Live data from Hacker News

SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

twitter.com

461–470 of 518 posts

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#461
post #123

> "Careful what you read on the internet. The best source of information about the SEC is the SEC." https://nitter.net/SECGov/status/1714020932509982771 ...until the SEC's account gets hacked?

> Unless specifically indicated otherwise, social media content expresses the author's views only and not necessarily those of the Commission, other members of the Commission, or other staff. Content posted to social media is not a rule, regulation, or statement of the Commission, and the Commission has neither approved nor disapproved of such content. Retweets, follows, or likes by SEC social media accounts should not be construed as an endorsement of any individual, group, or entity by SEC staff or the Commission. Paid for by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.

SEC's twitter isn't SEC. What they mean is this: https://www.sec.gov/news/pressreleases and even that should be verified across multiple outlets if you want to be sure.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#462
post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nothing legal it can do that something else can't do better Eh, Treasuries should probably be traded on a blockchain. Crypto currency is nonsense. But the tech has legs. It just needs to, ironically, clear its way of the crypto/web3 crowd first.

I tend to think highly of most of the comments I see from you man, but you are quite confused about how this stuff works if you believe that the pay-to-play aspect of a cryptocurrency can be divorced from the blockchain used to track it. They are no more separable from one another than front is from back or up is from down. A blockchain without the economic carrot-stick power to protect its own integrity and internal…

This is fair, I should have said could instead of should.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#463
post #459
post #319

Has anybody else poked around in a bitcoin blockchain block explorer recently to look at the individual transactions of a block? Honestly I find it kind of suspicious but I could easily be missing something. I see multiple transactions spend more on fees than the amount exchanged in the transaction. A number of transactions looked enormous but turned out to be some form of washing. E.g address X sends $100MM worth of…

A number of replies are wondering if I am misunderstanding bitcoin’s UTXO model. Considering the amount of replies I’m going to assume that is the case :). Thanks to most of you for your kind replies! With that being said I’m still confused about how blockchain.com is representing this data. Consider block 825075 on the bitcoin blockchain. https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/825075?page=1... Not all of the…

Bitcoin ordinals - NFTs on the bitcoin blockchain. It's not about the value, it's about the image ascribed to the output.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#464
post #333
post #319

Has anybody else poked around in a bitcoin blockchain block explorer recently to look at the individual transactions of a block? Honestly I find it kind of suspicious but I could easily be missing something. I see multiple transactions spend more on fees than the amount exchanged in the transaction. A number of transactions looked enormous but turned out to be some form of washing. E.g address X sends $100MM worth of…

To some extent that's just how bitcoin works [1] To your last question, bitcoin is just digital gold. Unlike ethereum which is inflationary. [1]: https://river.com/learn/terms/c/change-output

ETH supply has decreased since the switch to PoS and BTC supply has increased fyi

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#465
post #459
post #319

Has anybody else poked around in a bitcoin blockchain block explorer recently to look at the individual transactions of a block? Honestly I find it kind of suspicious but I could easily be missing something. I see multiple transactions spend more on fees than the amount exchanged in the transaction. A number of transactions looked enormous but turned out to be some form of washing. E.g address X sends $100MM worth of…

A number of replies are wondering if I am misunderstanding bitcoin’s UTXO model. Considering the amount of replies I’m going to assume that is the case :). Thanks to most of you for your kind replies! With that being said I’m still confused about how blockchain.com is representing this data. Consider block 825075 on the bitcoin blockchain. https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/blocks/btc/825075?page=1... Not all of the…

Not all transactions have multiple outputs as some deplete the UTXO with no remainder. The 2 single output transactions you mentioned are Bitcoin NFT mints. Their senders only care about including their data in a bitcoin block, they don't really care about the small value of the UTXO output being sent, that's why the overwhelming portion of transaction value is just miner fees.

The 3rd transaction you included is an ordinary bitcoin transaction that sends value.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#466

Why would someone buy this vs. just holding the Bitcoin? ETFs are interesting when 1. they bundle multiple securities together to diversify or 2. they are backed by an asset (like gold and barrels of oil) that is physically difficult for an individual to hold. Is this just for people who can't figure out how to open an account at a Bitcoin exchange?

