Stay up to date on all things crypto and blockchain
Token Daily is a place to discover trending news and products in crypto and blockchain.
Token Daily is a place to discover trending news and products in crypto and blockchain.
So, I have a few questions:
Do all trades in exchanges appear on the blockchain ? I guess no, the exchange can have a private pool of crypto and fiat currencies, and satisfy many trades internally.
Do all exchanges have to match opposing trades in the same way, with same timing, same quantizing of the trades ? I guess no, they can choose to rate-throttle, match trades any way or any time they wish, etc.
Do exchanges have to offer small spreads ? I guess no, they're free to make the spread as wide as their customers will tolerate.
So it seems to me that the graphs etc in this article don't necessarily mean "fabricated trades". Much of what they show could just be artifacts of exchange algorithms and policies. Maybe some of it could be termed "exchange manipulation" or "unfair practices". But I don't think the case has been made that trades have been fabricated.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't read all of the report or understand all of it. Please correct me where I'm wrong.
Won't this trigger a bankrun? I mean fake volume indicates that they don't have the keys right?
The report was submitted to the SEC on 19 March 2019, as part of an application for a bitcoin based ETF to be listed on the NYSE. Bitwise asset management reports:
We will demonstrate in multiple different ways that approximately 95% of this volume [reported on CoinMarketCap.com] is fake and/or non-economic in nature, and that the real market for bitcoin is significantly smaller, more orderly, and more regulated than commonly understood.
The report says that Binance, Bitfinex, bitFlyer, Bitstamp, Bittrex, Coinbase, Gemini, itBit, Kraken, and Poloniex are reputable exchanges without evidence of manipulation. Unless you know what you are doing, best to stick to one of these for trading.
I encourage you to give the report a read. There's a lot of information in there about how to spot suspicious activity.
Wow thank you for sharing ...was a good read...funny how they nail the exchanges with a fake volume. Lol
"The coin with the larger market capitalization is deemed to be the continuation of the original blockchain".
Unfortunately this is the world we find ourselves in, PoW, and consensus mean nothing to fat cats.
This was a presentation to the SEC, not the SEC itself.
Welcome to r/patient_hackernews! Remember that in this subreddit, commenting requires a special process:
Declare your intention of commenting by posting a pre-comment containing only the single letter R
. (This pre-comment will not be visible to others.)
Wait 24 hours or more (you will receive a reminder).
You can then post a new comment with your actual reply in the same location.
Comments that don't abide by the 24h delay will be automatically removed.
NOTE: since step 3 is not mandatory, pre-comments can also be left as a way to set up a reminder to check up on the discussion in 24h.
More information on how this forum works.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I have only some minor quibbles.
GPUs are very much not abundant. Gamers were complaining a lot during the last bull run that those crypto nuts were buying up all available high-end GPUs.
Also comparing the hashrates of Bitcoin and Ethereum doesn't make sense. Those are different algorithms that run on completely different hardware. Bitcoin ASICs can only be used for Bitcoin (or Bitcoin forks that haven't changed the POW algorithm) where GPUs as more general programmable devices can be repurposed for mining other cryptocoins which might be more profitably to mine at any given time. Together with the fact (as stated in the article) that Ethereum has reduced the block rewards over time, it's not surprising that the hashrate isn't bigger than during the previous bull run.
This leads to the criticised monetary policy of Ethereum. This wasn't explicitly mentioned in the article but Ethereum's monetary policy can best be summarized as "don't overpay the miners for securing the network".
Many see it as a necessary evil that Ethereum is still running on POW and they are eagerly awaiting the jump to POS. It is seen as a design flaw of Bitcoin that it has a rigid coin issuance that isn't dynamically adjusting to the actual demand.
Disclaimer: this is just my own perspective and speculation based on a bit of reading and brief convos with Ethereum foundation people.
P.S. I'm long Bitcoin, so I hope I'm wrong!
[1] - https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-lightning-network-vulnerabi...
- The claim that BTC chose a non-scalable solution for ease of running a node isn't true. The claim at the time was that Segwit and LN were sufficient to solve all the scaling issues, the hardforks were going to solve anyways with their block size increase. It also falsely states that the hard forks take up more hard disk space, when in fact BTC still takes more...
- The hashrate comparison, the way it is charted is completely nonsensical, between BTC & ETH... it is quite literally comparing apples to oranges, their POW algorithms are completely different from one another and cannot be compared in hash/s terms. They are each respectively at the top of their hash domains. I'm doubtful this is due to ignorance, but moreso malice. Would love to see BTC miners do a 50% attack on ETH, which the author is essentially trying to instill into the minds of readers.
> TLDR; Ethereum could indeed do very well over the next year in terms of price, but as long as it's transforming its base layer, it remains a speculation in alpha development, rather than a finished/stable product.
https://twitter.com/lynaldencontact/status/13508211296367370...
Some other cryptocurrencies could go up when that happens, but it seems like it would be bad for demand in the slightly longer run.
Funny that this upvoted article says much of what I said yesterday in a comment that was originally heavily downvoted, then went back:
The Ethereum solution to serve this demand, however, ironically has semi-centralized clusters. While it’s more decentralized than purely-centralized systems, it’s not really the level of decentralization that some were hoping for, and Buterin has admitted as such. These clusters of centralization serve as potential attack surfaces for governments to crack down on these methods of going around regulated and fully centralized and KYC-regulated firms.
One could almost say it’s a veneer of decentralization over a system that is actually quite centralized. There’s a step here towards decentralization, but it’s not actual decentralization in its current form.
I went further. Let me reproduce it here: No, blockchains are not the future, they are really the reason why one transaction can happen at a time in the whole world. Even Ethereum 2.0 will have shards which will do away with this anomaly. The only reason flash loans even work with no collateral is because you can be sure nothing else is running on the “world computer” while your transaction runs, so you can roll it back with no risk except gas fees. Vitalik himself acknowledges this, the guy is quite honest and straightforward about its limitations:
Vitalik Buterin: Using Ethereum is expensive, and its blockchain is ‘almost full’ He also said blockchain's 'problem' is that every computer verifies every transaction
Actually blockchains are a first-generation technology that do global consensus for every block, which literally means all transactions in the world must go through one computer in the world (the miner) although it’s a different one each time. And the situation is actually worse, since you don’t know who would mine the next block in advance, every transaction must be sent to every potential miner! Imagine if BitTorrent had every computer store and seed every movie instead of using DHT.
The ability to send or loan arbitrarily large amounts for a fixed fee is a symptom of centralization. In a fully distributed network, transaction fees would have to be proportional to transaction size!
Almost every other protocol on the Internet does not have such bottlenecks in its design. No one asks how many emails or websites can be served per second. Blockchain is trying to secure every transaction using the entire network! That is why so much electricity is wasted just to do 7 transactions per second. The next generation of crypto will actually be able to power payments using embarrasingly parallel architecture. Until then, we have blockchain. Ethereum is nicknamed the “world computer” for a reason. Gas fees are super high for small transactions like paying for coffee or voting in a secure election. Just one app KryptoKitties can clog up the entire network.
As one example, we built Intercoin apps on top of Ethereum (https://intercoin.org/applications) but we are not going to wait around for Ethereum 2.0 - which is blockchain also. Kik Messenger and others have long gotten off. Ripple, MaidSAFE and Solana use different technologies.
