171–180 of 350 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's likely that market makers are holding the ~$15k floor to prevent a liquidation cascade.
Market makers aren't in the business of keeping prices up. Market participants that do this aren't market makers anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really not sure where the line is between those two.
The real one is promoting crypto by playing a "foolish" version of himself on camera in exchange for money.
If he was promoting FTX on his own personal account like so many "influencers" do, then I would be ok criticizing him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen a lot of people say this (and I'm sure you're all correct!) but I never understod the link between BTC and Tether. Multiple attempts to explain it have gone over my head. Am I just stupid?
Consider it such: there is a company that wants bitcoin to stay above 15k. Every time the order books show a significant decline below 15k, that company issues new tokens that are treated as dollars by exchanges in order to buy bitcoin. This stays very much viable. Right up to the point that it isn't. Then, people will wonder what is backing those tokens, and if they want to risk the event that they aren't worth thei…
It's incredible that SBF was being touted by Sequoia, WEF, Fortune, chumming it up with Clinton and Blair in the Bahamas, getting meetings and kid glove treatment with the SEC, relatively glowing profile as a "do-gooder" by the NYT. All while FTX had a Chief Regulatory Officer who was basically a career white-collar criminal. It beggars belief that anyone who dug half an inch into this story wouldn't have seen 90,000…
Wait, wasn't the NYT supposed to take a very critical look at everything in "tech", as a matter of editorial policy? Why were they giving such a glowing (no pun intended!) endorsement of crypto, of all things? Something doesn't add up here.
> The laughter has faded. Over the last few days, the collapse of a so-called stablecoin called TerraUSD has sent the crypto market into meltdown, accelerating a dramatic sell-off that tanked the price of Bitcoin and Ether, the two most valuable cryptocurrencies. At Baha Mar, Mr. Bankman-Fried was throwing a giant party for the industry; this past week, he was attempting to restore calm, tweeting long threads about the state of the market.
Then discussing how his awkward, unkempt appearance is actually calculated and intentional. And look at the final paragraph:
> Outside, the convention center was emptying, as hundreds of crypto enthusiasts headed for the airport. It was the calm before the coming meltdown. To leave the resort, guests had to walk through the Baha Mar casino, the largest in the Caribbean, a brightly lit hall of flashing slot machines.
The whole thing is framed around this guy hanging out with celebrities and lobbying government officials while his market crashes. Reading it for the first time 6 months after it was written, I think it holds up as an accurate profile with a bit of foreshadowing of what was to come.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With every crypto collapse there seems to be an associated failure by the media to do any real digging. The same thing happened with Theranos where, with a few exceptions, the media fawned over Elizabeth Holmes. It's hard to tell if the media has gotten worse at their jobs or they've always been this bad and I'm just getting older. There are plenty of earlier scams and bubbles (Enron, dot-com bubble) that slipped und…
> It's hard to tell if the media has gotten worse at their jobs It's not that "the media" has gotten worse at their jobs. Rather, there simply a lot less funding for reporters. The hit in funding has become much worse in local reporting -- especially local newspapers. However, if this is viewed as a training ground for the few large national/international news organizations, it's easy to see how this has a profound i…
Newsrooms are completely different from investigative digging into stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the onus on reporters to ferret out fraud has the same moral weight as tobacco lobbyists? Except they make $35k/year, get fired every 6 months as their newsrooms undergo layoffs due to lack of clicks, and get sued for investigating anyone powerful enough to matter? Can't imagine why more people don't sign up for that.
Let's say the onus is on reporters to not take money in exchange for glowing coverage. Having a mortgage to pay is no excuse. If you can't be an honest reporter, don't report at all. I think that's a reasonable standard to hold them to. If you can't hack it as an honest reporter, then go get a job in retail or something. Anybody who took money from these people is not a victim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“The media” is mostly just a bunch of 20-40 year olds with liberal arts bachelors degrees, trying to make ends meet and feed their families. Serious investigative reporters with the smarts and experience to dive deep were always the exception, maybe a handful in the world at any given time. So IMO, “they’ve always been this bad” is the answer, but it’s not entirely fair. Kind of like saying the cooks at McDonald’s ha…
> Serious investigative reporters with the smarts and experience to dive deep were always the exception, maybe a handful in the world at any given time. Correct answer. People dramatically underestimate the extent to which reporters are stenographers: they go to relevant people, get quotes, write some background around the quotes (which itself is derived from previous statements), and hit publish. Almost every busine…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consider it such: there is a company that wants bitcoin to stay above 15k. Every time the order books show a significant decline below 15k, that company issues new tokens that are treated as dollars by exchanges in order to buy bitcoin. This stays very much viable. Right up to the point that it isn't. Then, people will wonder what is backing those tokens, and if they want to risk the event that they aren't worth thei…
Ok, so roughly speaking, 1 BTC != USD 15k, 1 BTC = USDT 15k, and people broadly agree 1 USDT = 1USD (for now)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy coins aren't. The problem with Bitcoin is, that it CAN be regulated to death.
And privacy coins come with the appended issue that software issues could hide an inflation bug, which isn't provable at that moment. Is Bitcoin anonymous? Nope, but with some diligence, you can be quite protected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen a lot of people say this (and I'm sure you're all correct!) but I never understod the link between BTC and Tether. Multiple attempts to explain it have gone over my head. Am I just stupid?
Consider it such: there is a company that wants bitcoin to stay above 15k. Every time the order books show a significant decline below 15k, that company issues new tokens that are treated as dollars by exchanges in order to buy bitcoin. This stays very much viable. Right up to the point that it isn't. Then, people will wonder what is backing those tokens, and if they want to risk the event that they aren't worth thei…
That said, the Tether situation is clearly fraudulent in some way, just not the one people usually put forward. So stay away, if you aren't already.