Sure people should try not to be stupid, since no one should want to lose any money, even if it is ONLY $10.. yet if they start with a small amount, then their security should be in line with the amount invested, and realizing that if they hold coin with a third party then there are various kinds of risk but also that if the bitcoin gets stolen (like through a hacked account), then it is likely that the transaction is irreversible if the hacker takes the bitcoin, even if the bitcoin is with a third party.. At the same time, holding private wallets can also be complicated, including if the bitcoin are held on a hot wallet versus a cold wallet.
These matters of the various kinds of wallets need not be learned prior to getting started, since getting started is one of the most important things. and yeah, there is a difference between the incomes of people in regards to how much security that they might feel that they need based on their income and/or their other resources, so there is a difference between investing $10, versus $100, versus $10k versus $500k or some other amounts...and yeah, sometimes there needs to be extra security to account for potential changes in value.. since for example, even in 2020/2021, there might have been some guys who might have been somewhat lax in their security if they had $8k invested or in a wallet, but then after the BTC price went from $7k to more than $60k their $8k might have all of a sudden turned into $70k-ish.. and similarly in 2017 (although that is further back in history, when $5k to $8k might have been in some wallets and the BTC price was around $250-ish in mid to late 2015 - yet by late 2017, the BTC price went up nearly 78x, so that $5k to $8k would have turned into $390k to $624k, and so that would have been an even more extreme example how the security should have been more important, since maybe a person might have been o.k. to keep $5k to $8k on their phone.. even though that seemed a bit much, but then if the amount turned into $390k to $624k.. then they might have become quite nervous since maybe their whole networth might have been less than $50k and then all of a sudden their whole networth goes up 8x to 10x or more and much of their value is on their phone, which would not have had been a very good and/or secure place to be. .even though I think some folks did find themselves in those kinds of situations in 2017.. and their security did not keep up with the size/value appreciation of their BTC holdings.
Not many take Bitcoin security serious unless they lose Bitcoin by becoming victim of hacking or through other scams. There are many security measures available but it largely depends on how serious your are in securing your Bitcoin. If someone is serious in Bitcoin security then he will defiantly learn ways on how to secure his Bitcoins whether it's 100$ or 100k$. We don't know when our 100$ will become 1000$ because of Bitcoin volatility. One must keep this in mind that we constantly need to upgrade our security measures all the time. Hackers are defiantly more interested in 1000$ but that doesn't mean that they will spare 100$. Think from that perspective.
You are likely correct with any kind of suggestion that once a hacker (or person who gets access to another person's keys or wallet or account) has access, the amount may well still be taken whether it is small or large, yet I doubt that there is any real value to attempt to parse out the mentality of any kind of hacker or person who might get ahold of our keys.
It does seem important to spend more effort when more value is at stake or that the value of the loss is greater in the event that someone might get access to our keys or our account.
When a person is brand new to investing into bitcoin, maybe he is ONLY buying $100 or even $10 per week, so in the first few weeks, it could well be safe enough that the amount is saved on some account or even on a hot wallet that is on his phone, yet if the amount grows and grows and grows through ongoing buying and/or through possible BTC price appreciation, it likely becomes more and more important to figure out how to secure the coins in better ways.
For example, it is difficult to imagine that a person might keep thousands or even $100s of thousands of dollars on his cell phone, unless there were maybe some special and/or limited purpose and time that the large amount would be on the phone.. So maybe a large transaction is going to be made, so the amount on the phone might only be there for a few hours or maybe one day or two at most. Otherwise, maybe the amount on the phone would be no more than what a person might hold in cash in their physical wallet - which truly would vary depending on the kind of neighborhood that a person lives or hangs out in... some places are more dangerous than other places in regards to physical robberies or other kinds of ways a person might be insecure in their person and/or possessions.