I think this article is really solid, as are all of her articles. Part of what I love about Ethereum and altcoins is exactly because of the speculative, fast-money, insanely risky and exotic assets and protocols it creates. Where she sees that as a negative, I see it as a positive. ETH and its tokens have helped my crypto friends amass more wealth than we would have made working at FAANG companies, and without slogging through all of the bullshit and pain of working at huge corporations. Plus we get to work on super interesting tech rather than middleware that powers the middleware that powers the data mining pipeline that extracts money out privacy violations.
If you want the "safe" crypto play, I tell people to do 60/40 BTC/ETH on Coinbase so they can hold it safely and never look at it again. If you want to make the 10x fast money gains speculating like a crypto degen trader, then the only game in town is ETH and the alts running on its ecosystem.
CR plan doesn't say anything about how would be handled claims not related to the exchange? Will they be covered 100% like fiat creditors related to exchange or prorate? That important because Coinlab has allowed (but disputed) claim for $500M and trustee need to set asiide (reserve) either ~23% of that amount if distribution is prorate (like btc creditors) or 100% like fiat creditors. Beside that claim Coinlab has $17B claim what is currently not allowed under assessment (trustee for now doesn't need reserve funds for this claim, only if court rule its allowed but disputed claim).
Had a buddy pay for a fiverr gig today with bitcoin and it took so long that the gig got canceled because they didn't receive the BTC payment in a timely manner. Hmm...
Snapshots:
I am just a simple bot, not a moderator of this subreddit | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers
I've got big respect for Kim Nilsson and his WizSec reports on Gox, but surely he's well out here.
Creditors who don’t opt for the early payout will stay on until the end and split the remaining assets normally, which is projected to be slightly higher (22–23%) if CoinLab’s claim is successfully struck down.
Where is this 22-23% coming from? I think this is confusing BTC assets/BTC claims for YEN assets/total claims. With the appreciation of BTC, yen assets are way higher now. BTC would have to crash to like 12k USD or something stupid for us to be in this situation.
Sorry for spamming this same thing everywhere. It seems like I am shadowbanned on this subreddit alone, no one can see my opening posts, so I'd rather try and share the message. I've reached to mods since I believe this to be some accident. Just few months ago my post was the pinned one here.
What's important here is that the trustee managed to reach a settlement with CoinLab. The whole Early Payment -bullshit with Fortress and CoinLab is now confirmed by CoinLab itself.
Since nothing is being pushed on us, I really think this is best for us as creditors, allowing the case to get forward instead of getting stuck with CoinLab.
What's the most revealing today was also that CoinLab mentioned that the trustee has 23% (!!) of BTC held vs the approved BTC claims.
For each Bitcoin that was locked up in the bankruptcy that has a claim on it, the estate has only 0.23 coin to give out, according to a CoinLab spokesman.
From: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coinlab-reaches-deal-mt-gox-184624542.html
That’s a serious bump from the 15-18% what people have mostly discussed about.
Sure, some might/will be sold still due to default ”Final Payment” option being a cash. That shouldn’t impact the ratio as it’s pro rata, but BTC value might slide obviously lower if thousands/tens of thousands of BTC will be sold - even on a bit longer period of time.
Realistically, I think we'll hear from the court in H1/2021. As the trustee is assigned to the work by the court and trustee even mentions he's part of the whole process even now with court, I believe it's going to be approved.
I would say stuff is going to happen faster than /u/thondera pointed out here (except the 2069 Mars Base!), but other than that the list itself looks good to me. I'd even claim there's a chance everything is settled (Final Payment paid in BTC/BCH) by the end of 2021 too; 2022 by the latest.
Yes, this is a good article. Sorry if my previous comments got a bit out of hand but this is an emotional rollercoaster for all of us.
This is really bad advice. This makes it look like the early payout is 90% of value when really it's absolutely horrendous unless Bitcoin crashes to next to nothing. 21% of the BTC value when civil rehabilitation started is worth 4.8% of a Bitcoin now, currently best guess from ozcoin is 14.9% payout for BTC claims. It's literally a third of the expected value.
How can you not get much more if you wait until final payout? There is 15% coins left at market price today and early payout gives 21% of 90% of old obsolete market price. Seems there should be a definite positive upside on waiting with the extra risk of something happening along the way. But of course Fortress wants that extra cash and process to end as much as we. Maybe Fortress is good actually. If you don't take the early payout that is. Taking the early payment is essentially selling to Fortress because they take the upside later. They expect an upside otherwise they wouldn't negotiate this. I think author of this article is wrong when he says there will be little upside in waiting. Waiting it will be however.
Except, the rehabilitation process should go rather quickly from here.
All of the creditors have submitted claims and the claim process has closed. Therefore, if the plan is deemed reasonable by the court, it will proceed quickly. Everyone that filed a claim will receive their Bitcoin and the unclaimed portion/disputed portion may drag on.
Out of the 140,000 BTC a maximum of 90% will be distributed likely within months. Not knowing the number of claims, or those electing to wait out the dispute process for the remaining 10%, you could only guess at least a minimum of 50% will be released in the first phase.
With the rehabilitation plan draft submitted and the Coinlab agreement, there's very little left to stall the process.
Thanks for posting /u/germano_nh! Remember to follow the rules. If you need some extra help, please contact Twitter Support. Please DO NOT send modmail or ask the moderators for help regarding to your twitter accounts and issues, please contact Twitter Support.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I understand how this threatens Tether, Tether holders, and every exchange that trades Tether. But what I don't understand is how this threatens the value of Bitcoin itself.
What does this mean for BTC hodlers?
To me, this only sounds bad for Tether holders (and a few non-US exchanges).
I did read that 70% of the volume was coming from USDT, so without Tethers are we to conclude that there will be an immense collapse in demand, and therefore in price?
This is completely bonkers. First read about it on Matt Levine's Money Stuff and patio11's blog.
How does one short Bitcoin?
Edit: balajis' comments on the post.
This has been posted here, but it's useful for reminding people. As another redditor commented, "you won't see this in r-bitcoin". So while the majority of btc bag holders (including Adam Back) prefer to serve their own self interest, here we are keen on truth and success of crypto without corruption.
Tether’s supposed bank in the Bahamas is Deltec. Whose Chairman and largest shareholder is one Jean Chalopin a French, ginger, ex ‘writer and producer’ - read kids cartoon maker, turned banker.
I kid you not.
You literally cannot make this stuff up.....
For the sake of the argument let's assume Tether is backed 1:1 in USD. Then, how do they earn money? Because operations, lawyers, accountants, bankers all for sure do not work for free. That's not even accounting for the money they lost. What's their claimed business model? How do they cover for risks?
Ich verstehe nicht ganz wie das den Wert von Bitcoin beeinflusst. Kann das jemand mal für dumme erklären?
Interessanter Blog-Post über die Manipulation vom Bitcoin-Kurs durch Tether. Vielleicht für dein ein oder anderen relevant, der bei den kürzlichen Kursentwicklungen sich überlegt hat, Krypto ins Portfolio zu packen.
I’ve been around the crypto space since 2017, and I remember the massive levels of FUD around Thether on all the forums before there was a huge sell off of Bitcoin and then the massive bull run up to 20k. Has anything with the concerns around Tether changed since that time frame? It’s reminding me a lot of the 2017 FUD that amounted to nothing.
I think this analysis is really valuable; I can't determine its truth value but there seems to be a massive bubble regardless; Tether being a fraud would explain this to some degree.
I think a lot of people will ignore and/or push back on this simply because they don't want it to be true. After all, if it IS true, that means their crypto position is in jeopardy and their paper gains are more likely to disappear. However, sticking one's head in the sand and ignoring all the available evidence is rarely a good decision.
