Seeing as this is the biggest of news for WEXFORD rather than bitcoin you'll probably get away scot free without the savaging I usually get for bringing a bit of good news to the discussion...well played sirMassive news for BTC!!!
"Comparing Bitcoin to Ponzi Schemes is unfair...
- Thread starter Brendan Burgess
- Start date
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 379
Great news for Wexican ex-pats in far flung places like Leitrim who are sending remittances back to the mother land.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,090
A clear sign of the massive adoption that is just around the corner......Massive news for BTC!!!
Wexford’s first Bitcoin ATM installed at Gorey shop
GOREY has welcomed its first Bitcoin ATM machine at the XL Shop and Asian/Brazilian store on Gorey’s Main Street.www.independent.ie
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,090
The US Department of Justice is now one of the biggest holders of Bitcoin....A currency created by a unknown person that becomes the defacto currency for the dark web, leading to efforts of the US to shut down illegal activities (Silk Road), and now capturing other criminals.....Maybe it was the US all along, after all they did create the private web browser ToR.
I jest, interesting conspiracy theory all the same! Can't wait to be berated and attacked by some members of this forum for daring to speak out against their precious Bitcoin.
On another note, I attended an event with a number of large institutional investors recently regarding digital asset strategies. It is definitely not being treated as Ponzi scheme, but the general consensus is how can they get exposure to it without holding it directly / what are the investment opportunities. The conversation never touched on adoption of it as a currency, it is purely viewed in the context of an emerging investment asset.
I jest, interesting conspiracy theory all the same! Can't wait to be berated and attacked by some members of this forum for daring to speak out against their precious Bitcoin.
On another note, I attended an event with a number of large institutional investors recently regarding digital asset strategies. It is definitely not being treated as Ponzi scheme, but the general consensus is how can they get exposure to it without holding it directly / what are the investment opportunities. The conversation never touched on adoption of it as a currency, it is purely viewed in the context of an emerging investment asset.
So what? These are probably the same institutions that bought synthetic CDOs by the skip load back in the day...
It must be true 'cos there's far greater alpha being shared around on the 'business luncheon' circuit by comparison with what us poor plebs have to settle for.So what? These are probably the same institutions that bought synthetic CDOs by the skip load back in the day...
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,090
So what? These are probably the same institutions that bought synthetic CDOs by the skip load back in the day...
They are not.
It is important in the discourse of Bitcoin on this forum. Posters often cite news stories regarding institutions using crypto as evidence of adoption of Bitcoin. It is inferred this 'adoption' aligns to the original use case of Bitcoin as a decentralized global currency.
However, my opinion is that this is not causation and the 'adoption' by financial institutions is as an investment product first and foremost, just like they saw opportunities to profit from synthetic CDOs, MBS, Weather Options etc Bitcoin and digital assets is just another conduit for these market players to profit.
The continued adoption as an investment product does legitimize bitcoin as an investment for a retail investor. The market infrastructure will continue to mature and regulation will occur (FSB announcment yesterday), making it more secure. This does not reduce the price risk associated with Bitcoin but it will reduce the operational risks associated (flash crashes, exchange security weaknesses).
This is all on the basis of Bitcoin being adopted as an investment asset and not as a currency. There however remains uncertainty as whilst FInancial institutions want to introduce clients to it as an investment asset and profit via bid/offer spreads and fees, other market players can't profit in the same way. For example Paypal, it too wants to profit from BTC, but its main profit mechanism is via offering it as a payment method. Thus we are heading to a fork in the road, companies want to profit from BTC, but it is split between an investment product or a payment product. My opinion is the investment product will win out.
Last edited:
As per his/her/their musings on the bitcointalk discussion board back in the day, Satoshi was well aware of the potential significance of bitcoin from a store of value perspective. In the same way as the early internet hit bottlenecks, so too has the bitcoin network. In 2017, the modest progress the network had made was stunted due to scaling issues - leading to transaction cost/transaction time issues. From that point, it has made headway as an inflation hedge, a store of value likened to digital gold and a credible & unique asset in its own right.
