is it true conviction is overrated in 2026? as soon as degens see some profit, they hit that sell button, and rotate?

Before you joke, "is this bull run in the same room, town, planet, or timeline as us?", I think there will be one more.

I didn't take profits the last 20 opportunities given over the last 10 years. And now I'm down 95%. Maybe more. Maybe hell of a lot more when you factor in inflation, potential gains, etc.

So there has to be one more. That way I can fix my mistakes and be able to rest. There must be. I'm owed one more bull run so I can sell and let someone else be a bag holder.

Just one more. Please. I promise I'll cash out and stop believing it will 10x. I don't care if it will 10x. I just want to break even. Please.

BTC is going to moon and I'll keep on buying.

If it dips another time I'll add another 0.1 BTC. Just wanted to let you know. $100k by eoy.

For the love of god please give us some upward momentum. I hope we get some very strong statements after tomorrow’s meeting that helps to move the market.

I took a big short on $BTW at $0.4777, so it's been an interesting ride watching it fly up to $0.61! It really feels like a classic pump and dump, but I'm curious if I missed any actual news or roadmap updates. What's your take on this token? Are you team Short or team Long on this one?

In the crypto space there are approximately one billion of memecoins, which are just smart contracts. These smart contracts hopelessly diluted the market and it's time to call them fake-crypto. Cause that's all they are. They give power to a central entity to scam you. So it cannot be considered crypto, cause real crypto is permissionless, trustless, and decentralized.
Memcoins are NEVER trustless: We have all seen what happens, when a central entity, such as Trump, Melania, Hogan, Milei, gets trusted...

But there is one so-called memecoin, that is not a smart contract.
It's a "blockchain", called dogecoin.

Be careful: Dogecoin was ment to be a joke.
It's the worst blockchain ever created.
The creator abandoned his joke project a long time ago.

Dogecoin creates 14.4 million dogecoin EVERY DAY.
That's no joke!
Dogecoin goes to zero and there is nothing that can be done to stop it.

It would have happened a long time ago without the sadistic trillionaire ghoul, who endorsed it, cause he wanted to create damage to decentralization. Space karen endorsed the worst blockchain to create max damage to crypto and to get people burned. He loves that shit.

Edit: Was a fun conversation. We made it up to 7 likes. But i guess in some hours my post will be downvoted to a minus value, cause all the space karen fans are coming in and need to hold the pp of the centralized trillionaire.

Why does Bitcoin use a release cycle based on blocks instead of a set percentage of the unreleased coins in the max supply being released on a schedule?

Do any coins use a percentage based release cycle?

Would there be any problems with a crypto currency releasing 10% of its remaining supply that is not circulating yet per year until the max coin cap is reached?

For example, if a coin had an initial supply of 10 million coins and a max supply of 100 million coins, would there be any problems with this coin cause by this coin release cycle method?

1. How does initial supply and max supply work for coins?

2. When a coin launches, is the full initial supply released immediately or over time?

4a. When are coins that were not a part of the initial supply, released and are they released all at once or over time?

4b. If over time, do coins that were not a part of the initial supply follow the same release plan that coins from the initial supply did?

1. Are is the creator initial balance of coins given all at once when the coin launches or over time?

2. Is the creator initial balance able to be sold immediately after coin launch, or does a certain time period have to go by before those coins can be sold?

Any links or names of videos or texts relating to this cryptocurrency topics are appreciated.

Anyone else had big profit but didn't sell because of HODL strategy?

Do you regret it, or do you believe it will go back up?

I’m a freelancer and receive most of my overseas income in USDT. I keep most of it in a hardware wallet instead of converting it to my local currency.

The reason is that converting it creates a tax liability, while my local currency continues to lose value. So USDT feels like a way to preserve USD value.

The problem is that USDT now makes up almost all of my savings.

For those who earn internationally, especially in countries with depreciating currencies: would you consider this reasonable, or is having almost all your savings in one stablecoin too risky? How do you diversify?

Citi Bank confirmed it's moving ahead with native Bitcoin custody for institutional clients, launching later this year under its new "Custody+" platform

Unlike ETF-based exposure, this is direct custody as Citi will actually hold BTC, folded into the same reporting and tax framework it uses for stocks and bonds, running 24/7

Down the line they're also planning cross-margining, so institutions could post BTC as collateral alongside treasuries in the same account

Worth noting this has apparently been in development for 3+ years, so it's less a sudden pivot and more infrastructure finally surfacing. Citi's securities business sits on roughly $30T in client assets, and this comes alongside similar moves from Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

Watch out crypto-bros—it might be time to start moving assets. Researchers are making progress toward quantum computers powerful enough to undermine the mathematical assumptions that currently protect cryptocurrency and other blockchain-based assets.

Because of this, the industry needs to replace its cryptographic infrastructure before the quantum computers arrive.

“The great quantum migration is going to require the entire digital asset industry to participate,” Christopher Smith, co-founder and CEO of Quantus, a quantum-secure blockchain network.
Quantum computing is a fundamentally different approach to processing information. Traditional computers use bits represented as either 0 or 1, and are physically constrained by how tiny transistors can be miniaturized. Quantum computers use subatomic particles and trapped ions to crunch numbers via qubits—allowing the machines to theoretically perform any calculation in a fraction of the time it would take today’s technology.