I think it's clear to anyone with half a brain that this crypto bull run is based on the speculation of the price of Bitcoin alone. Although there have been 3 years of steady development in the Ethereum world since we hit the ATH price, ETH is not currently over $1000 because it's being used by thousands of organizations every day, it's only there because Bitcoin number go up.
Given Tether's shady history, lack of transparency, and general fuckiness, I think there's a very strong chance that it's a black swan waiting to happen. Look at it this way: if you had the opportunity to print a token out of thin air, swap it for BTC or ETH, swap that BTC/ETH for fiat, and then rinse and repeat, wouldn't you do that as many times as you could, until you were caught? I sure as hell would.
Unlike USDC which has regular audits by known accounting firms, or DAI, which has a built-in system of collateral and liquidation, Tether's finances are largely unknown. I, for one, don't think it's a coincidence that the price of Bitcoin gets pumped every time Tether goes on a printing spree of billions of "dollars."
All that said, I still think there's a sound investment thesis for holding ETH long-term, in that the value will come when thousands of companies have deployed multiple smart contracts to save on labour costs, and need to buy ETH to pay for all the gas they will be using; however that day is still many years away. I'm not sure what the investment thesis is for Bitcoin anymore, other than 'number go up.' I'm not advocating that everyone liquidate their entire crypto positions like the author of this article did, but I'd also say don't dismiss his claims simply on the basis that you don't want them to be true. Part of making an informed investment decision is knowing the risks involved in your position, and tether is a huge risk.
TLDR - author gives compelling argument that tether USDT is a scam and not fully backed by dollars. Shows USDT powers majority of crypto trading. Then points out that a sufficiently capitalized actor could blow the whole thing up by selling USDT for USD until the USD runs out, collapsing USDT price, and destabilizing the crypto markets.
Everyone should read this article.
That was an amazing read. Thank you for posting.
i got banned from the bitcoin subreddit for posting about the mods removing a post with this article. is this FUD or real fraud which will crash bitcoin?
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether Die Geschichte hat es schon auf Wikipedia gepackt.
Naja das ganze wird so lange laufen bis die Blase platz... Wünsche allen schöne gains bis dahin, bloß würde ich da vielleicht nicht meine gesamte Altersvorsorge reinpacken 😜
naja also er hat schon recht. und trifft auch ganz gut das was z.B auch ich mir denke (wenn auch weit nicht so ausgereift). Aber wenn einer bis vor kurzem nicht gecheckt hat wie groß USDT ist, ist man schon ein ziemlich ignoranter fuck.
Fraud is everywhere even in government and amongst regulators. I'm very sure all the authorities responsible for first of all preventing this fraud and putting it to an end, have been well aware of it. But because most of crypto is basically unregulated is kind of a cover for them. I do believe tether was a deliberate conspiracy to "fakely" propel the crypto markets to the level they are at currently by artificially pumping Bitcoin for the purpose of raising global awareness. This wouldn't have happened quickly without the "Tether fraud". Once the utility phase kicks in, which in my opinion is about to, then Tether will be brought to down together with 99% of cryptos without utility.
He thought that government responses to severe crises that inject lots of money into the economy will cause "significant dollar inflation". In the real world, over the full year of 2020 inflation was 1.4% in the US (food costs went up a bit more, energy costs went down). Failure to inject money into a failing economy results in massive deflation. That's because money was rapidly disappearing from the economy. Money isn't created primarily because governments print it; whenever a bank creates a loan money is created, and when they call in loans money disappears. Central banks control the money supply by regulating banks, and their goal is to keep things stable.
For me, it's almost 100% aligned with what I've felt was going on with Tether in the last 2 years.
Also, it sort of crystallized an answer to a question I've had about Binance for quite a while: how did they manage to get so big, so fast.
Answer: easy, they never had to establish proper on and off ramps to the traditional banking system and lured customers with unreasonable leveraged offers (which BTW is another Tether-related scam in itself: if you are an exchange with a shit ton of USDT, you can manipulate the price up and down, and trigger artificial margin calls whenever you damn please).
The real interesting question is though: what will happen when (not if) Tether explodes. There will be a sudden huge demand for exiting from USDT, and the only way looks like buying BTC on semi or fully fraudulent unbanked exchanges (good luck with that).
This will also trigger a big price unbalance between exchanges, and it remains to be seen if arbitrage channels will be able to weather the storm and if so for how long.
If you hold USDT, better get out quick unless you want to be left holding the bag.
If you hold BTC (as in: for real, in your own wallet, not on some shady exchange, not your keys not your coins), it's likely the BTC ecosystem is going to undergo a very large "event". Up or down, who knows.
If you hold BTC on an exchange, especially a shady one with 100x leverage type offerings, get your coins out of there ASAP before you get BTC-E'd [1]
>The implication was shocking: there weren’t nearly enough dollars in all the domestic banks in the Bahamas to >back the Tethers that were floating around in the crypto market.
Doesn't match up with whats shown here[1], Bahamas banks are holding 110bn in customer deposits.
[1]https://stats.bis.org/statx/srs/tseries/LBS_D_PUB/Q:S:L:A:US...
A cursory glance at Coinbase's USDC's market cap [1] shows that it too is growing at almost exactly the same pace as tether's [2]. I think most players in this market would agree that Coinbase, for all of it's failings, is unlikely to be planning an exit scam at this point.
It doesn't disprove the whole thesis, and some elements of it might have merit, but at least one element of it seems weak to me.
https://www.deltecbank.com/2021/01/14/a-covid-year-in-review...
https://www.coindesk.com/tethers-bank-says-it-invests-custom...
https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1349873798078558209
The next weeks/months are going to be fascinating to watch, as US regulators and invested institutions fight to both regulate and protect their crypto investments. Maintaining the inflated cryptocurrency valuations propped up by Tether while simultaneously removing it from the game before too many eyes set on it, will surely require subtle maneuvering.
Ultimately I do suspect OP indeed, sold early, as the game theory mechanics strongly favor just participating in the Ponzi rather than trying to bring it down, especially when this has the potential to be the one last great bubble before a major recession.
Just to make it clear: there's absolutely no broad inflation almost everywhere in the world, certainly not in the United States. It may still come, but inflation is not why Bitcoin is on such a tear. Look at CPI or PPI of you don't believe me.
Although this does remind me of the Green Lumber Trader story from Taleb. Congrats on the trade!
> The US Treasury should enforce 100% reserve requirements on all USD-pegged crypto stablecoins, with mandatory audits.
Laughter is really the best way to start my day.
> What’s more, the supposed USD inputs (e.g., 401,431,056 USD in the top left transaction) are giving perfectly round Tether outputs (e.g., 400,000,000 USDT in the same transaction) in every block — regardless of the prevailing exchange rate or anything else.
Whale Alert uses exchange rates to convert currencies in the post. The "USD inputs" are simply the USDT that was minted converted using a USD/USDT exchange price (I'm not sure which one)
Whale Alert has also hard-coded USD/USDC to 1:1, which is why the coinbase pro minting Tweets match exactly
1. He's definitively bad at investing. He doesn't have an investment strategy, and probably never heard of portfolio re-balancing.
2. He got in lucky and made some good returns. Now he thinks he is a genius because of that, and as a result can predict the next market move.
3. He didn't do good market research. For example, most of the volume in USDT is faked by the exchanges. Coinbase, GBTC, and CME each one of these is are probably bigger than USDT in size and volume. Unregulated derivatives are an alternative to USDT for more sophisticated traders and they are also huge.
