stake here for obvious reasons. So unlike the other sectors, the healthcare sector are in a more precarious position where financial failure is not an option, especially the larger ones. Extra care should therefore be taken by them when venturing into the cryptocurrency field. What do you think?

First up: I know that there is already a topic for this. https://cryptotalk.org/topic/8452-bitcoin-rap-battle-crypto-vs-banks/ My reasons for putting up another similar topic are as follows: I've created this topic so we can have a more in-depth discussion about the contents of the video. Each points presented deserves special attention: however, since the video was made in a rap battle format, further discussions in the video itself are limited. The makers of the video have to balance out the information and entertainment value of it after all. So it is up to us now to fill up the vacancy on the more serious discussion. Our loyalties to crypto is obvious: you and I probably won't be registering in this forum in the first place if we're not. But to make this discussion MORE FUN 🥳🎉🎉, I would like to introduce a special rule first, just for this particular topic: Before posting your first comment here, make sure you declare on which side you're on first. And try to stick to it. (Choosing the neutral side is NOT allowed! 😁 ) (Declaring your side but not adding additional comments to that post will be considered as a 'useless content' offense and is also NOT allowed.) (Just one announcement is okay, no need to declare on succeeding posts. If you want to change sides (Turncoats!!! 😂 ), you may edit your first post with the announcement, then update your next post declaring so. You can then proceed with the discussion as normal.) I'll start. I know 99% of you guys are going to pick Nakamoto-san, so I'll choose Mr. Alexander Hamilton's side for this discussion. This discussion won't go anywhere if nobody's going to play the villain. Somebody's gotta do it. 😈 I'm not an economic expert on fiat (or anything crypto-related for that matter), but I'll do my best 🙂 . If you haven't watched the Youtube video yet, you can watch it from here. ... ... ... Don't forget to quote a specific line if you want to make an approval/rebuttal on my or others' comments. Just an extra precaution to avoid confusion in our discussion 😄 . This topic post is quite long: Please, please, PLEASE, do NOT quote this post IN FULL. Quoting only the parts you want to comment on will suffice. The lyrics of the rap battle were taken from this article (with a few minor corrections). https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/this-absurd-rap-battle-summarizes-the-arguments-for-and-against-cryptocurrency/ I've chosen not to comment too much in favor of Bitcoin and Satoshi Nakamoto in this post on purpose - some of you must help defend him!!! Without further ado, let's proceed with the main discussion. Since the beginning of human civilization, there has always been a need for a medium of exchange. The concept of the fiat currency may have been relatively new, being the one who replaced the flawed gold standard and all, but its function is basically the same. The only difference is that centralization of the fiat is an absolute necessity. In this way, restrictions on printing money can be enforced. The production of fake money by criminals is particularly suppressed. On the other hand, yeah sure, Bitcoin's total supply is capped at a fixed amount determined by its creator (21 million BTC). But what about the other cryptocurrencies? What is our guarantee that cryptocurrencies cannot be faked, if not by criminals, then by the developers themselves? For one thing, cryptocurrency is a very hard subject to understand, I doubt even a kindergartener can use it. And being a digital currency, the toddler has to learn how to use a computer first, which you wouldn't see any normal kindergarten school teaching this subject. On the other hand, using pennies to buy candies from a store is almost as easy as [1 + 1]. See what happens when people invest in "something they don't really understand"? They buy Bitcoins when it's 'overpriced' then the BTC market drops, and they lose a lot on their investment. Don't even start on lecturing them to do a Google search, the computer tech lingo is like Greek to the average Joe. With BTC going for another ATH this late 2020, there's going to be more victims of making wrong investments based on false promises of getting rich. BTC may get to be more expensive after some more years have passed, but most of these people are not that patient or may even be deceased by that time. Cryptocurrencies claim to be "decentralized", but centralized cryptocurrency exchanges are proving otherwise. Crypto exchanges have KYC, they can help track and/or block crypto hackers trying to dispose of their loot on the exchange, they have customer support if there is a problem, etc. You have to admit, centralization is important to cryptocurrencies as well. Speaking of customer support, how about what happens when you lose your passwords and private keys? (There are plenty of ways to lose them: theft, arson, natural disasters, Alzheimer's, you name them.) Unlike banks, where your money is secure as long as your identity is preserved in their system, and if anything bad happens, you can always talk to a lawyer. This is where the points in the rap battle video gets very particular. Without law, chaos in society will ensue. To ensure that laws will be enforced, governments exist. The whole economic system is also governed by laws, even Bitcoin is governed by laws embedded into its program. So Bitcoin in a way is also keeping control of crypto users, particularly in mining and transaction speeds. Mining, I can accept that halving is necessary to produce scarcity and make Bitcoins more expensive as time goes by. But what about the Bitcoin whales? Some of these guys have especially large holdings of Bitcoin back when mining is cheap on hardware and electricity. Now when some of these whales are on the move, the Bitcoin market can sometimes go into a panic. To prevent this, websites like the Bitcoin whale alert (their link is here) have to exist just to let crypto users know their movements. If this movement by Bitcoin whales isn't what you call market manipulation, then I don't know what else you call it. Also, transaction speeds is slow on Bitcoin. Adjusting the Bitcoin code to accommodate the transactions should be a piece of cake, but why Satoshi Nakamoto didn't do it? Does he himself want some control after all? Maybe the ones supporting BTC hard forks like Bitcoin Cash has this same sentiment. All man-made systems are not 101% foolproof. Bitcoin is a man-made system, therefore it is not 101% foolproof: in fact, there is a topic about the most recent bug being discovered by Bitcoin engineers. https://cryptotalk.org/topic/111177-bitcoin-engineers-have-again-discovered-blockchain-vulnerabilitynow-fixed/ There is no guarantee that some evil hacker will not be able to find a bug exploit in the code by chance. So if something remotely bad happens to Bitcoin's code and billions of dollars worth of BTC are affected, who's going to take responsibility for it? I'd feel bad for the current BTC developers if they are the ones who's going to take the fall. I wouldn't say that fiat is perfect either. But if something bad happens, then the government can at least take the responsibility. If they don't, then the people involved can still face prosecution. LOL, this is one of my favorite lines in this rap battle, and Mr. Hamilton's point is spot on for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is digital currency, right? And Bitcoin needs a computer network, right? How about some countries and areas where computer networks are unavailable or too expensive to maintain? And as I have mentioned above, cryptocurrencies is a hard subject, one which a kindergartener would have difficulty to understand. Even adults can have difficulty understanding the subject. There is a proverb saying that along the lines like "if something is already good enough, why change it?", and the general population in a certain country will be reluctant to adopt cryptocurrencies if it means its harder to use than fiat, which has been excellent already in that role. So, is using Bitcoin worth it in those cases? Nakamoto-san's counterargument on this one is pretty weak. First, paper money today isn't technically made from trees AFAIK, it's made from stronger materials like cotton and abaca. Second, Bitcoin miners may have had the right to use electricity no matter how much if they're going to pay for it anyway, but they should at least be considerate of the energy required to produce that electricity. Sure, everyone's involved in the global warming issue, you and I included, but Bitcoin miners whose energy source come from generators powered by fossil fuels can be pointed out as some of the ones who contributed the most. And third, trees are a renewable resource (you can plant new ones), a large percentage of society's energy resource which is fossil fuels is nonrenewable. Bitcoin is actually helping deplete the world's fossil fuel reserves. Good luck to the promise of cold fusion if such a power source finally becomes commercially available in this century. This issue where the counterargument that fiat is also used for crimes is getting old. So how about something else? Like, what if Bitcoin and cryptocurrency becomes THE normal mode of exchange? Criminals already know that Bitcoin accounts are private, but transactions are public. So the next obvious step is for criminals to use crypto coins whose accounts AND transactions are private. Such coins already exist: I'm not going to mention exactly what those coins are. What are our law enforcers going to do about it, if tracing such transactions are very difficult if not impossible? Bitcoin's #181. So how about Ethereum? Litecoin? Tether? And all those 1000+ other altcoins, both living and dead? Can the cryptocurrency exchanges system help regulate these crypto coins alone? ... ... ... Remember to abide by the rules of the forum when posting. The following are particularly important: No useless content No off topic remarks No hate speech