It likely is a good practice to have extra security, like in the case that I mentioned in my above post where some value could go up 10x or even 70x in a relatively short period of time, then extra security might be preferable, yet also justifiable to spend some extra money or even create extra steps to access value... At the same time, it would not make a lot of sense to have such high level security for relatively small amounts, and sometimes normal people might end up making their coins so secure that they end up locking themselves out of their coins or even making it overly difficult or complicated that they may well end up losing their coins forever without anyone being able to help them to recover their coins, so there should be concerns about the negative sides to over security or even how it could become more difficult to pass down coins to heirs in event of death and/or permanent incapacitation.... which those surely are individual concerns about how much security should be taken to make sure that the keys/passwords are able to be passed down.. while potentially not giving access to the coins prior to they are authorized to be accessed.
[edited out]
Security the bitcoin investment is the most crucial aspect of the business because without proper security, the whole effort of buying and holding can be brought to ruins. In other words, security of the asset is among the first things everyone should learn before getting started because scammers are becoming very smart and sophisticated these days.
This is the point that I keep trying to make, and guys keep saying the opposite, which I believe is wrong.
If you only have $10 fucking dollars in BTC you do not need to learn a whole bunch of stuff about how to secure your keys and the various kinds of security blah blah blah.
The more that you buy, the more you likely should learn, but you can learn some of these things as you go, and surely some guys might not even realize how vulnerable that they are, so there can be complications in believing coins are secure when they are not.
Unfortunately, many people still do not take the issue of security seriously just like you have rightly stated. This is the reason we still have people who store their assets in centralized exchanges, forgetting the importance of self-custody.
I don't mind continuing to stress that self-custody is better than holding coins with centralized services, yet some folks are going to have challenges to secure their coins in private ways without screwing up their security.
I don't think that the level of security an investor should employed should depend on the amount invested in bitcoin because every money is important. $100 to some people might be like $1 million for some people so both cases require maximum care to the security of the asset.
That is a ridiculous statement to proclaim everyone is the same and security is the same for everyone and/or all amounts. Of course, there are different levels of security for different amounts, and also people have to also figure out their own abilities to learn and not fuck things up. When you proclaim that the security is the same for everyone, you fail/refuse to prioritize and/or to tailor your discussion to the varying circumstances of individuals. There maybe be elderly folks who might not have abilities to learn and they might be best off to have third-party accounts and even ETFs. There are also trade-offs in regards to owning actual BTC versus owning exposure to BTC prices by owning shares and/or IOUs.
It can be difficult to argue how much security a person needs, since some folks might have permanent residential locations and even various places of relatives that they can place keys, and other people might live in more mobile ways with even difficulties of having data on a phone or backing up their data on a phone. Different kinds of security practices might be practical and/or doable, and there are also some folks who $40k would be 5-10x their annual salary, so they may well have to guard that amount a lot more closely than another person who might have $10 million or more in networth, and the more well to do person might have several million in bitcoin, and also have investments in other assets and property and consider $40k as an amount that he spends every 1-3 months, depending on his activities.
The first is to learn about self custodian wallets and how not to share secret information to the public.
Do normie newbies need to learn those kinds of things before getting started in bitcoin? I doubt it.
Another is also not to click on random links to avoid phishing and other security threats. There are other measures the investor must employ to remain safe.
Of course, people vary in their already existing knowledge of secure practices, and secure practices become more important when value is being secured as compared to when mere information is secured, so there is likely value to continue learning how to stay secure, which again the level of security is also going to depend on amounts and also depend on various aspects of the person and his financial/psychological situation.
Bitcoin alone holds itself in a strong position in the long term. Altcoins can't hold their position in that way for long. Bitcoin can return to its maximum ATH at any time. People often fall into a state of confusion during ICO. They are confused with attractive white papers. People buy these coins hoping to make more profit and face losses. They steal huge amount of money by tricking common people. Bitcoin Pow is fair and realistic where miners do what is best for the network. Finally let me say that Bitcoin is a completely decentralized institution and completely different and risk free from other coins.