4.USDT is now also used outside of the crypto-market. Not because it is great, but because of the practicality. This offshore unregulated market of USD is worth in the $ trillions. USDT having a market cap of a dozen billions is really peanuts. That being said, I'd be more interested in an investigative journalism on how Tether has succeeded in moving such amounts of money while avoiding all the KYC bonanza a regular joe (or business) has to go through.
Have I got that right?
Why do they only take Tether? Because US banking is incredibly expensive and a regulatory nightmare.
Why do people use Tether exchanges, over Coinbase? Not just because of leverage, but also because many do not AML/KYC, especially if you only deal with crypto. A LOT of people in the crypto community don't like to pay taxes, and we've known this from day one.
Many crypto enthusiasts also boycott "regulated" exchanges like Coinbase, because they shut down accounts if you use it to gamble on a sportsbook, or whatever their surveillance doesn't like.
So it should not be a surprise that many people in the crypto community, me being one of them, actually prefer to use Tether and Tether exchanges.
The probability that something fishy is going on which would trigger a panic-sale when it's discovered is too high until we know more about the court case against Tether, imho.
Though all the people insisting on calling this FUD do make me wonder whether I'm seeing things or this is an "emperor's new clothes" situation.
Companies like Alameda trade billions arbing this synthetic USDT/USD market close to peg:
https://twitter.com/AlamedaTrabucco/status/13487730276395622...
If tomorrow Bitcoin will cost $10000, nobody will be surprised. Neither if it will be $70000. We are not building crypto systems for speculation.
Sell everything my friend and never look back. Happy for your wins here. Enjoy your "life-changing" investment decision.
> This is a one-time-use account. I won’t be responding to messages or inquiries on this platform.
If you aren't willing to put your real name to it, guessing you're not that confident about it either and are just another market timer looking for easy kudos over the centruries of proclamations. Crypto is basically ground zero for the biggest flaseflagging and ubershill campaigns on the planet.
Without proving what you sold, this is a fairytale, and you know damn well you can cryptographically prove right now how much and when you held it.
Tether holds far more than your bank or many bluechips in backing, try not to forget that one.
Crypto Anonymous, you sold extremely early, I'm sorry.
tldr; Ethereum’s mainnet is set to be deployed in a “soft launch” with a defense-in-depth approach to mainnet. We’re taking an iterative approach by launching first with training wheels and removing them as we gain confidence in the production system. The fastest route to an open, fully decentralized & secure optimistic future is to relentlessly iterate.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Who exactly benefits from this? other than everyone of course. I saw Uniswap and SNX listed? (Noobish)
For those who might be wondering, this is a new rollup scaling tech called Ethereum Optimism. They are on the cusp of launching on mainnet. Bright days ahead for users / reduced network fees.
This is the scaling solution everyone was waiting for. Now to test it iteratively to make sure it's safe, and then open the flood gates.
2021 is going to be great.
tldr; Ethereum’s mainnet is set to be deployed in a “soft launch” with a defense-in-depth approach to mainnet. We’re taking an iterative approach by launching first with training wheels and removing them as we gain confidence in the production system. The fastest route to an open, fully decentralized & secure optimistic future is to relentlessly iterate.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
tldr; Ethereum’s mainnet is set to be deployed in a “soft launch” with a defense-in-depth approach to mainnet. We’re taking an iterative approach by launching first with training wheels and removing them as we gain confidence in the production system. The fastest route to an open, fully decentralized & secure optimistic future is to relentlessly iterate.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Goldman can go f themselves.
I'm never forgetting 2008.
Fidelity owns 10% of Hut 8.
BTC adds diversification among all this economic uncertainty.
tldr; Goldman Sachs has issued a request for information (RFI) to explore digital asset custody, according to a source inside the bank. The RFI was circulated to at least one well-known crypto custody player toward the end of 2020. The bank's digital assets initiative is "part of a broad digital strategy," the source said.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
A big part of why big banks will be forced to step into this space is continuous fintech innovation. For example, we now have Square and PayPal offering big crypto’s. Either big banks do this too and capture a market share, or let square and PayPal keep racking it in.
tldr; Goldman Sachs has issued a request for information (RFI) to explore digital asset custody, according to a source inside the bank. The RFI was circulated to at least one well-known crypto custody player toward the end of 2020. The bank's digital assets initiative is "part of a broad digital strategy," the source said.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
When asked about JPMorgan, Goldman and Citi – the three big U.S. banks most are watching in relation to crypto custody – Mónica said: “We are talking to all these guys.”
Just hodl and retire in 5 years, my lads.
tldr; Goldman Sachs has issued a request for information (RFI) to explore digital asset custody, according to a source inside the bank. The RFI was circulated to at least one well-known crypto custody player toward the end of 2020. The bank's digital assets initiative is "part of a broad digital strategy," the source said.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Surprisingly not surprising.
Little more info:
There has been chatter about Goldman perhaps offering something akin to prime brokerage services involving crypto. However, the Goldman insider said the bank is looking at custody but not prime brokerage.
My guess is they'll do the prime brokerage thing eventually.
Welcome to r/patient_hackernews! Remember that in this subreddit, commenting requires a special process:
Declare your intention of commenting by posting a pre-comment containing only the single letter R
. (This pre-comment will not be visible to others.)
Wait 24 hours or more (you will receive a reminder).
You can then post a new comment with your actual reply in the same location.
Comments that don't abide by the 24h delay will be automatically removed.
NOTE: since step 3 is not mandatory, pre-comments can also be left as a way to set up a reminder to check up on the discussion in 24h.
More information on how this forum works.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Anyone know anything about this? I’m experimenting with it but was wondering if others here have tested it, too.
Is the chat encrypted? Edit: I'm not smart.
faq What kind of security does cabal have?
All traffic is encrypted using a symmetric key,
Looks very interesting! I like that it's just simple chat like IRC is.
Something I don't see in the FAQ that I'm interested in; how does it discover peers?
Looks cool. But does this have anything to do with IRC beyond both being used for chatting?
No servers are needed to join a cabal, or to start your own. Everything is stored and runs locally.
Does that mean it's serverless peer-to-peer like Bitmessage/I2P-Bote/Scuttlebutt? I love serverless systems, you can't censor them.
Private business, broke TOS, BANHAMMER!
NOTHING is preventing free speech and you shouldn't force companies to become a bullhorn for violence and hate.
Maybe they should start their own servi.... oh. They tried that and got ran out of town for their violence and hate? huh, I don't know. Stop being a dick?
Hi globaltummy
. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
If you have questions as to why your post has been removed, please see here: Why was my post removed as Off-Topic?
If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/globaltummy&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/kygnln/big_tech_and_censorship/?context%3D10000%29)
Being able to speak freely and petition your elected officials for redress is not the same as having a global bullhorn to spew misinformation.
Why can't we go on the TV news and discuss whatever we want? Why are they keeping our free speech down?
Honestly the tech companies are too powerful and shouldn't be self regulating, just not for the reasons trump supporters think
Edit: all I'm saying is FB ,Twitter, etc should be broken up and regulated by the government instead of regulating themselves.
All they care about is profit so we will only get limited accountability and half measures until something changes.
If you come into my place of business and start spouting lies and racist rhetoric, I am throwing you out as is my right.
This is in no way a 1st amendment violation. These are private businesses deciding that Far Right rhetoric is no longer good for business. This is the free market in action. Republicans would be overjoyed at the prospect if it didn't impact them.
It's really infuriating when people exercise their first amendment rights to spread misinformation about your first amendment rights.
Sigh. Again, do we really have to explain, that the 1st Amendment / Free speech doesn't mean what you think it means?
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Sillicon Valley isn't controlling free speech, it's standing directly in its way and inhibiting it.
