DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,092
What was the point of it? What argument did those comments support? Genuinely it is unclear and not well articulated.
Bitcoin in a hyperbolic bubble
- Thread starter Duke of Marmalade
- Start date
- Status
What was the point of it? What argument did those comments support? Genuinely it is unclear and not well articulated.
There are different stakeholders in crypto. I'm sure there are more recent arrivals who reacted superficially. There are also those who don't and didn't. Nobody will argue with the suggestion that bitcoin has yet to mature. However, there's more to it than someone notable tweeting. Much debated in these parts but I'm quite confident that there is something tangible at the heart of this...but we all make up our own minds on that.
Be aware also that media always look to attach a narrative to a market movement...the first narrative that they can find. Nothing goes up in a straight line - it was due a pullback - just like we had a 30% pullback last month.
Wolfie, you've been an active participant in these discussions over the duration. I'm quite confident you know what's at play here - and it has little to do with a genuine interest in furthering the discussion. Take no notice.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,092
I have come to realize, that @tecate is incapable of recognising any critique of BTC. That is why he structures all his responses with a get out of free clauses 'some people reacted, some people didn't, 'it isn't correlated, sometimes it is correlated', 'BTC isn't mature, it will solve the issues'.
What is ironic is that this type of closed-mindedness is the antithesis of crypto. If anything the simple fact is there are many people in the community that criticise, hence the bitcoin forks.
I don't need Tecate to respond to these comments, he has already shown his colours in many other threads and resorted to insults.
I just hope any newcomers to this thread don't fall for his hyperbole on the topic. I think the best statement has been the claim that BTC mining will actually solve climate change..
Maybe we should move onto how Bitcoin can cure cancer.
What is ironic is that this type of closed-mindedness is the antithesis of crypto. If anything the simple fact is there are many people in the community that criticise, hence the bitcoin forks.
I don't need Tecate to respond to these comments, he has already shown his colours in many other threads and resorted to insults.
I just hope any newcomers to this thread don't fall for his hyperbole on the topic. I think the best statement has been the claim that BTC mining will actually solve climate change.
.Maybe we should move onto how Bitcoin can cure cancer.
NotMyRealName
Registered User
- Messages
- 113
@tecate ,I neither have a philosophical or financial interest in bitcoin. It seemed to me that Wolfie felt he may be getting light-headed at bitcoin altitude. So it's purely a book-your-profit view. One can still be part of the story of bitcoins success even if you took early profit. It's the psychology of profit and loss not the philosophy of Blockchain. Please accept these peace offerings. Tulips attached..... they're still around and lovely to look at..
Last edited:
Steven Barrett
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,327
Would you support a return to the gold standard? That is the impression that I get from Bitcoin aficionado's who constantly talk about fiat money and the weakness of it. You can therefore assume that they think the currency should be backed by something i.e. gold or Bitcoin.
I believe in hard money. I would certainly support the gold standard not having been done away with in the first instance. However, given where we are right now, I'm happy with the bitcoin standard as a counterweight to rampant money printing. I don't think people's savings should be stolen by stealth to hide the screwups that governments make or pay for their pet projects (that may not be in the ordinary joe's interests). Gold can be counterfeited, it is largely centralised - meaning it's under central authority control - leading to the manipulation that Henry Ford identified 100 years ago (and every point in between). Bitcoin will have a similar battle albeit that it stands a better chance as it is much easier to self custody.
Other than that, I'm not suggesting that sovereign currencies be done away with - just that regular people have a safe haven where their personal wealth doesn't wither away (or be confiscated, etc.).
Can't argue with that - there's never a bad time to book a profit.
Steven Barrett
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,327
With the current prices of Bitcoin and the volatily of it, can't people's personal wealth fall away fairly dramatically if they buy it at the wrong time. It has fallen by 34% in three days in the past. It has also risen over 1600% in a number of months. How good a storer of wealth can it be if it has wild swings in value?
Also, is it a replacement of gold or currency? Was it not invented as a decentralised currency that people used to buy stuff with (mainly drugs and weapons on the dark web in the early days)? You'd be made to use it to buy anything these days. Apologies if all this has been discussed already, I haven't read the previous 15 pages of this thread.
NotMyRealName
Registered User
- Messages
- 113
Then of course there's another observation in the Bitcoin,Gold, Fiat Currency menage-a-trois.
Fiat currency value to the average punter is largely ethereal , and has no real physical practical application value. Gold has its physical uses and can be conspicuously displayed as a signal of wealth.
Hard to imagine bitcoin necklaces or Pussy Galore helping BitcoinFinger to corner the market.......
Just sayin'.....
Fiat currency value to the average punter is largely ethereal , and has no real physical practical application value. Gold has its physical uses and can be conspicuously displayed as a signal of wealth.
