What a broke, clueless jack ass who can't spell Plot twist: He's now taking bcash as a salary |
|
|
|
With Coinbase seemingly trying to take the BTC investor crown away from Microstrategy we have the fuel to get above $50K. Then we can watch media articles push us back above new highs. I think in the next 60 days we’ll see a greater than $60K Bitcoin and once that happens we’ll see just how big this bubble is going to inflate. I suspect it will be quick and by Halloween it will be clear that the market is headed toward the moon.
Bah whatever. What a freaking POX that Armstrong is on Bitcoin. He has been anti-BTC for at LEAST six years, and their announcement is they will put their money in "crypto". I actually believe that there are a few projects besides Bitcoin that do matter, so I am not even a maximalist. Well i believe there is ONE. And he won't list or hold that one for fear he won't keep getting to lick the boots of the state. He picks the WORST, and has never understood why bitcoin matters as far as I can tell. In a way it's win/win. Either it's SUPER heavy BTC allotment (proving the point) or it's super heavy shitcoins, and he loses his ass. Sadly the percentage of BTC in the mix is likely to hedge against total ass losing... I hope with all my heart that they put WAY too much into shitcoins that end up getting clobbered. Yet their "investment" will somehow legitimize the shitcoins. He can't take any crown away from Microstrategy anymore than someone who specializes in slot machine gambling could win a WSOP bracelet. Brian A. likely hides his true feelings about Bitcoin (and also shitcoins), because Coinbase has always been about buying/selling fees, and now their trading platform (fees for every trade). And the investing establishment (now shareholders) have clearly swayed him, i.e. "You must make more and more shitcoins available for trading on your platform!" Now they actually have to put $500M of shitcoins on their balance sheet to create liquidity for those scam markets, because without it there wouldn't be any liquidity at all. It's Penny Stocks 2.0 all over again. High volume buying/selling/trading fees are the only thing that matters now for Coinbase's bottom line. They pretend to care about vetting all those shitcoins on their platform, but they really don't. As long as a shitcoin has some sort of narrative/angle to make it seem somehow valuable, that's all they care about. |
|
|
|
I sold at about $55k. To be exact, it was the day when Ethereum reached over $4k. Bitcoin at $1T marketcap, Ethereum over $4k, all friends & neighbors into crypto, Tether printing billions in hours, and even my portfolio at an unimaginable value. It seemed unreal so I made my decision. About buying back, I've said it before a few times and will say it again, as soon as 200-week moving average is touched: https://www.lookintobitcoin.com/charts/200-week-moving-average-heatmap/You should have bought back at $30k. By the time it touches the 200-week again, the price could be back to or even well above $55k. |
|
|
|
OT: Relevant  |
|
|
|
This is the catch-22 of bitcoin, and one of the more interesting topics of thought, in my opinion.
Some of the factors:
Some believe people will not want to SPEND a deflationary hard money, but rather will SAVE into it.
As long as purchases with crypto are taxable events it disincentivizes commerce.
Gresham's vs Their's laws... how does that play out?
My thoughts...
Even if Bitcoin was not "spent" much it would be useful. Currently in the west people are "saving" in the stock markets. You can't use stocks to buy things, and trades out are taxable events for most of us. And yet the stock market continues to flourish.
Same with gold. Gold is property. And people hedge with it.
But Bitcoin is a better hedge than either really. And the world is *juuuuust* figuring that out right now.
And here is the kicker. Bitcoin's properties make it the most natural electronic money ever. It is DESIGNED for commerce. So once people are in it they will start to move it around. I.E. SPEND it.
So... that's where it gets interesting. How will that unfold? Yes, I *do* think eventually people will spend their Bitcoin. I am just not sure about the path to that future.
Everything you said is on target. But one thing to keep in mind: The wealthy elite that buy bitcoin will never spend theirs as they view it as an asset. They will hodl btc and borrow fiat against it. The currency of the wealthy elite is debt (free money). They mean to set up a system whereby "spending bitcoin" is for the plebs, so that the wealthy elite can get a cut of every transaction. Moar easy money for them. Also as the plebs spend their bitcoin, then more btc will flow into the coffers of the wealthy elite over the long term. Which they will continue to stack. So with regard to bitcoin, should we do what the wealthy elite do with it, or should we act like the pleb masses? |
|
|
|
A nice advice for all those who want to invest in bitcoin that you won't get rich overnight as no one has ever become in most cases but you need to think about safeguarding your future like you take insurance policies and plans for your kids and old age.So it is better not to regret at that time making same false and lame excuses.Be part of it now. Interesting how the sheeple sit on the sidelines watching bitcoin do a 5X since pre-Covid, and do nothing, while also watching inflation reek havoc on the food/goods/services that they buy daily during the same timeframe and feel no way to escape it. |
|
|
|
Now that there are bitcoin-based NFTs, I'm willing to entertain the idea of them having some valid use cases. Digital collectibles, souvenirs, in-game items, etc., are the obvious cases. But real-world items too, anything with a serial number could have its ownership connected to an NFT. Guns, cars, real estate, stock market certificates, etc.If I have legal copyright to a personal IP or work, and I sell you the NFT to that IP or work but do not transfer the copyright over to you, good luck trying to prove in a court of law that you truly own it and I do not (news flash: you will lose). This is reality. NFTs have revolutionized absolutely nothing. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but in this case I feel like blunt is the only way to get the point across. Bitcoin is revolutionizing the world.
