BTCUSDT20240725P60000
Bitcoin / Tether USD Jul 25 2024 60000.00 Put
crypto

If you already have USDT, converting it to BTC is easy. The bigger question is whether you want to use a centralized exchange or stay fully self-custodial.
If you're comfortable with a CEX, most major platforms let you swap USDT for BTC through a BTC/USDT pair in a few clicks. I've done similar swaps on WazirX before and the process was pretty straightforward.
If avoiding exchanges is your main goal, then you'd probably want to look into decentralized options and self-custody instead.

Develop your favorite trading style over time.
You could scalp, day trade, swing trade, do long term investments. Some prefer the consitency of winning many small ones over the big dopamine hit when closing 1 massive trade per week. Or maybe they just don't have the patience. You could pick 5m, 1s, 1m, 15m, daily charts, etc. as your prefered time frame. Maybe you are much better at short than long trades? Maybe you like the price action of the craziest meme coins while others are only interested in BTC. Trade with different risk reward ratio, some think tight SL is better, others don't use a SL all, etc. Whatever suits you best.

I don't want to be a downer, but accumulating 4 BTC with this strategy will be impossible most likely.
My goal is 2,1 and even that will, when calculated, take forever

BTC Spot

All in BTC = normal investing 

BTC goes to 10k

It's great that we are going back to BTC but won't the fees be higher than with stablecoin payments and whatnot?

BTC is not Bitcoin anymore. If you want Bitcoin look into BCH.

Good question. I held from $30k to $125k and still holding now at $60k.
At the highest I were up to $16 million, now down to $8 million. Not sweating since I am still up from $30k.
But if it comes as you say we might see sub $30k.
I regret to just HODL forever, but no point in selling now and just riding it out.
The reason I never went into stock is because BTC is tax free where I live, while stocks are heavily taxed. So it's not like "Just put your money in stocks bro".

There is a much higher probability that there is a bug in XMR than there is a bug in BTC. That probably also keeps the price down.

I am much more a BTC sceptic than pumper. But by first banning on any crypto related sub was on buttcoin when someone stated with absolutely 100% certainty that it was going to zero. I pushed back a bit, my view is that it most likely will collapse at some point but it will probably not go to zero. For this blasphemy I was banned.

BTC is solely propped by USD through tether minting usdt to swap for BTC. So what does that make BTC?
I like BTC and wish it was effective as a currency but it still has flaws

Now thats the fun part. We don't know. Liquidity has to go somewhere, and when its not going INTO the AI trade but exits, where to? Gold will profit probably. BTC probably? Although that narrative got a bit muted too recently.
Personally, I don't think that when liquidity flows OUT of AI, a limited asset that is (historically) at low prices, below the 200 WMA will drop another 50% or even stay there for years. For the very least traders that purely look at those overbought/oversold levels (without necessarily real conviction for the asset) will buy BTC when AI does not promise astronomical short term profits. At least temporarily. Treasure companys won't stop if they CAN continue to buy. Bitcoiners won't stop.
I think for a multi year (BTC) bear market we would need shit to really hit the fan. New depression. Long term hodlers selling BTC they hold for years just to get though, no matter the price. BTC they never wanted to sell. Not out of panic but desperation.

BTC is crabbing

Short term BTC bleeds with Nasdaq — that correlation has been clear since 2020 and 2022 both proved it. But medium term is interesting — during the 2023 US banking crisis BTC actually pumped while bank stocks crashed. If AI bubble bursts and trust in centralized tech collapses, Bitcoin's fixed supply outside-the-system narrative could be exactly what makes it decouple. Happened before, could happen again."