Hard to imagine bitcoin necklaces or Pussy Galore helping BitcoinFinger to corner the market.......
Just sayin'.....
If you have a short term time preference, then sure - you have to be cognisant of the volatility. However, over the longer term, it has performed as a store of value. It's entirely logical to me that it needs to go through these phases of price discovery. Think about it - you launch bitcoin tomorrow as a finite asset and it maintains that one price from day one or that price is discovered along the adoption curve?
Volatility is unavoidable and will be a feature of bitcoin for some years to come. By the way, lets not forget that gold has gone through similar volatility in its history but somehow people don't seem to get as animated about that.
It's being adopted right now as a store of value/digital gold. It has the characteristics to take on that role. It is also being used as a settlement layer for larger transactions. Some want it to act as a transactional currency - and it's currently limited in that ability for micro-transactions due to scaling issues. These are issues that are being worked on by developers (by way of layer 2 solutions eg. lightning network). So rather than write it off on that basis, people should be aware that this use case may come back into play. Even if it never does, there's enough depth in that first use case for it to thrive.
In its very early days, yes it was used on the dark web - but that is not the extent to its use case. We've seen growth in its use as a means of exchange in places like Nigeria where capital controls are draconian. I've used it myself in recent weeks to move $ out of a developing country (legitimate $ that was brought in according to the bureaucratic system that exists here) simply because I don't want to go through the bs they have in place to get my money out (because in countries like this, it doesn't feel like its ever your money...and in actual fact, it isn't - it's theirs).
On the subject of criminal use, cash remains the king for illicit trade. Meanwhile, recent studies have shown that no more than 1% of btc transactions are related to illicit trade.
That's a reasonable point. It's been discussed at length here over the last 3-4 years. My own view is that you've more or less stated that it's used as jewelry as a store of wealth. There are plenty of polished rocks that are used to make jewelry - but the interest is in gold because its valuable. It's valuable because its finite. Meanwhile bitcoin is more finite. Bitcoin also offers other advantages ...such as the ability to transmit it globally to whomever you want practically instantly. You can custody it yourself and cross borders with it - without the risk of confiscation.
That's my take - whilst many here take the opposing view. I don't think there's any point in re-hashing that - it is what it is. The only other point I'd make is that there is also a generational shift here in terms of how digital currencies are perceived and I'm sure that's playing in to views expressed here on AAM.
Yes and no. The high altitude gave pause for thought, for sure. Im not a bitcoin-to-the-moon maximalist, and while I accept it may return to zero one day, such a return will have nothing to do with the perception today as nothing more than a BOHA.
Either a fundamental flaw in its tech, as yet to be detected, or the emergence of a superior piece of technology that does everything bitcoin is supposed, but only better.
That said, I only sold a portion of my bitcoin holding. In part to cover my outlay, which makes sense to me considering the price went to multiples the cost dollar average of my outlay.
I also cashed in another equal portion pure profit, as a feel-good factor....but as I mentioned, the feeling of FOMO arose once more.
In the end, I miss having my bitcoin more than I enjoy having my fiat returned with profit. So the consideration is to use the profit to buy back in, but I will take my time - bitcoin is here for the long-term, so no rush.
Overall, my initial foray into bitcoin about 4yrs ago was purely speculative and out of curiosity. But it is has been a great education more than anything else. It has certainly opened my eyes to reconsidering many perceptions I have about the world I live in (Covid also). I would recommend it to everyone
I made the point above that bitcoin is closely correlated to the fortunes of the technology sector, it is afterall a child of the tech boom. That however is also it's fundamental weakness it cannot exist independent of technology. People that hold gold hold it not just because it is valuable but also because it is indestructible and exists independent of man and technology. If the power grid was to collapse in an armagedon scenario where would bitcoin be? As was pointed out above bitcoin requires enormous amounts of energy just to create it is completely dependent on modern industrial and technical predominance
NotMyRealName
Registered User
- Messages
- 113
....and what about say, water? ( I have a position on this....even before Michael Burry's ( see The Big Short).
It's Finite, absolutely vital , even tulips need it....but we put very little value on it...It's not sexy but my investment has ticked up nearly 200% in about 10 years with volatility between, let's say, "normal" investment parameters. Eventually, you may be offering your Bitcoin for my water.......and I may not sell it.
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,588
I am not unsympathetic to the point but just to get the electricity dependence in perspective. Let’s say there was a crippling global carbon tax imposed. It would drive miners out of business but there would be an awful awful long way to go before the integrity of the blockchain was compromised. It is currently operating at 21 trillion times the capacity that Satoshi originally thought appropriate to secure the blockchain.