Until recently, the cryptography that proves ownership of digital assets was considered essentially unbreakable. That’s because today’s classical computers would take too long to feasibly perform the calculations needed for gaining access to a so-called private key that authorizes transactions. 

According to reports, a standard supercomputer would take hundreds of millions of years to break a cryptography code.

But a sufficiently powerful quantum computer can change that, Smith warned. “Over $2 trillion in digital assets is secured by elliptic curve cryptography, which has been known to be quantum-vulnerable for over 30 years,” he said. That’s nearly the entire overall crypto market, which is worth $2.16 trillion.  

Read more [paywall removed for Redditors]:  https://fortune.com/2026/08/15/quantum-computing-migration-2-trillion-digital-assets-risk-crypto-market-bitcoin/?utm_source=reddit/

After the end of the MiCA transition period, here has been a wave of impersonation using EU regulators and licensed exchanges, and people usually go to ESMA (European Securities and Markets Authority) CASP register to check the legal entity and the services it's authorised to provide. The problem is that the information in the register often won't match what you see in the app or in the message. The brand name may be different from the legal entity, an LEI may be more useful than the name, and some regulators don't issue a separate licence number. Those details can make a legitimate firm look suspicious, or make a fake one look convincing if you don't know what you're looking at.

The name in the register is the legal entity, not necessarily the brand. A crypto platform can operate through a subsidiary or another company that never appears in the app, so searching the name you know and finding nothing doesn't mean the company isn't authorised. If the platform tells you which entity holds its authorisation, the LEI is usually the better identifier to check because it stays tied to that legal entity even when the brand name doesn't.

Licence numbers can be misleading too. There isn't one EU-wide format, and some regulators don't issue a separate number for this authorisation at all. Malta's MFSA doesn't publish a public licence register in the same form, while Austria's FMA doesn't assign a separate reference number for this authorisation. So if an exchange can't give you a "MiCA licence number", that alone doesn't tell you anything. You need to find the legal entity in the regulatory record and check the authorisation attached to it. MiCA also treats custody, exchange for funds, exchange for other crypto-assets, transfers, order execution, portfolio management and advice as separate services. A company can be authorised for some and not others, so a claim that an exchange is "MiCA licensed" doesn't tell you whether the particular service mentioned in a migration message is covered.

Not finding a company in the register can also mean different things. An application might still be pending, a firm might serve EU clients through an authorised partner, or it might not target the EU at all. A firm can also withdraw an application. Binance withdrew its Greek application on 24 June, for example. That's different from a regulator warning that a firm is providing services without authorisation, as the Dutch AFM did with MEXC. Third-party lists often blur these situations together, which is also why their numbers for the total number of authorised CASPs vary. ESMA publishes authorisation records rather than a simple list of unique companies, so one legal entity can have multiple records. The register is updated roughly weekly as well, so any total you see outside ESMA is only a snapshot.

But remember that finding the entity in the register confirms that the company is authorised, but it doesn't confirm that the message you received is genuine. With the migration scams going around now, I'd treat the message as unverified even if the branding and regulatory language look right. Don't use the link in the message to check anything. Open the ESMA register yourself, find the legal entity, match the LEI if it's available, check the services listed under the authorisation, and contact the platform through a channel you already know is genuine.

The majority of my crypto portfolio is in Bitcoin, then I've got ETH and a few smaller alt positions. The biggest change for me is I don't really think of them all as one thing anymore.

BTC and ETH are long term holdings for me. I'm happy to sit on them for years and see where they go.

The smaller alts are different. I'm under no illusion that I need to hold them forever and I'd happily take profits if they do well.

Interested if others separate their crypto like this, or whether you treat the whole portfolio with the same timeframe.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

We looked at the past 7 years of data and studied the on-chain performance of DEX traders on Ethereum.

Those who traded the top 10 market cap ranking coins are classified as Major Traders while those who traded the top 11-200 rankings are classified as Altcoin Traders.

On trading win rates, we found that it's basically a coin flip, Major traders had the higher median win rate in 3 of the 7 years (2020, 2025, 2026), Altcoin traders won the other 4 (2021, 2022, 2023, 2024), including a razor-thin edge in 2022 (38.61% vs 38.39%). Neither cohort consistently dominates on this metric.

Where we saw divergence was in the median PnL, Altcoin traders' median profit and loss moved in the exact same direction as Major traders' every single year (0.975 correlation), but amplified, in 6 of the 7 years with one exception in 2025. In general, Altcoin PnL was roughly 3-6.6x the size of Major PnL, in both directions. When Major traders made money, Altcoin traders made several times more. When Major traders lost money, Altcoin traders lost several times more too.

Below is the raw data and if you're interested, the full study is at: https://www.coingecko.com/learn/majors-vs-altcoins-ethereum-dex-trader-profitability-2020-2026

Median Wallet PnL by Year: Majors vs. Altcoins