This we can agree on.  |
|
|
|
You're mistaking your inability to search with some sort of conspiracy. It's been debunked and forgotten.
I mean, what the fuck are long term studies even good for anyway, amirite? Bob, in the absence of long term studies and data, you aren't supposed to exercise caution with new drugs. You're supposed to kiss caution to the wind, jump in and YOLO. Oh, wait.. |
|
|
|
|
In other news, Bitcoin hashrate is finally recovering from the pit of despair.
|
|
|
|
My body is ready for this seemingly endless accumulation/shenanigans to be over and btc moving beyond 1,2,3 etc tril (on the way to 10-11 tril first, then maybe 100 tril).
I think that we were tested enough in the last 8 years or even longer (for some others).
The funny thing about when Bitcoin adds another '0' to the end of the price....it always does it when either the public isn't looking, no longer cares, or both.  I've got friends, family, and colleagues that have already forgotten about btc hitting an ATH in April...in fact they have already forgotten about it period. |
|
|
|
As for me, I prefer my books in PDF format, or anything that I can easily convert into PDF, as I can then save that forever and read it offline, and nothing will change that too. I understand some tech or movement is out there to just use plain .txt files or something.
PDF has some issues because it is a display/layout format and doesn't work well with some devices. It's not terrible though. epub and mobi are basically marked-up text which is designed for reflow and is fine as an archive format. PDF is preferable for some works which rely on layout so there are some competing aims there. FWIW, the PDF format was originally not open but it turned out their protection was incredibly weak. Plain text has a whole range of issues as a book format and is only really any good for the simplest of works. Yeah, I understand this, it was like ... a bunch of things Adobe did that protection was weak, like all their previous generation software, particularly Photoshop (which is why everyone seems to have it, or it's always at the top of the list on the pirate bay.) I still don't understand why most retail users are still using Adobe Photoshop. As a graphics designer I used it for the better part of a decade, but now GIMP does pretty much everything PS can do and more. And it's free. I switched over to GIMP years ago and never looked back. And for pen drawing/painting, Krita is the bomb. |
|
|
|
The Bitcoin price will go up another 25% every time the Fed decides to print another $1T. You heard it here first. |
|
|
|
 Comes from Tuur Demeester Always good content I would like to merit this, but his assessment of 'All other crypto' for #2 Medium of Exchange completely killed it for me. 1. For example just look at Ethereum, the transaction fees are completely off the charts and unaffordable. 2. You can't spend the thousands of shitcoins out there anywhere, on anything. These 2 things alone make 'All other crypto' worse than Fiat as a medium of exchange. |
|
|
|
|
People want to moan "But the price was at $64k! Now we're at $38k....ugh."
Were these people not around when btc hovered over and under $9K for what felt like forever? 11 fking months.
Now the price is 4 times that. 4X !!!
They had almost a solid year to purchase btc sub 10k. And most of them didn't do it.
|
|
|
|
Here are my 2c on Fed vs bitcoin.
It looks like the gov is in a mad rush to find anything extra that they could tax and spend.
In lieu of this, I think that it is exceedingly unlikely for them to effectively ban bitcoin, etc. since they would be decreasing, not increasing their tax base.
Witness gradual opening of the weed trade in US, the taxation of which definitely contributes to the individual states coffins. There was no tax and no revenue henceforth when it was illegal.
That said, they project completely unrealistic (currently) amounts that they can raise via bitcoin taxation as it is a small sliver of the overall economic activity and there lies some problems as they expect a lot more than they would see and when they would see a trickle instead of the flood, what conclusion would they have?
The answer is rather obvious and it would NOT be that they admit to overestimation.
Exactly. On weed: The people believe that "finally the govt is coming around how harmless weed is, and that is why they're making it legal." No you idiots, in these desperate times, they are desperate to tax your weed purchases. It has nothing to do with the govt protecting or not protecting you. Hell, they would legalize fentanyl, heroin, and crack cocaine and make it OTC if the health risks weren't so bad. At this point they don't give a shit what the people buy (within reason/legality), as long as they can tax it. They are desperate for money and are looking under every rock. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