So you're presenting a scenario where the bitcoin network as a whole goes down. The network is distributed over 195 countries. It's been a bad day at the office for planet earth then if ALL parts of the planet have been struck down such that there is no power whatsoever. Imagine yourself under those conditions. You're talking about complete societal breakdown. You don't need money to pay for anything - you'll need might. I'll try to pay for something with gold and you won't have any idea if its real or fake. Secondly, are we going to spend all day melting it down to the exact value that equals the loaf of bread I'm trying to buy off you (given that gold fails in terms of divisibility)? But if we have no power worldwide, then the rule of law doesn't exist - we just have chaos and the 'currency' is the baseball bat or whatever other weapon is lying around.
Availability is an interesting point though. A day after former Fed Reserve Chair & current treasury secretary Janet Yellen criticised bitcoins shortcomings, FedWire - the funds settlement system operated by US Federal Reserve Banks - went offline. In it's 12 years of existence, the bitcoin network has never been offline.
I'm not sure what your point is specifically? However, water is a commodity. I believe that there's now a water futures market. If you're comparing water and bitcoin in terms of scarcity, then I would say that bitcoin is more perfectly finite. Water can be made - additional bitcoin can't. Lets take any commodity that becomes scarce. The price goes up - then new tech becomes feasible in attempting to find more of that resource. In the case of water desalination, such plants exist but they're few and far between because they're not economically feasible. In the scenario you describe, they would become feasible - and now you will have more sources/supply of that resource. Take gold as the example in that instance. It's price goes up and now other methods of mining it become economically viable. This scenario played out with oil in recent years. Remember a few years ago all the talk about peak oil? The price went up - then new tech came along (fracking)..and now nobody talks much about us running out of that resource.
In considering bitcoin in that context, scarcity has been designed in. As its adopted and it becomes more scarce, there is absolutely nothing that can be done to produce more of it. It's perfectly finite. Everyone on the planet knows how much bitcoin has ever been issued, how much has been issued today and what the ultimate limit is.
Last edited:
I get your optimism for BTC - and I find your arguments interesting. But I'm not sure why you feel the need to make it a "zero sum game" vs traditional banking networks. Or if you're going to make the comparison then at least be accurate about it. Fedwire was down for a short while but all activity was transacted before end of day.
The BTC network is certainly more distributed. But it also handles a tiny fraction of the volume and value of something like Fedwire. It also had much longer processing time and significantly higher transaction charges than Fed - or similar.
That's not to invalidate BTC. It's just that it would struggle to replace existing networks. I don't think most people / corporates would accept a $20 charge for every transaction and a wait of up to days to complete. Fedwire is a cent or two and seconds to confirm
However underlying blockchain technology is being used for regular cash movements between banks
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,588
I wonder what exactly this means. Several aspects come to mind. A chain of blocks of data, time stamped and linked by their hashes. Private/public keys. Compression of multiple transactions into Merkle trees. All these things might have a usage in conventional banking. But Proof of Work? Please don't tell me banks are engaging in zillions of hash puzzles per second. As Yellen said, the most inefficient mechanism one could imagine.
Last edited:
@Duke of Marmalade are you suffering from Stockholm syndrome, the new Patty Hearst?, you are talking all the bitcoin jargon now
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,588
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 374
How many countries is it available in? Who has access to it? How long before a transaction has settled and you are guaranteed it will not be reversed? Does it work on days beginning with 'S'?
All of the current systems have their limitations in terms of final settlement time, transaction size limits, geographic coverage and accessibility. If you want you'll be able to cherry pick transactions that make any of them seem like the 'best', including bitcoin.
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 374
On this topic, Jack Mallers is probably the guy doing the most in the bitcoin ecosystem to improve the payments use-case.
Bitcoiners would consider bitcoin a rock solid settlement layer, but the downsides are volatilty of bitcoin price and transaction limits, fees and variable times for transactions to confirm. Jack is attempting to address both of those downsides with his Strike Global service: volatility by conversion to stable coins so balances are held in units pegged to fiat, and transaction time/fees/limits by using the lightning network layer on which bitcoin transactions settle instantly.
This approach no doubt introduces other challenges such as opening of lightning channels and reliance on stable coins, but it's interesting.
I'm reserving judgment either way until I see how it works out for him.
Here's a 15 minute read from him about it if you're curious: https://jimmymow.medium.com/announcing-strike-global-2392b908f611
Bitcoiners would consider bitcoin a rock solid settlement layer, but the downsides are volatilty of bitcoin price and transaction limits, fees and variable times for transactions to confirm. Jack is attempting to address both of those downsides with his Strike Global service: volatility by conversion to stable coins so balances are held in units pegged to fiat, and transaction time/fees/limits by using the lightning network layer on which bitcoin transactions settle instantly.
This approach no doubt introduces other challenges such as opening of lightning channels and reliance on stable coins, but it's interesting.
I'm reserving judgment either way until I see how it works out for him.
Here's a 15 minute read from him about it if you're curious: https://jimmymow.medium.com/announcing-strike-global-2392b908f611
- Status