Enter 2021 and layer 2 scaling solution lightning network had finally gotten to a point where it could scale bitcoin payments. The lightning network has grown exponentially over the course of the past 18 months. There's bitcoin the asset and bitcoin the network. The likes of Strike is using the network for remittances with minimal slippage. As per its announcement yesterday, Coinbase is taking a similar approach, starting with the US->Mexico market. And meanwhile, bitcoin is gaining traction with direct micro-payments also.
All different use cases - all developing. I'm sure that some will end up accounting for more activity (depending of course on how you measure that) than others. However, it's not binary. The use of bitcoin for one use case doesn't negate its use for another. In fact, I would suggest it's quite the opposite. If you hold or utilise bitcoin for one use case, isn't there a greater likelihood that you'll use it for another use case from time to time also?
Enter 2021 and layer 2 scaling solution lightning network had finally gotten to a point where it could scale bitcoin payments. The lightning network has grown exponentially over the course of the past 18 months. There's bitcoin the asset and bitcoin the network. The likes of Strike is using the network for remittances with minimal slippage. As per its announcement yesterday, Coinbase is taking a similar approach, starting with the US->Mexico market. And meanwhile, bitcoin is gaining traction with direct micro-payments also.
All different use cases - all developing. I'm sure that some will end up accounting for more activity (depending of course on how you measure that) than others. However, it's not binary. The use of bitcoin for one use case doesn't negate its use for another. In fact, I would suggest it's quite the opposite. If you hold or utilise bitcoin for one use case, isn't there a greater likelihood that you'll use it for another use case from time to time also?
Last edited:
I gave up at this sentence because it makes no sense.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,090
You are extremely rude. If you don't have anything valuable to add to the conversation why even bother? Your moronic quips add no value to this conversation. Perhaps it is a lack of understanding or just that you want to get a rise out of people, they add zero value and just degrade the value of this forum.
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 379
If you inferred that from my posts, well that's your mistake. Adoption of bitcoin is anyone using it, where 'using it' is holding it, or transacting with it, for any reason.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,609
According to John Kelleher this is not possible.
JK is an avid BTC cultist believing its ultimate value will be €500k based on it achieving 15% penetration of global medium of exchange.John Kelleher of Investopedia said:
Suggesting that BTC can shrug off this medium of exchange dependence would be like some snake oil baldness cure becoming an investment asset even though only a tiny cadré of true believers are actually rubbing it on their scalps.
I would also like to clarify that I've discussed bitcoin here in the context of a number of use cases - not limited to store of value and means of exchange/payments. If anyone is suggesting that everything I've posted here has been exclusively in support of the use of bitcoin as a day to day currency, I've no idea how someone could arrive at that conclusion.
On a related note, I recall someone or other lamenting a while back at how bitcoin had become a markets and wall street plaything. The point is that bitcoin is opensource and decentralised and can be used by any person or organisation for whatever purpose they decide to put it to. That can range from the street vendor who took payment in bitcoin from me for a pupusa here yesterday, the Colorado governor announcing the ability for taxes to be paid in bitcoin later this year, the world's largest energy exploration/production company announcing a bitcoin mining project or Fidelity announcing the launch of its first Bitcoin Exchange Traded Fund.
On a related note, I recall someone or other lamenting a while back at how bitcoin had become a markets and wall street plaything. The point is that bitcoin is opensource and decentralised and can be used by any person or organisation for whatever purpose they decide to put it to. That can range from the street vendor who took payment in bitcoin from me for a pupusa here yesterday, the Colorado governor announcing the ability for taxes to be paid in bitcoin later this year, the world's largest energy exploration/production company announcing a bitcoin mining project or Fidelity announcing the launch of its first Bitcoin Exchange Traded Fund.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,090
I haven't inferred anything from your posts. If I am honest, I don't find that you have a strong position and it often changes to suit your needs of the conversation at a particular point. The above post is a good example.
I infer from it that you don't believe that Bitcoins only use case is as a currency? If so you appear to agree with me, what I am not sure is why you have often spent time mentioning Bitcoin as means of replacing central bank currencies and the fiat system?