Most nations' governments today still regard cryptocurrencies poorly, legal-wise. But what happens when they suddenly find themselves holding large sums of crypto, after seizing digital assets from criminals, as an example? If governments refuse to acknowledge that cryptocurrencies have worth and that they shouldn't even touch it with a six-foot pole, then one would expect that whatever crypto assets they would somehow get hold of would have been discarded, destroyed, or locked away in an inaccessible place. But some governments indeed liquidate those crypto assets. And if crypto is to be liquidated at a time when its price has increased due to volatility, what will the government do with the extra cash? If they decide to liquidate assets at a time its price has gone up, it would have been a very shrewd move on their part, and they would have actually profited from crypto, after paying up the various legal costs. Governments also has the option to hodl cryptocurrencies they have seized. Remember the Silk Road incident? What would have happened if the U.S. government decides to keep the BTC they seized back then and sell them today at current prices? BTC prices have already skyrocketed since those days, so one would already have an idea of how much profit the government would make even though their policy over cryptocurrency today is a bit muddled at its best. So maybe despite how much governments piss and moan about cryptocurrencies, once they get hold of large sums of it, they might change their mind after all. Cryptocurrency today has value, and there's no denying it, not even by them. For more insight into this discussion, you can visit the following article: source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/a-legal-asset-after-all-governments-are-cashing-in-on-seized-crypto

Hello Everyone, Today i want to open discuss for analysis about BTC/USD with price action. i get one important moment for analisys today about BTC/USD. There is an HNS pattern that occurs in today's session on BTC / USD in the price range of $ 9000. if closed daily today does not touch the price of $ 9354, the possibility of price movements tends to be still bearish until it enters the HNS support pattern in the price range of $ 6000.

Banks have been regularly being portrayed as one of those institutions that reject cryptocurrencies. This has been mentioned oftentimes in some discussions on this forum as well, but few of those gave details on why it does. In this topic, we will discuss about an aspect that banks oftentimes find fault in crypto: transactions. Perhaps there may have been something to do with the volatility of most crypto, but stablecoins might offer an alternative for less volatility. Still we don't see and hear much about banks readily adopting stablecoins, if volatility is really an issue. Why? If anonymity is an issue, there is already KYC, and I am getting the feeling that the crypto community as a whole, over the years, concede that KYC can be accepted as a compromise for preventing and apprehending crime-related transactions. There are other features beside KYC too. But there is still no dice for most banks trying to be more 'friendly' to crypto. Why? There is an article posted recently that gave some insight into this issue. The link is here: https://cointelegraph.com/news/why-banks-keep-blocking-cryptocurrency-related-transactions To simplify things, I will try to summarize the reasons why crypto transactions are blocked or restricted, which is already given in the article: The regulators - Banks will try to block crypto transactions due to their policies, either existing ones or recently passed/amended, that is aimed at regulating their own national currencies, among other things. The acquirers - Other institutions tied to banks like credit card companies, online money delivery services, etc., have doubts about the safety and security of crypto coins and transactions. What more do the global banking system wants for crypto to do before it allow legitimate crypto transactions in its system in its entirety? There are already some prominent countries whose banks are becoming more open to the notion of cryptocurrencies, why are there still others that steadfastly refuse even until now? Do you have answers or comments on this issue? Please share to us here. Further questions are also most welcome.

Hello my friends. As we all saw, Bitcoin's price has decreased a lot in the past few days and Altcoins' price along with it. Experts are saying that the price will go back up to break the barrier of 10,000$. So do you think that Now is the best time to buy?

A recent article has just been released discussing about the many ways cryptocurrency can be more than a hedge against the US dollar (this can be applied to other national currencies as well). The global economic crisis today has compelled many people to make long-term investments in many things. But since there are fears that the U.S dollar's value is depreciating, cryptocurrency is now being viewed as a sound digital investment. source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/why-cryptocurrency-is-more-than-a-hedge-against-us-dollar-inflation Cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, are oftentimes regarded as 'digital gold'. But unlike gold, a person can also use crypto for online transactions when buying or selling products and services, as a trading tool in specialized websites like cryptocurrency exchanges in a similar way stocks do, and among other things, something that gold and other physical objects cannot easily do. And unlike fiat, cryptocurrencies especially the ones with limited supply, do not suffer much from inflation due to oversupply. Do you agree with the contents of the article? And what other ways can cryptocurrencies be more than just a hedge?

