151–160 of 334 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thankfully most cryptos are moving to proof-of-stake.
Is proof-of-stake a proven technology yet though? Has it been shown to function without loopholes or exploits?
https://viktorbunin.medium.com/proof-of-stakes-security-mode...
Someone that was predicted to own 5% (1mm) of all Bitcoins just died in Costa Rica I doubt they had a survivorship and secession plan for their bitcoins and I doubt Bitcoins become less scarce Shorting Microstrategy and Coinbase via puts are good ideas though. Microstrategy isnt overleveraged yet but its easy for them to be. Coinbase is just a share dump, thats the entire purpose of direct listings. This has nothing…
that prediction is bogus. they were OG, yes, but it's highly improbable they were able to hold on to all those bitcoins. 2009-2011 was a time when people threw literally hundreds to thousands bitcoins for dumb things like socks and pizzas. and those are real world assets - it was much easier to spend BTC for virtual assets like hosting or vpn or gambling. no doubt the guy was beyond rich, but i'm almost certain they…
I think he was aware of technological solutions native to Bitcoin, but I just dont think he would have put them in place unless he was terminally ill and had some lead time to do it. This has nothing to do with being a billionaire and is distinct from drowning on vacation as an in shape 41 year old
He’s had an objectively gargantuan sum of money for a very long time, everything you said is true for single digit millionaires too
Or a thousandaire in Romania
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that prediction is bogus. they were OG, yes, but it's highly improbable they were able to hold on to all those bitcoins. 2009-2011 was a time when people threw literally hundreds to thousands bitcoins for dumb things like socks and pizzas. and those are real world assets - it was much easier to spend BTC for virtual assets like hosting or vpn or gambling. no doubt the guy was beyond rich, but i'm almost certain they…
Because Mirceau made their trust issues with institutions to be pretty clear I think he was aware of technological solutions native to Bitcoin, but I just dont think he would have put them in place unless he was terminally ill and had some lead time to do it. This has nothing to do with being a billionaire and is distinct from drowning on vacation as an in shape 41 year old He’s had an objectively gargantuan sum of m…
and since you say he was technical - well there are tehnical solutions to do that, multisigs, sharded keys, etc.
Many traders still predict Bitcoin to be over 100k by the end of the year. December could align with the bubble peak due to Bitcoin‘s investment cycle triggered by the halving events. That could wreck his short position but if he’s lucky, it will burst earlier.
How many people who aren’t invested in it themselves are predicting it to be over 100k? The whole system will continue to work until the money isn’t coming in. I know nothing about investing, but come on, this one is obvious. The only question is when will the money stop coming in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My online banks keep getting worse, crypto keeps getting better. That resonates with me after my bank shut down my ability to transfer money (via eTransfer) because I hit their arbitrary $20,000 limit for the month. I had to wait THREE weeks before I could send another transfer.
Every bank will reimburse you in the event of getting hacked or fraudulent withdrawals (to varying degrees), so withdrawal limits reduce their liability. Bitcoin doesn't provide any protections in the case of your money being stolen, so it doesn't impose any limits. Depends what you prioritise I suppose.
Fraudulent withdrawals (eg: check forgery, ACH fraud) are caused by the nature of our high trust banking system.
Account takeovers are easiest to pull off via social engineering vectors.
Alternatively build a good key management UX and don't talk to any Nigerian princes. I'd rather prioritize that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except if you believe, as the author does, that the entire market is just scams and insider manipulation there is no meaning to be gleaned from any of the numbers. If it's all a sham it will blow up at some point, it's just a question of when, but that will almost certainly be precipitated by some unpredictable external event.
That’s a very bad thesis to trade options on. The author believes that BTC is overvalued, but if you look at their reasons for believing it’s overvalued, some of them could have applied to BTC at any point in time over the past several years, and the rest could have applied to BTC and any point in time since it’s creation. By buying puts on bitcoin (derivatives), they’re not only betting that they’re correct, but als…
I love this sort of thing. He’s making a bet, explains his reasoning, and does it in the open! That’s great. I disagree that there’s no tech here. IMO public ledgers that never sleep are far superior(thanks to the hard work of many people over the past decade), and their advantage over retail banking will only increase. My online banks keep getting worse, crypto keeps getting better. Think about this: banks are CLOSE…
What kind of a bank do you use that doesn't allow you to send money 24/7?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are making up the qualities of good currency, and then conclude BTC has none of them. Qualities of good money are 1) Durability (not losing value with time), 2) Portability, 3) Scarcity (limited supply), 5) Divisibility, 6) Acceptability and 7) Storability. BTC has all of them except maybe 6). And I'm no defender of BTC, I don't like it and I don't think it will ever be the main currency. It will be at best like…
C'mon now BTC certainly doesn't have (1) it's down 50% in the last month. I'd quibble with (2) because portability does imply a low cost of portability which compared to USD it does not have. (3) It has. (4) It has. (5) It definitely isn't broadly accepted and (6) it's not great at either, just look at what percentage of the coins have already been lost. 20-30% in a decade. Every random walk down the time line leads…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Mirceau made their trust issues with institutions to be pretty clear I think he was aware of technological solutions native to Bitcoin, but I just dont think he would have put them in place unless he was terminally ill and had some lead time to do it. This has nothing to do with being a billionaire and is distinct from drowning on vacation as an in shape 41 year old He’s had an objectively gargantuan sum of m…
becoming a billionaire most likely changes your perspective a lot. and he became billionaire 7 years ago. that's plenty of time to think of how to preserve bitcoins such that they aren't lost when one passes away. and since you say he was technical - well there are tehnical solutions to do that, multisigs, sharded keys, etc.
Even if I agree with you on bitcoin having an intrinsic value less than that of toilet paper, these reasons would have been true before the recent high point too. Instead, it reached that high point and an equivalent put would have expired worthless. Meaning you would have lost all of your investment.
I think shorting is a better idea as it relies less on timing. But with the fed pumping massive amounts of money into the us economy, I think you are still not unlikely to get margin called for a bet that the fed will not destroy the value of the dollar faster than the bitcoin goes back where it came from.