I agree with the man himself on this model.

1.  It will DEFINITELY fail eventually.
2.  It is uncanny how well it has worked so far.

I think the chance is likely we see it fail late in this "cycle", which is really fairly soon...

One of the most interesting parts of this "cycle" in my opinion.  It is not retail.  The retail markets are nothing more than an unreliable oracle so far.  And the majority of acquisition is happening in dark pools.

If retail DOES start to buy this cycle they are going to soak up the available float so fast it will make peoples eyeballs pop out.

Watch.

(If it does not happen this time, which is hard to even accept as possible without some giant global macro black swan... it WILL happen in the next cycle.)

It's a bit difficult not to feel offended by the above as you basically say I am in "insider" in the gross bitcoin maximalist cult because I have a Wall Observer hat.

I try to be a nuanced person.  I typically avoid extreme positions, unless I become convinced that such a position is the solid truth.  I am not a bitcoin maximallist (strictly speaking), nor am I a carnivore, although the keto diet was good to my waistline.  I tend to be put off quite a bit by petty tribalism.  And that is true both in the maximallist world you describe above, but I also find it sadly true when I see someone like yourself, willing to paint people with a broad brush just because of a forum avatar.

I also think the "maximallists" are right about a lot of things.  Shitcoins, for example. There are VERY few crypto projects that merit a chance with or against Bitcoin.  The top 10 is riddled with premined scams.

One of the types of scams is the one that paints itself as the  project that is against all the "greedy NGU bitcoinners".  This is exactly what I am warning against.  Monero does not need to use that doomed energy.  It is a worthy project, and one that will succeed, and has.

What I hope is the judge is able to see what the meta game is he's trying to play.  He has made it very clear online. 

It's all part of a long con.  But there are several sub cons going on at the same time. 

Here is what I see as the big story arc:

1. Establish via the court systems that he is SN.
2. Use the courts to try to force the Bitcoin devs to give him control over a list of blocks he claims to own without having to use the private keys.

The courts have been fairly clear that they are not trying to decide whether he is Satoshi or not, I think.  But one possible thing is they could claim he owes billions of dollars worth of BTC to the plaintifs.  And if so I think the plan is to say he's lost the keys to those blocks and the only way he can get the money to pay the plaintif is if the court orders the BTC devs to basically code his access into Bitcoin Core.

That is a thumbnail of the long con.  And it is entirely ridiculous.  BUT the only thing that scares me is BTC has BIG enemies at the nation state level.  Depending on how corrupted our world is, I could imagine a scenario in which the courts were told to do it.  The is far fetched and nearly impossible to imagine.

The lesser con is to convince his faithful of the above plan.  That is what the BSV people are believing is the way at this point.  LAW is going to grant him the access to those blocks, and he is going to crash BTC and buy all the BSV with it and usher in his kingdom.  And they will dump all their BSV that they have collected up over time (?) on them.  Another angle here is they fail to get any traction on their plan to rewrite the BTC client to give him millions of coins, but they have well prepared the failthful to allow him to take those blocks on BSV.  So I think that's the last level fallback.  (Obviously legal claims on BCH will also be made, and probably fare as badly as they will on BTC)

Or perhaps Calvin Ayre is the anti-christ, and CSW is his prophet.  And BSV is the mark of the beast.  A panopticon  of evil.

You think I am joking with that last part... but there are people who believe this line as well, and I think CSW has played into the image with all the red socks etc...   The anti-christ is indeed called "the father of lies".  It kinda fits.

I seriously hope the courts crush him, and we can really start to put this chapter fully in the rear view.

*sigh*

My hope for that sort of thing is fairly low.  I feel like hes going to get away with very little bad happening to him at all.

Perhaps I am just projecting my fears.

I will be VERY happy to have been wrong.

I merit you in spite of all the lambasting.

I have noticed something interesting though... a pattern in your responses.

I use a technique when making an idea clear where I allow for a possibility that I highly doubt.  This time instead of saying; "I think this is the super-cycle"  I lay out that I think there is a significant change the last 50% crash will be the first of a generally decreasing magnitude of bears.