You are confusing confusion with greed. It is not because people are confused that they try to grab money via an ICO investment. It is because they are greedy to the point that they are willing to give up on their value positions, aka BTC. They tell themselves that it's only for a short period of time to flip the money for the better, but in most cases it is going wrong. Some get lucky of course, but those lucky guys shouldn't be taken as a precedent for others to do the same.
I believe not. OR not entirely. "Greed" is only part of the reason, but that's the wrong word to use in my personal opinion. It's because it's in our nature as humans to feel the need to be incentivized, therefore we have an urge to GAMBLE. Plus from the a normie's viewpoint, our investments in Bitcoin is a gamble on a "Ponzi Scheme" caused by greed. Haha. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There are a lot of shitcoiner talking points that may well sound very convincing to a newbie, and so he might not really know the difference between bitcoin and shitcoins and he may well be convinced by the talking points and/or the influencer who might come off as genuine and/or trustworthy... and maybe even as a person who has an "inside scoop" that helps to get better "bang for the buck."
As an example, let's say you have a monthly income of $120, from which you can invest $80 in other activities and the remaining $40 in Bitcoin. have the attitude that you will invest $40 a month regardless of the ups and downs. And if you have other means of earning money then you can increase the rate of Bitcoin investment.
The percentage means making about 35 percent of the total income we make to be invested?
Even though it is a very good thing but we have to keep in mind other situations and conditions because for the initial 35 percent for DCA I think it is quite difficult to do because after all even though maybe for the first week or month it can still be done but of course this will be a little troublesome in terms of consistency because we cannot handle this large amount if our income remains at $120.
I think it's still good enough if we only allocate at least 20 percent-25 percent because it's possible we can still minimize in terms of needs but for 35 percent it could be torturing yourself even though being in bitcoin is a very good thing to do but forcing yourself because you need to remember that this takes a long time at least 4 years or even more so that with a nominal 35 percent of your income it is still very large in my opinion.
Some of these numbers are a bit screwed up and even confusing. If a person is able to consistently invest 35% of his income into bitcoin, then after only 3 years he would have had invested a whole year's worth of income into bitcoin, which truly would be a good thing if he is able to sustain himself off of that amount and it could well be the case that bitcoin might go up in value during the investment period too.
One of the issues when dealing with such seemingly small amounts would be that if a person is living off such small amounts, then might he not want to increase his standard of living down the road?
Standard of living is truly a personal determination, so it is difficult to intervene and to say how much is enough and/or how much is more than enough, though personally I get the sense that if a person is able to invest (or otherwise arrive at having at least 10 year's income into bitcoin), then it starts to become possible to start to live off the BTC as a source of income in a sustainable way as long as the valuation is using the 200-WMA and withdrawals are taking place within limits of no more than 10% per year while the BTC spot price is at least 25% higher than the 200WMA..
So reaching a high enough level to start sustainable withdrawals might also have better sense of security if some extra amounts are accumulated so that there is a bit of a cushion and the person is able to figure out that the math works for him to transition from accumulating BTC into a status of withdrawing from it.. .. yet there also might be a period of time in which accumulation had stopped and withdrawing had not yet started.. so the BTC holdings might be mostly maintained and presumptively continuing to grow in terms of value, even if the amount of BTC might not be growing in size.
That is why I recommend Buy... and HODL. If the portfolio is large enough to sell some for profit for strategic reasons because someone feels like diversifying would be a good move (or have some cash for contingencies), then so be it. But in general, don't wait for the DIP unless we have gone through an unreal bull run for weeks and you think that a DIP is inevitable. That's possible by the way. If the market looks overheated, it can be ok to just lean back for a moment and watch. But then it is still bitcoin and it could be wrong as well. Just make a decision and don't regret it later.
you get the sarcasm. Many issues and then you are angry with yourself because you used the most precious of your portfolio to buy the biggest bullshit. 