Based on the above, I don't see any reason why you would disagree with my statements of financial institution adoption is about the opportunity to profit and not because of a belief in Bitcoin as a currency. That is why I don't believe it is a Ponzi scheme.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,609
My guess is they would have sold gas to the Nazis. Doesn't mean they in any way support those who buy its product or what they are doing with it.From tecate's link said:
So let me get this straight. ConocoPhillips will now get paid for something that was otherwise being flared off and wasted. Secondly, when it comes to its Corporate Responsibility and ESG policy, obligations & associated metrics, it now boasts a 63% reduction in CO2 equivalent emissions. And you want to spin this off as if its a bad thing?
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 379
Correct, which is why I've been talking about the coming institutional adoption as a store of value since a year and a half ago. I've personally been using it as a store of value for the best part of a decade.
I don't think I have. My main opinion is that adoption can/will continue in the manner it already has. I think that can continue in parallel to central bank currencies. I think that something like the El Salvador experiment in currency usage is less likely to succeed and if it does it's a long way away (10+ years probably) but I wouldn't rule it out. For a start it needs the lightning network or some other 2nd layer to become better than anything that exists right now.
No argument there.
DublinHead54
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,090
I think we are perfectly aligned
I view the experiments in El Salvador as superfluous to the overall adoption and that it will not succeed. Whether that failure comes from lack of buy in from citizens or from external pressures.
Where I view the real battle in the coming years is in the private for profit sector between Financial Institutions and Payment Companies. This boils down to Financial institutions who will have the motivation for it to be an investment asset vs Payment companies that want it used as a day to day currency in order to profit.
The entire discussion here (with rare exceptions) since early 2018 onwards has centred on the store of value use case - be that via retail adoption or institutional.
Right. I haven't heard anyone call for or predict a complete swap out of fiat for btc over a number of years of discussion here.
It depends on what the definition of success is. My understanding is that the main reason that Bukele went down this road is to cut out the loss to the individual and the state to intermediaries in the remittance process. BTC and USD are legal tender - not one or the other.
He's using BTC and BTC network rails to break free of the clutches of the banks locally and conventional international banking/financial services. Success for me is the universal acceptance of bitcoin as a means of payment. It doesn't have to replace fiat currency. Fiat currency can remain to be utilised for 98% of everyday purchases and I wouldn't give a fiddlers as long as the choice is there to pay with bitcoin.
Gresham's law dictates that there's less reason to use hard money over fiat for everyday payments. That makes sense - but I think it's important that people have the choice. If a fiat currency is mismanaged entirely then ordinary people need to be in a position to switch over seamlessly. So long as there's no mismanagement, then there's no need to force the issue. Other than that, it needs to be there as an option to get round these moats that have been built in conventional financial services re. costly international transfers and to circumvent capital controls.
Having said that, there may be greater incentive for nations that don't have their own sovereign/fiat currency to go beyond that as they don't have some of the advantages that go along with that i.e. seigniorage, etc. His project is likely to come up against a lot more push back now that he's going down the bitcoin bond route and putting it up to the IMF....but that's a move that's entirely different to having BTC accepted as a means of payment on a day to day basis.
They've done reasonably well considering it's been introduced over such a short space of time. He had to start with the centralised government app/wallet to get things kicked off. I think they'll improve the app but it gets more interesting as people get more up to speed with it, more comfortable with it and start to use independent lightning wallets.
My understanding as regards lightning itself is that it's more or less there. There are some aspects to be shored up still but fundamentally, it works. I'm not sure if you've played with it - but if not, download the Muun Wallet, DM me a QR code and I can ping you a few sats - just so that you see transaction time/transaction cost/user experience, etc.
Thanks for the heads up on that - certainly better than his last BTC-related guest! He seems to be getting a little bit closer but from his summing up, he's still a tad confused! Link to the podcast here in case anyone else wants to listen to it.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,609
Not like you, that is a complete Trumpian twist. I did not say it was a bad thing. I said it was a No thing as far as institutional adoption of btc is concerned. ConocoPhilips will sell gas to anyone who will pay for it - and I presume they insist on In God we Trust as the means of payment. Next you will claim that Mercedes are institutional supporters because miners mostly drive S-series Mercs.