Other than that though, I agree with this statement and going by what I've read online, I'm far from the only one.
tldr; Analysts and mining pools say selling pressure from mining wallets hasn't contributed to recent corrections in bitcoin’s price. For the past six months, weekly bitcoin flows from miners to exchanges have been steady despite bitcoin's more than 330% gains over the same period. Miners are currently on track to finish another extremely average week with only nearly 1,200 coins
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Seems to me that with the low volume of BTC being mined compared to current total supply, it’s obvious the dip wasn’t due to miners selling. 1200-2100 btc mined per week vs the 18 million-ish already mined... miners make up a tiny percentage, certainly not enough to cause a 30% dip. I’m a dummy though so happy to be corrected if I’m way off.
A lawyer for Tether denied that any of those funds were Tether’s.
Aaaaaaand we all know how much you can trust Tether's lawyers ...
It’s funny news about Tether manipulating the price of BTC doesn’t take off around here. I guess a lot of people aren’t ready for the implications of this...
So just like a normal brick and mortar bank, but it invests in a hard asset instead of propped up equities markets, sub prime mortgages and failing businesses? As of Jan. 1, 2018, banks with deposits less than $16 million have no reserve requirement. Banks with between $16 million and $122.3 million in deposits have a reserve requirement of 3%, and banks with over $122.3 million in deposits have a reserve requirement of 10%. Non-personal time deposits and eurocurrency liabilities have had a reserve ratio of zero since December 1990.
The double standard is hilarious.
Lol this just prove tether is issued to pump bitcoin. Tether prints to buy bitcoin, which is deposit in the bank.
... This is fine
No really it's ok guys
We bought bitcoin (BTC, +5.1%) for our clients at about $9,300 so that worked very well through 2020 and we expect it to continue working well in 2021 as the printing presses continue to run hot,” Rogers said in the video.
See? They'll just keep printing and put the printed money into bitcoin, all is well!
tldr; Tether’s bank Deltec Bank & Trust is investing customer funds in bitcoin. The announcement raises new questions about whether the dollar-pegged USDT stablecoin is backed in any way by bitcoin. Deltec made headlines in 2018 after Tether published a letter from the bank announcing that it held a little over $1.8 billion.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
tldr; Tether’s bank Deltec Bank & Trust is investing customer funds in bitcoin. The announcement raises new questions about whether the dollar-pegged USDT stablecoin is backed in any way by bitcoin. Deltec made headlines in 2018 after Tether published a letter from the bank announcing that it held a little over $1.8 billion.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
Thank goodness. This is way too important to rush through and get wrong.
Coinbase can achieve KYC compliance without killing the ability to send smaller amounts around freely. Anything under $10k shouldn't require a full audit. Chasing $1500 worth of crypto around the world is a huge waste of everyone's time - especially the governments.
Let's keep it up! If you haven't yet, leave a comment! I left mine.
Mnuchin, as the incumbent operative in a bankster-occupied state, acts spasmodically, brazenly violating established procedures and then retracting, but as much he as his successor the ex-FED Yellen, and the private banksters they represent, know that Monero is the black hole which will suck their fraudulent fiat money into nothingness, thus exterminating the parasite race of fractional reserve banksters from the face of Earth.
Re-linking the response from the Monero Policy Working Group:
https://downloads.getmonero.org/Monero_Policy_Working_Group_FinCEN_01-04-2021.pdf
This is a good start, but they have not pulled back on the proposed rules themselves.
we need to keep fighting.
Our writing letters worked. This nixes the outrageous 15 day deadline for comments and pushes consideration into the hopefully more favorable next administration.
This is a win for crypto. It pushes the time for finalizing misguided new rules into the next administration and removes what was clearly a politically motivated railroading attempt. From where I sit, the community pulled together and forced a positive change. We have muscle and should keep using it for good.
Finally, some common sensibilities!
I’m glad this change occurred because it seemed like they were just going to pull a FCC move at first glance.
I try to stay out of the way of them people that think they can predict shit. But this chick has it spot on a tok of shit.
If you haven't seen XLM's logo before: https://www.stellar.org/blog/announcing-the-new-stellar-logo?locale=en
Also let's not forget about the Saturn on ETH: https://www.reddit.com/r/PastSaturnsRings/comments/hn883u/theres_an_ethereum_based_crypto_for_saturn_didnt
Anchorage is pleased to announce that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has provided conditional approval to our application for a national trust charter, which makes Anchorage Digital Bank National Association, the first federally chartered digital asset bank in history. This is a major milestone, not only for us as an organization, but also for the crypto industry and the wider financial world. Crypto deserves a bank, and we are immensely proud of being approved as the one to set the standard.
Gigantic news! Basically, this gives all major banks the legal green light to offer bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to their customers through a partnership with Anchorage.
Visa, who are major backers of Anchorage, are now firmly positioned to benefit from the growth of cryptocurrency.
I believe the term for this is "BOOOOOOOOLISH"
tldr; Anchorage Digital Bank has received conditional approval to become the first federally chartered digital asset bank in the United States. The bank will offer sub-custody services for traditional financial institutions that wish to give clients access to digital assets. Anchorage Digital Bank is the first entity to have both the tech and the regulatory clarity that serious institutional participation in crypto demands.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
There is no 'funny' business. Only compliant or non-compliant. Legal or illegal. No compromise on the truth
Credo sia la strada che vogliono prendere tute le principali banche.
E onestamente la trovo la cosa più corretta, maneggiare Bitcoin e le cripto in generale lo trovo speculativo peggio di stock OTC e penny stock.
In più ci sono tante "tarantelle" che andrebbero evitate, vedi il caso xrp e Ripple.
Non sono sicuro del perché sia necessario regolamentare dall'alto, ma l'ultima volta che ho provato a capirci qualcosa di più mi avevano risposto che essenzialmente sì, si tratta di scommettere sulla diffusione dell'adozione della tal valuta. No?
Vai vai fate casino cosí continuano a salire e mi pago la pensione che a tassi negativi sto prima a rapinare una banca
è giusto che vengano regolamentati, sono soldi che girano senza alcun controllo.
Kinda weird that this 200-year-old woman and her friends still think they don't have enough power.
It's like being a billionaire and begging for pennies.
mi sono letto una vagonata di commenti in cui si dice "eh ma con le crypto posso spostare una capitali senza intermediari etc etc"... però poi ste crypto prima devi comprarle (intermediario 1) e poi devi venderle (intermediario 2)... qual è la differenza con il classico "bonifico" o con il tizio che porta lingotti d'oro oltre il confine Svizzero?
everything has been used for money laundering or corruption purposes, I don't get it why people tend to immediately criticize something because it has been used by criminals.
fiat has been used by criminals way more than other currency has been and we still use it, in fact, they print it
Affermazioni fatte ad ogni bull run del BTC, presto dimenticate appena inizia il bear market.
Una regolamentazione comunque, secondo me, potrebbe solo beneficiare il BTC attirando ancora di più i grossi investitori rimasti in sideline.
Penso che la libertà di trasposizione del titolo che si è preso OP abbia deviato la discussione.
Il problema di Lagarde non è la natura speculativa, ma il riciclaggio.
(Bitcoin) is a highly speculative asset, which has conducted some funny business and some interesting and totally reprehensible money laundering activity
Da questa dichiarazione i funny business del titolo originale sembrano proprio riferirsi al riciclaggio e non alla speculazione.
Infatti nel paragrafo successivo si legge
Lagarde did not provide specific examples of money laundering cases but said she understood there had been criminal investigations into illegal activity.