Hello guys. It is a clear question to discuss. What do you think will happen? Will fiat currencies disappear? Will the to types of currencies work together? Share your opinion!

Hello. This is a very bad day for Bitcoin and for us. All cryptocurrencies are dropping in price along with the major coin, Bitcoin. Should we wait for the price to go up again? Will it go up again? What's the reason of this? Is it Corona Virus?

Before we go on with the discussion on this topic, we should read this linked article first (the topic title was ripped off from here too): https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/archived/realworldresearch/world_events/bitcoin-frenzy-making-the-world-less-safe.htm (First, let me point out that the world was never safe, even until today's modern times. There are literally vast scores of information on this, from the mouths of ancient philosophers to modern trolls on social media, but since we are discussing about Bitcoins here, we will limit ourselves to it.) From the moment Satoshi Nakamoto mentioned about the use of Bitcoin as a tool for anonymous transactions, it must have reached the eyes and ears of criminals as a potential tool for their illegal activities. This has been highlighted in the now infamous "digital Silk Road" that (thankfully) has been taken down by authorities. Thus even today, there are still people who view cryptocurrencies in general as being pegged to criminal activities. However, I, and everybody else here will surely agree, view this thinking as being unfair. The fact that crypto is used for crimes is indeed undeniable. But let us not forget that even before digital currencies came into existence, there are already valuable objects other than fiat that are used for the same purpose, and there is a certain allure to those physical objects which can literally be slapped on the face of the nearest enemy or henchman, something that obviously cannot be done with digital assets. So if Bitcoin is going to be declared illegal just because it is used for crimes, shouldn't this be done to gold, gemstones, antiques, artifacts, etc. as well? Another thing to be considered is that Bitcoin introduced the blockchain. Actually, the idea of digital peer-to-peer connections is nothing new (take Bittorrent for example) but Bitcoin can certainly claim the spot of being the pioneer in peer-to-peer digital monetary transactions, one that is virtually impervious to alterations by hackers. Even if the world rejects Bitcoin itself, it cannot deny the fact that they find plenty of uses for the blockchain technology: the internet world is full of such reports of nations and organizations exploiting the possibility of its usage to their systems, if not being used already at the time of this writing. There are still many things to add to the benefits Bitcoin brings to the world, which I will leave for others to comment on. To say that Bitcoin, which in the end is only a tool and an asset in the digital world, is making the world less safe is fallacious. To point the criminals and other entities who deviously use crypto to their advantage as being the ones who makes the world less safe would be a far more accurate statement.

So I was surfing the net just like any other day, and I happened to hit upon this Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flooz.com (Read this article first before posting. Yes, the usual advice 🙂 .) A brief description of it is as follows: This webpage got me intrigued. As I read along, I found out that despite its primary use as being a way of redeeming merchandise, it was conceptualized first as a digital currency, which may have been a good idea, but it has never really gotten off the ground global-wise due to it not being widely recognized. Why? Lack of publicity? Was Whoopi Goldberg not enough? Not enough funds to drag more Hollywood actors/actresses to promote it? Or are there some 'more technical' issues? Everyone should remember that the internet world back then is more primitive compared to now (Case in point: slower internet speeds) and the idea of sharing data across multiple computers at the time Flooz was created has not yet materialized, like what the blockchain now has done. Anyway, the company that created Flooz has shut down and the domain "flooz.com" no longer exists. It could have become more popular to the point that Bitcoin wouldn't have existed the way it is now, but it didn't. But let's take it another way: if Bitcoins haven't got much support from the early pioneers back when it first started, it would have had faced a similar fate. Aren't you personally glad that this wasn't the case? There is nothing like reading a few pages of history to appreciate what we are now enjoying.