The BCH fans prefer a literal interpretation of Satoshi's white paper, which does not discuss nodes. When writing the paper, and in the software he had spent almost 2 years developing, every node was a miner and every miner was a node. But, at launch he discovered that mining slowed his laptop to useless, so he made mining optional and set mining off by default. This decision separated the node role from the mining role. Obviously, the white paper was never edited. Less obviously, this quirk and other quirks where the launch software and subsequent versions deviate from the white paper were never documented in a way which answers the question - why is this different from the white paper?
The justification for Bitcoin's decentralised design is given in two short paragraphs under the "Introduction" heading. It's very clear, in a way which supports a different interpretation depending on the reader's prejudices. It supports a "whack-a-mole" interpretation - that Bitcoin avoids the problems caused by centralised on-line payment systems by not relying on a trusted third party, and its network can't be shut down. But the words don't explicitly describe this. Also, it wasn't true in the software which Satoshi developed. It became true later, when the node network became large and diverse enough to resist arbitrary shutdown attacks. Even as late as 2013, a centralised chain tip rollback was possible, and was used after the BIP-050 bug was fixed
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawiki
Practically, it makes sense to rely on the non-mining nodes to verify new blocks after the fact of mining, because miners do make consensus errors
In the whack-a-mole context, it's risky to rely on mining nodes as the definitive consensus mechanism, because there are so few of them (because of mining pools, something else not predicted by Satoshi)
In the governance context, it's well-recognised that BTC's reliance on acceptance of consensus changes by node operators is a potential point of failure. If node network acceptance is too slow to respond to an emergency, BTC could fail
On the other hand, the node network's inertia protects BTC from unwise consensus changes such as the foolishness currently promoted in BIP-110
Read the recent progress of the BCH major consensus changes. The BCH developers are confident that the changes will be accepted, because BCH isn't encumbered by a large network of user-operated nodes
Before Bitcoin, centralised Internet payment systems were easily shut down by law enforcement overreach (E-Gold and Liberty Dollar). But those events are long forgotten. Decentralisation has the benefit of being resilient against arbitrary shutdown, but there have been very few (and very weak, such as the Ripple case) attempts at regulatory shutdown since 2018
> Most nodes didn't switch
This is only important in a world where there has to be a competition with only one winner. The attempted political attack on Bitcoin was focused on SegWit2X. It failed because the proponents didn't understand the nature of open software development, didn't understand decentralisation in the node network, and because they failed to hire a competent developer team. If they had addressed only the last point, there could have been a SegWit2X fork as well as BTC and BCH
Nodes don't vote, so there never needs to be a majority. For either side of a fork to succeed, there only needs to be enough nodes to prevent a regulatory shutdown attack. If there's no regulatory shutdown attack, there only needs to be one node. In some forks, there also needs to be sufficient miner hashes to mine blocks in a short-enough time. BCH developers coded a workaround which allowed a lower hashrate to mine enough blocks

BTC will dump too obviously. Although crypto has already front run this bear and majority of the liquidations have already happened, it is possible that BTC goes sideways after another final dump while stocks keep dumping further.

"BTC has never truly been tested as a global risk-off asset. An AI crash might finally answer whether it's digital gold or just leveraged tech."
"My guess: first it crashes with everything else, then it separates based on fundamentals. Liquidity drives the panic, adoption drives the recovery."
"Correlation tends to go to 1 during a crisis. The real question is what happens after the panic selling stops."
"If the AI bubble bursts but central banks respond with easier money, BTC could end up benefiting in the long run."
"Bitcoin doesn't care about AI. Bitcoin cares about liquidity. If liquidity dries up, everything gets repriced."

**Daily crypto TL;DR:**
* ℹ️ Crypto Markets Rebound: Bitcoin and Ethereum show modest gains; Solana surges, yet overall sentiment remains in "Extreme Fear" due to persistent ETF outflows.
* ⚠️ Hawkish Fed Policy: Federal Reserve's "higher-for-longer" interest rate stance continues to pressure crypto, eliminating 2026 rate cut hopes.
* ℹ️ US-Iran Diplomacy vs. Military Stance: Renewed US-Iran talks initially boosted BTC, but Iran's military readiness signals introduce new geopolitical uncertainty.
* 🚀 Retail Interest Returning?: Global crypto search volume rebounded in June, suggesting a potential return of retail investors.
*News summary from the* [*HODLings app*](https://www.geosystemsdev.com/products/hodlings/)*.*

If the AI bubble bursts and we enter a multi-year bear market, how do you think BTC reacts?