Ora rispetto al riciclaggio e ad altri funny business è innegabile che sia un problema di bitcoin, ma non mi sembra che la cosa sia limitata ai soli bitcoin. Non è che prima del 2009 non si facesse riciclaggio tramite le banche, anzi lo si fa ancora oggi.
Quindi mi sembra che io riciclaggio sia la motivazione di facciata, e che il vero obbiettivo sia un altro, magari come detto da altri utenti quello di spianare la strada ad un euro digitale.
Leggendo questo thread, da completo ignorante in materia, mi viene in mente solo gente che urla "Perché la Banca é l'emblema, zio"
Io ci credo che la tecnologia blockchain sia il futuro. Quello che mi devono spiegare è perché un bitcoin o qualsiasi altra alcoin sia comprata come se il valore delle crypto in $ ne definisca la reale utilità e adozione.
Se io credo nelle crypto dovrei comprare quote delle aziende che ci lavorano e producono la infrastruttura, non le coin stesse che altro non sono ma un tool.
La frenesia sui bitcoin in realtà ha un effetto contrario alla possibile adozione: dato che viene visto solo come un mezzo per fare soldi facili e il suo prezzo non è stabile, cio ne riduce la probabilità di adozione come moneta di scambio.
ELI 5: Se io ho una bella somma in BTC è possibile convertirla in euro senza vendere i BTC a qualcun altro?
stai a vedere come quelle cripto che ho da parte dal 2017 quando arrivano a valere qualcosa e non è il moment in cui me le stratassano stai a vedere
Che la signora Lagarde volesse dire una stronzata per farli scendere un po’ e poterne comprare altri?
She understands that Bitcoin has been used for illegal activities?
If I were going to issue a call for global regulations on an asset class, then I’d be more informed on the subject I was speaking on.
It’s a public ledger. You can literally track the money from wallet to wallet. Can’t do that with paper fiat.
Criminals already use Monero for its truest private transactions.
Monero is great for privacy, but it is more suspect than BTC for illegal activities.
l'intero internet triggerato tra 3...2...
​
come per la famosa net neutrality, che alla fine non ha avuto alcun effetto sulle meme (come tutti dicevano) e anzi ci sta parando il culo con il casino della privacy tra whatsapp e facebook. Prima tutti capiranno che l'europa è il posto più bello del mondo e meglio sarà
Questa ci ha dato il prestito più grande nella storia dell FMI (sono argentino), non ha nessun tipo di autorità morale per affermare niente.
What if btc just increases the block size too? Wouldn’t that render bch useless?
Does anyone know anything about this lightning strike thing they are all singing about?
But they did hardfork and increase the Bitcoin block size.....it’s called BCH. Bitcoin but with bigger blocks and still usable as p2p cash
and the refusal to hardfork to improve the protocol & increase the blocksize is the reason.
Terrible headline, but the article makes a really good point.
A currency is not supposed to increase in value or have wild fluctuations in value. Both of those degrade its utility as a medium of exchange. It's supposed to be stable and, if anything, very gradually lose its purchasing power over time. It's not supposed to be an investment, it's supposed to be a temporary token that we use to exchange one thing of value (our labor) for something else of value (goods, services, or investments). If what you're buying is not doing that, then its not a currency.
Bitcoin today is a speculative investment, not a currency. So long as its market value is so volatile and overall increasing, it won't be used as a currency.
Bitcoin solves a core issue with fiat currency; central banks have a history of hyperinflating its value. Fiat currencies, on average, last 27 years. Governments use central banks to finance increased spending by printing money in the form of debt. That money has to be paid back eventually. Governments can either raise taxes or print more money to pay off the debt created by printing money. The former has immediate negative effects on the economy while the latter kicks the can down the road so future politicians have to deal with the consequences. Governments always choose the latter. Its a self destructive feedback loop that ends up forcing the central bank into hyperinflating its own currency to pay off its debt.
The USD became a fiat currency in 1971 when it was taken off the gold standard. It's managed to stay incredibly stable as a world reserve currency. It's used for trade between countries, giving it extraordinary demand. Without that demand, the Federal Reserve wouldn't be able to print money at its current rate without creating immense inflation. USD M1 supply increased 25% in 2020 alone. It's creating asset price inflation with stocks at ATH, yet living expenses haven't increased substantially. There's too many reasons for low inflation to list, but a couple major factors are that people are hording cash during this recession and technology is lowering prices. The bottom line is that the money printing won't slow down and inflation will catch up to us eventually. The US government isn't going to raise taxes to pay off debt and the Federal Reserve won't be able to raise interest rates without crashing the economy. It could be 40 years before it's a problem, but who knows.
The USD isn't going to last forever, we will need to move to a different system eventually. Bitcoin is a step forward in the right direction because its supply is fixed. We know exactly how much bitcoin there will be 100 years from now. Bitcoin is volatile, but its volatility is decreasing. USD on the other hand will increase in volatility years down the road. Eventually, (I'm taking 40 years into the future) bitcoin or some other decentralized currency will become less volatile than the dollar and people won't have option but to use it. People will see prices skyrocket in USD and remain relatively stable in crypto. They'll have a choice between holding a currency that increases in value or a currency the decreases in value. Inflating currencies may be better for spending, but to spend a currency you have to hold it first. Cryptocurrency will be an obvious choice in the future.
Bitcoin is a very limited technology. It can only handle 7 transactions per second. That said, second layer solutions can be made on top of bitcoin. People don't have to transact with bitcoin itself, bitcoin can be used as a reserve currency for financial institutions to back their customer's deposits. For example, PayPal can hold all of your bitcoin and keep track of your transactions. They don't have to make an on chain transaction every time a customer spends their bitcoin. Instead, financial institutions can make bulk transactions with each other every 10 minutes to ensure their holdings match the amount held by their customers. The institutions would manage all the transactions between customers themselves.
Crypto is a solution to fiat's supply problem. The only other solution known is gold and silver. Bitcoin is faster and cheaper to transact than gold and works in today's digital age.
Oh no, the best performing asset of the decade has volatility! It's dead! Again!
As a long time btc holder, it's fucking hilarious seeing these same articles pop up over, and over, and over, and over, and over; and despite bitcoin's many deaths, large institutions and millions of retail investors keep buying, putting btc at almost 40k at time of writing.
If you haven't bought btc yet, it's not too late. You don't need to rationalize sitting on the sidelines with these silly articles. Invest responsibly, a small portion of your net worth. Buy and hold for the long haul. Don't try to time the market. Take profits if you need them for your life. It's not hard.
There's definitely an article a week making this exact argument and it's mostly irritating because it's an entirely destructive argument that offers nothing helpful, not even a framework to start thinking about a better alternative.
I'd like to see an author like this tackle the stated goals of bitcoin - peer to peer, censorship resistant, independent, global currency, and propose a system that doesn't look like this. Or compare bitcoin to other currencies with similar goals.
Because the volatility argument in particular is not an easy to avoid problem and I'd be curious to hear alternative suggestions.
You can tie your crypto to the dollar, but that doesn't meet the goal of being an independent entity. You could write a crypto which issues more coins to combat deflation automatically, but that is unpredictable in an entirely different way, and not easy to create and secure. You can have a highly inflationary currency, but it's still subject to market forces which affect it differently at different economic scales, so volatility is not likely to be solved.
I also agree with other posters that volatility inevitably comes with growth in bitcoin. It's absolutely true that bitcoin adoption is growing, both as a speculative asset and a currency. The limited supply means growth causes it to spike in value, and this activity will increase speculative activity, until growth has reached some kind of plateau. Price stability will open up currency opportunities, leading to increased growth, leading to another speculative run.