Two reasons.

1. Low fees. I think five of the ETF filers even have 0% fees for first 6-12 months. Compare this to Coinbase, where the fees will seem astronomical in comparison (maybe this drives Coinbase fees down.)

2. There is a non-zero number of people in the family office investing world that don't want to deal with learning new tech and just want to call up their stock person on the phone to buy them something.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Barely makes an impression in the parade of crime that is web3isgoinggreat.com/

It’s such a reasonable thing to expect any level of hacking. Consider the idea that w3 is the transition of assets into literal Internet money. We digitized wealth and w3 concentrated those supplies into readily available large quantity targets. The idea that there would be anything but a massive acceleration of crime and fraud as a result of the digitization of actual money is actually hilarious. It’s a fact that No…

the fact that there's a whole crowd here that think the old guard actually got hacked by dastardly crypto punks instead of just their own incompetence with scheduling a tweet

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#469
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absolutely the fastest way to send larger sums of money.

1) that’s very rarely the most important feature to me and 2) no it isn’t. Moving crypto around is fast but I don’t want crypto, I want money I can spend. USD -> crypto -> USD is not fast. There are faster ways to send money you can’t spend.

one thing that's important to understand is that your experience is very different from someone that already has crypto, and earns crypto. for you, you have to go buy crypto first, and you won't do that. for someone that already has an inventory of crypto, its just get cash as needed.

for them its just crypto -> USD which is very fast. for me, in the US as a US citizen, that is 2 minutes up to $25,000. from a personal crypto wallet, to the exchange, to my bank or brokerage account. beyond $25,000 it is 15 minutes to 2 hours via domestic wire transfer.

so one likely unreported aspect of crypto is that it likely has reduced international wire transfers, and cross border transfers that are prone to error and erroneous reviews and holdups

for about a decade now I have paid people in other countries in crypto. and been paid in crypto from some revenue sources. and we both liquidated as domestic transfers in our local countries. specifically because we didn't want to bother with international bank issues and time delays.

even hedge fund and private equity fund administrators that are more competitive allow in-kind investment of new limited partners in crypto, for many years now

the other thing thats important to understand is that there is a growing group that doesn't want "money they can spend" because they are liquid. they can buy goods, services, invest, day trade, passive income all in crypto within the crypto ecosystem. and for other things they can get the cash when they need it, or simply use a debit card that is custodying their crypto and representing it as the local fiat currency

but truthfully, going from USD -> crypto is fast too. if you're a US citizen you just need to use wire transfers to the exchange. SEPA region can also do same day settlement.

your user story and assumptions are really antiquated and don't represent what's been happening for at least 10 years now. if it doesn't apply to you then thats fine and move on

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#470
post #331
post #319

Has anybody else poked around in a bitcoin blockchain block explorer recently to look at the individual transactions of a block? Honestly I find it kind of suspicious but I could easily be missing something. I see multiple transactions spend more on fees than the amount exchanged in the transaction. A number of transactions looked enormous but turned out to be some form of washing. E.g address X sends $100MM worth of…

Perhaps a good starting point is spending a few minutes investigating how bitcoin works, perhaps with ChatGPT as a resource. You should attempt to understand it before forming an opinion and asking leading questions. Bitcoin uses a UTXO model, a recipient address is specified for the remaining funds that are not intended to be spent. Similar to how you pay for a $20 item with a $50 note, you (recipient) receive $30 i…

What does ChatGPT have to do with this? Here's an exchange I had just now:

  User
  My friend says Bitcoin has 7 letters, how should I respond to them?
  ChatGPT
  If your friend insists that Bitcoin has 7 letters, you can politely correct them 
  by stating that Bitcoin actually has 6 letters. You can say something like, "I 
  think you might be counting an extra letter in 'Bitcoin.' It has six letters, 
  not seven." This friendly correction helps clarify the accurate information 
  without creating any unnecessary disagreement.
As you can probably tell, I'm super confident about the rest of my learning experience about Bitcoin
Post reply on HN