You tend to look at the flat statement:  (Something along the lines of) "The 'normal' 80% crash could still happen this cycle BUT..."  and you kind of knee jerk and go:

It's like you are missing my point.  My point is not the doom and gloom.  And I am saying what you a are saying in your response.  Perhaps I could be more clear and say: "Of course anything is possible, but I believe we may see more frequent, less deep bear markets as we move into a mature market that ends up eating all the value in the world".

But that would not have the cAPS over-dramatic flair!!!

Still, the thing I notice is you want to knee jerk at any extreme prediction, particularly bearish ones, that you do not notice when they are a hypothetical meant as a contrast.

Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful comments!

Again... I think something really big is coming.

Damnit!  All that hocus pocus I tried to pull and you just cannot be moved!

I have under estimated you!

I have been doing a little meta analysis of on chain data, and thinking through some things that I think we are currently watching unfold.  Because I love you as my brothers I thought I would share my thoughts here.  Perhaps you can tell me if you think I am crazy.

Let's just run some logic together... follow along if you will:

1.  What are the chances that there are multiple entities with 10+ figures in USD they want to move into Bitcoin.  In other words people who want to build a billion dollar position.  ANYWHERE in the world.  ANY sort of customer.  Rich individuals, companies, endowments, family offices, hedge funds, countries, central banks.  
The answer to the above question is not "IF", rather it is "Yes, of course. How Many?" I think at this point it is inevitable.  Microstategy was unique as they did it before almost anyone else (in the herd).  So they could do it somewhat openly.  But not too much so.  Same with Tesla.

2.  How will these entities be buying their bitcoin.  Logging on to TradeOgre and buying their bitcoin there?  
Of course not.  They will be buying privately from whales directly, or by using some sort of "institutional grade" broker.  Some will buy via Greyscale, but not all. They will be working with the trading desks at the major exchanges.

3.  How long will they spend buying their bitcoin?
I would suggest they would spend weeks, at least, acquiring such a position.  Even trading over the counter they will have an effect on the market.  And they do not want to make too big waves while they do it.  But on the other hand many probably believe the longer they wait, the better their entry price will be.  Many, but certainly not all.

3. Are there any of the above entities that are thinking they should wait for the next bear market?
I think absolutely, yes.  But most of these pros with a conservative approach are also going to hedge those bets by DCA-ing in at least somewhat in case they are wrong.  And they ARE wrong in my humble opinion.

4.What would happen to dealer stock as this is going on?
This is a deeper question than at first glance.  Obviously most of this sort of trading is not happening ON a retail exchange.  But big whales that keep a liquid amount of bitcoin on an exchange are being reached out to by these trading desks, and the trades are happening in the dark. Then that stock of BTC will be pulled out of the liquid addresses and sent to cold storage.  These bitcoin could also change hands on a ledger at the exchange, but simply remain in the cold wallet addresses of these exchanges.  This means that not only would stocks at the exchanges be shrinking visibly, which they ARE, but they would also invisibly be becoming more frozen.  Exchange X may have a cold wallet with 10,000 BTC in it, and 9000 of them were "for sale".  But in this case we see the first number declining measurably, but the SECOND number would ALSO decline causing an invisible drop in the available float. Bittrex is still holding that billion dollars worth of BTC, but it is no longer for sale.

5.  Would these entities be incentivized to manipulate the prices on retail exchanges during the time they are trading?
Yes.  I do not think they all would do this.  I doubt Microstrategy did it.  And El Salvador is not buying so much that it is worth their effort and money.  But people planning on taking a multi-billion dollar position?  They would HAVE to consider setting up traders to manipulate the prices on the retail exchanges while the deals are being done.  Inversely, the sellers would be incentivized to support the price as they sell their large lots.  Since retail can be moved with TINY volume I just do not see how this is not happening.  But I do not hink it can happen forever...  Eventually the market will become so strong that it cannot be moved that easily any more.  When?  No clue.

6. What sort of things would we see if the above were happening?
Barts, and flash crashes/flash recoveries. Sound familiar?