Finally, these articles assume that bitcoin has reached full maturity because its price is astronomical compared to the last bull run. Bitcoin, and the crypto space, is in its childhood still - a niche plaything with insane potential. It's an evolving technology and it may die before adulthood, but for now it's at the highest levels of usage and speculative value in history, and still has a bright future. Satoshi opened pandora's box for the next generation of money, and it's not just going to fade away.
This has pretty much been my take on bitcoin for years now. There's 2 main groups who see value in it: investors and people who want to use it as currency, and their end goals for bitcoin are completely contradictory while simultaneously creating a feedback loop that makes both goals seem plausible (but the currency folks are definitely getting the short end of the stick).
Like the article said, nobody's ever going to use bitcoin as a currency when its value fluctuates so wildly because nobody wants to be the guy who paid $300 million for a couple of medium pizzas. On the flip side, the only reason the value fluctuates so wildly, and mostly upwardly (which the currency people love to point at as a sign of mass adoption), is because of the investors. If the currency folks give up on the idea, then investors are speculating on an intangible asset with no real value. If the investors get bored with it, the price tanks and the currency folks are left with a worthless currency.
Eventually, one side of the two groups is going to decide en masse that they're not getting the value they wanted out of it. I think it'll be the currency side, and then we'll get an absolutely ridiculous bubble popping from the investors. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it jump to $100-200k before cratering to near zero.
Oh hey! It's one of these articles.
With the boring predictability of a spinning planet, BTC goes up and then when it drops there's a wave of "BTC is dead/horrible/never lived" articles. This one is nicely formatted, but still in that pile.
Yeah, we don't really now what public general use cryptocurrencies are just yet. They're a lot closer to cryptocommodities than currencies, at least for BTC's design.
There's some circular logic here. Bitcoin isn't used by consumers or accepted by retailers because of it's volatile price. Businesses are hesitant that the bitcoin they accept is worth ~25% less than what they accepted within a business day. Individuals are hesitant to spend that bitcoin because the pizza or cup of coffee they're buying might literally be a downpayment on a house in a couple years. So because no one is spending/accepting, then it's not usable as a currency? And because no one is using it as a currency, it's dead?
Bitcoin is useful for lots of reasons; the store of value, combined with the ability to globally transfer/receive, all publicly legered but with a layer of anonymity, is interesting and unique outside of the crypto realm (obviously there are other crypto that do this). There's all kinds of speculative assets that double as something else. Real estate, art, trading cards, cs go skins, stocks. All of those things do one thing or service, and double as a tradable store of value. Bitcoin is the same.
Bitcoin opened up the world to cryptocurrency and other kinds of crypto assets. Even though there's other crypto that better accomplish what bitcoin does (faster, more secure, more anonymous, more contract complex), all those other coins are relative to bitcoin. And bitcoin has a cap, there's only ~10% left of the total to mine, and that remaining 10% will take over 100 years to mine. The inherent scarcity is exactly why it retains value, because even though relative to a fiat currency the price may fluctuate or go down, bitcoin won't inflate itself by creating more coins in the system.
I most often compare and use high end art and expensive real estate as the real world comparison for bitcoin. Both of those markets basically exist as a way for wealthy people to park money into assets, and even though the art world and the real estate market are volatile and non-liquid, more often than not the asset will appreciate. Both those markets are huge, but they're so slow moving and non-liquid it's often tough to move if you need it. For luxury real estate you have to have a slew of real estate agents, mortgage/loan officers, appraisers, stagers, insurance, utilities, not to mention crew to upkeep the property until you sell it/while you rent/occupy it. There's closing costs, taxes, escrow. For art, it's the same. There's auctioneer costs, appraisers, temperature controlled storage, insurance, and you're going to pay someone to make a replica that you keep out while you hide away the real one. Bitcoin does away with all of that. You have your store of value, and with an address and a network fee, you can nearly instantly transfer that value to anyone in the world, and the receiver can have the transaction checked and verified by the blockchain and confirm that the funds were actually received. The volatility is a cost you bear, and basically the only cost. I think that's pretty powerful.
I bought some bitcoin in the early days out of curiosity, back when it was very cheap. I unfortunately kinda forgot about it, and my password.
I think there is a lot of nuance missed in both this article and some of the comments. Among those nuances: Bitcoin is a commodity, not a currency. Also, think what you want of Bitcoin, but it has created an entire cryptocurrency industry. This industry is allowing for economic innovation and reimagining of currency, which may lead to a new form of stable currency. Will it be Bitcoin? Probably not. But I expect future money will have been inspired by Bitcoin
I've read this article twice now and I'm still trying to figure out why it is trending. Perhaps someone can explain to me what I'm missing. Bitcoin had trouble being a currency from the start because there was no common market buy-in. There was the occasional story about a pizza place accepting bitcoin, but there wasn't a true market, industry, or region that said that bitcoin will now be as common of an exchange as traditional money. Second, a dip in the value of a currency doesn't signal it's end. It signals an adjustment, which will happen with a currency that has been purchased based on pure speculation. Finally, bitcoin is like any technology and will become whatever we make of it. As long as people see it as an investment it will continue to go up in value. If they start using it as a currency it will fluctuate, like any other currency. If they realize it is another tech fad you will see the bubble burst. As of right now I think the future is far too gray to make the speculations that were made in this article. I thought that was the discussion of all cryptocurrency since the beginning, but again maybe I'm missing something.
Bitcoin became, and I believe to a large extent remains, popular for ideological reasons as a libertarian and anarchists dream of the ability to divest the power of control over the currency from the govrnment of the country they live in and give that control to the market.
Regardless of any other pros or cons of bitcoin - and there are other cons - this on its own is an incredibly stupid idea. The ability of the people of a country as represented by their elected government to control and purposefully direct the behaviour of their nations currency is an incredibly useful thing to maintain direct control over in times of financial crisis.
Left to the market, the market will often panic when it should remain steadfast, be over exuberant when it should be cautious, and these are things that should be left to experts with the best interests of the people of the nation in mind, not the invisible - or rather, non-existant - hand of the market and the mob.
THIS IS AN OPINION. Hit it where it hurts.. The insurrection only made the nazis, I mean patriots- withdrawing their money from anyone opposing donold
if i didn't listen to asshats like you ten years ago i'd have a house off bitcoin right now like my UPS driver, shut the fuck up with this cynical ass fascist ass doom and gloom
oh boy a fucking medium article with a clickbait title what fucking quality content article of an internet post this must be i can't wait to read all about how bitcoin isn't yet as static as established currencies and that's why it'll never contribute to denying power to entrenched elites or ever be meaningful in anyway aguuuuu fucking chodes
bitcoins speculative phase will eventually end, were in pure price discovery now, it could be years before it settles but eventually all this price discovery will settle on an agreed upon value.
also im sure the value of currency issued by the continental congress varied wildly from the years 1775-1789 or so.
Not one mention of the bitcoin lightning network in this article, which was specifically designed to address the central problem that was brought up. Its like they just hired an intern or junior level writer and told them "Hey, everyone is talking about bitcoin again. Write us something about it to put between these ads". Then it was put on the internet with no QC by anyone who is actually well informed about the topic. And no one cares if it is woefully poorly informed because they got their clicks and ad revenue.
In which folks learn the difference between currency and commodities. Bitcoin is a commodity. The open question is whether its like oil/grain/soybeans or more like tulip bulbs/beanie babies.
Bitcoin has always bewildered me. I started really paying attention to it around 2014 when it was at its low point after the failure of mtgox (~$200 or a bit below there). Never invested.
It's now up to an incredible amount, about ten times higher than what was then considered a fantasy of delusional proportions. There was at the time literally a whole copypasta of some bitcoiner's fantasy of waking up and seeing a $5K bitcoin price followed by spending their day doing various activities with bitcoin integrated into the process.
Bitcoiners got the first part (the $5K value and then some to boot) but never got the second part. In fact I still can't think of any compelling use cases for bitcoin that I wouldn't rather use venmo/apple pay/wechat pay for. The author pretty much says this too and points out it's entirely a speculative asset, but I mean, even gold can be used in engineering applications, so it's even more "pure" as speculative assets go.
Looking at this, Tesla, and the way that... literally the entire stock market behaved in 2020, I'm just absolutely convinced that much of peoples' investments are based on nothing but hype, and they're making complete bank off of it.
Have I gone crazy? Is this just the way the markets work now? Have they always worked this way? I'm honestly afraid to put my money in now because I wonder when people are going to realize that much of the valuation that goes on right now have nothing to do with the utility/potential of the underlying asset.
The price volatility is due to new people getting into the coin and holding them rather than spending them, this causes price growth as supply dwindles and results in the the occasional short term bubble as people rush in to make easy money. However each bubble cycle is less volatile than the last and eventually the price will stabilise because over time the amount entering into supply shrinks while the amount in circulation reduces towards a certain amount. For anyone looking to speculate based on this, bare in mind that it might stabilize at a price point that is lower than the current.
These massive swings and growth simply can't last forever. None of this happens with state currencies since their adoption is much quicker and the price discovery is measured in days or weeks as a result. The price swings are simply due to the novelty of bitcoin, and its reduction in volatility over time is what's part of the design. If you're at all familiar with bitcoin you'll know about mining and mining rewards. At first the mining was reward was 50 BTC. Then after a certain amount of time the reward halves and then it halves again and so on, literally forever. This means fewer and fewer coins enter circulation and there is less and less reward to enter the network.
The real problem with bitcoin as currency is that it's slow and can be controlled by anyone who has a majority of the hashing power in the network. Right now most hashing power is in mainland China which means that the CCP has in theory control of the blockchain but theoretically they can be checked if other countries set up their own mining farms for no other reason than to counter the Chinese. But then you get into a problem where you're spending huge amounts of power just to keep the blockchain safe
The reality is that blockchain is a cool tech but bitcoin specifically isn't designed with strategic interests or widespread use in mind.
Its shit like this that keeps me subbed to this propoganda reddit, top class 10/10 abusively manipulative titles are too good to pass up.
I never understood the destructive nature of deflation but I do now thanks to bitcoin.
In any case, the result is bitcoin is not a currency. It's a commodity, as this article explains.
The EU needs to continue crumbling and self destructing. No wonder the UK left them. I’m hoping more countries leave this dumpster fire
tldr; European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde said bitcoin has facilitated "funny business" and needs to be regulated. Lagarde also described bitcoin as a "speculative asset" that has led to "some reprehensible activity." She said there will be a digital euro, hopefully in no more than five years.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
The EU central bank chief added there will be a digital euro, hopefully in no more than five years...
Likely there won't be an ECB in 5 years.
Max Keiser was estimating ECB bankruptcy would happen this year lol
the “highly speculative asset” has led to "some reprehensible activity," including money laundering, and any loopholes need to be closed,
What's with all this "we need regulation to stop money laundering!"
Yeah, ok, how well is that working with HSBC and friends?
Why does the US have this paranoia around government involvement in anything. It’s always possible that they’re honest well meaning people working hard to protect and improve the lives of their citizens. Rather than evil pedophile lizard people who want to inject us all with mid control microchips. Standards of living are higher across Europe because governments do care and intervene where necessary to make life better. Or maybe that’s the microchips talking.
Edit. A classic example is the new WhatsApp terms and conditions. Basically giving Facebook everything you on on your phone. That’s come from a private US company. The EU is using legislation to aprotect its citizens from this mass surveillance not encouraging it
"The EU central bank chief said there will be a digital euro, hopefully in no more than five years."
Yea, so they can get rid of cash and create mass panopticon. Surveillance society where every transaction you make is analyzed and attached to your credit score and your worth as a human being.
"The ECB has been looking into the benefits and risks of a euro-based digital currency since the Facebook-backed Diem (formerly Libra) project was announced."
Yea, so they connect the social graph with credit score. Shut you down for saying the "wrong" thing or being associated with someone they don't like.
gaslighted paranoid edit:
https://gizmodo.com/your-credit-score-should-be-based-on-your-web-history-1845912592
So says the 'elite bankers liar' .. don't pay them any attention, Bitcoin doesn't.
tldr; Fei Protocol aims to create a stablecoin that exhibits a high fidelity peg. The FEI stablecoin has an uncapped supply that tracks demand. It enters circulation via sale along a bonding curve that approaches and fixes at the $1 peg. FEI will support the creation of bonding curves denominated in any ERC20.
This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
faceplam why does anyone believe this nonsense. LoL CCP isn't going nationalize the company, atleast publicly this will never happen. The remification of.such action and possible chaos ensure is unimaginable. I get alot people here are either too young or live is pre socialistic world to understand this, but market is not the enemy.
Also I think it's utterly naive to believe that nationalizing everything is the way. Beuracracy and politics are very important for society and it's complicacy has driven many mad. Stop being naive for god sake, It's this reason why most of you are still.stuck in your capitalistic hell hole
Yea like others said, its unreliable.
Plus from standpoint of competitiveness and free markets, this seems kind of a bad idea.
I can see government taking a stake in alibaba and/ or ant financial though.
But complete nationalization is a bit overboard. This will harm foreign investment.
How reliable is this? Seems like wild speculation to me, not to mention a horrible idea and doesn’t even solve the monopoly complaints about the company (don’t @ me communists).
Not happening. Article is compete FUD. Not in the interest of the CCP to do so. To think so is laughable.
Une chose que je ne comprends pas, Jack Ma n'était pas parti à la retraite ?
Fake news
This would have been all over the likes of CNBC of it had any basis in reality
Est-ce que "nationaliser" implique un achat des entreprises ou tout simplement leur saisie par le gouvernement ? Et si ça se passe j'imagine que les marchés financiers Chinois vont êtres annihilés, ou peut-être pas; tout le délire avec Tesla et Musk me fait douter de la présence de quelconque rationalités dans le marché ces jours-ci.
Et Jack Ma toujours "disparu", c'est flippant quand même.
Pour ceux qui se poserait la question, la raison officielle pour l'intervention du gouvernement dans la gestion d'Alibaba est que cette société a récemment mis les pieds dans le secteur bancaire, ce qui apparemment ne leur était pas vraiment permis.
Alibaba avait mis en place un système de crédit à la consommation intégré au site, et il y avait des douilles à ce niveau là.
What a bad newspaper that doesn't even get its first sentence of the article to match it's headline?
may be working on a plan to nationalize Jack Ma's Alibaba
Une très bonne initiative ! Si seulement nous avions le courage de faire pareil...
The Fall Of Certificate Authorities And The Rise Of Handshake
TokenSoft is the volume leader in compliant token sales.
The open protocol for tokenized debt.
A secure online platform for buying, selling, and storing digital currencies.
A second layer, off-chain scaling proposal for bitcoin.
Ensuring the blockchain is inexpensive and accessible to everyone.
An open protocol for decentralized exchange on the ethereum blockchain.