7. But what about all the normal, smaller traders?
They are still here.  And I would expect there is a range of them.  People interested in buying a whole BTC to people wanting to ship 10s of millions in.  Many of these smaller fish will be the noise floor on the retail exchanges.  As you get into larger positions you will see a more savvy trader, and some may begin to look for dark pools.  But most will still be trading on the exchange.  They will set orders that catch the flash crashes, as well as bots that buy (or sell) aggressively under certain circumstances.

8. What about the futures markets (and leverage junkies)?
Good question.  These are the cost of a truly free market.  And I think leverage trading and futures can be seen influencing the markets in the form of BART type actions as well as bigger moves at expiry.  Some smart degens are probably getting rich picking up gold nuggets in front of the biggest steam roller in history.  But as we all know... when the corn decides to move, it can do so with extreme alacrity.  Some will get murdered by the markets.

In conclusion:
Perhaps we are on the brink of another multi year bear.  Perhaps we will see another 80% drop.  We DID just live through a 50% one.  But at SOME point this cannot continue.  Because at SOME point these billionaires lining up to get into the game are going to overcome what's left to sell.  Yes.  Everyone has a price.  And I would not be surprised if some early large investors decide to divest as we see the rocket going up.  Of course they will.  Maybe even some who moved in this year.  When they can sell half their stake and be freerolling with the same money they initially invested they will do this.  But Michael Saylor has it right.  It is going to go up forever.  There is coming a point where selling for anything other that the need to spend will make absolutely no sense at all.  Borrow against it, or sell little bits for the big things.  But otherwise why would you ever let go?  It will be called a ponzi, again and again and again.  Because this is the archetypal, mathematical event that ponzi schemes all pretended to be.

Already the signs of this thing getting out of control are starting to appear.  These flash recoveries... the constant upward pressure.  News after news after news of bank after firm, after bank integrating it.  All the while the payment network is being developed in parallel to the already established store of value asset.  Saylor is right that Bitcoin does not challenge the USD.  The lightning network does.  Thing is people do not realize yet that the lightning network IS Bitcoin.  But they will.

Over time the base layer is going to get very crystalized.  We already see it.  Above as I describe bitcoin is cold storage at X exchange being "frozen solid" surreptitiously as an investor buys it, but lets the exchange continue to custody it.  As it stops moving on the base layer it becomes increasingly valuable.  A lot of people doubt this. But like so many other aspects of bitcoin it does not make sense when measured by the standards of the day.  It slows down because the hands holding it are ever stronger.  

There will always be a float that is being used to transact by the whole world.  But that percentage of the total will be ever decreasing.  Because the incentive to HOLD it is never going away.  

In my opinion the above things are simply a mathematical certainty.  

And the math is going to blow our pants off.

Heya tifozi, long time... welcome back.  I have a feeling you may have shown up just in time for some fireworks.

You are right about the ETH angle.  In fact seems to me the whole bank/institutional money world seems to be aping in (yeah yeah) as a way to concede without conceding.  I think either out of sheer ignorance (ETH is more gizmos - therefore better) or possibly understanding (ETH is an asset we can control very similarly to how we have played the USD.  Better it than the pure thing).

You have any more thought on your exchange manipulation?  I feel like more than anything exchanges just don't want to touch Monero very much, i suppose due to the whole "drug money" stigma.  With Kraken being an interesting exception.

I do not think Monero can stay where it is for much much longer, and I think the privacy maxis entering the space are more important than most anything else in recent times.  Once folks like they understand how it works, and well, how WELL it works?  They are going to start dipping their toes in it.  The Monero Market cap (stupid metric, but still) is at LEAST an order of magnitude too small currently.  I would say it should dig well into that double digit billions realm to be fairly enough priced for it to make sense.

That means Monero in the 2k-6k realm.

With 8% of Bitcoin's transactions I think we could conceive of an 8% value to match.

Currently that is $5200.  But I think it will be more like 9k by the time we get there...  Still I would set 5k as a reasonable target because if things go well in the bitcoin space, that is a <5% chunk. 

Conservative.

Well it avoids the need for a prenup...

I'll chip in a little if you want to build a hurler on your ranch...

It's just fucking with you now Billy...

I feel ya man.. I really do.

This won't take real long though...  just let go.

OK.. I fed the troll.. sorry.  I fed him cyanide though.

OK I will make up by posting this king crimson track... you'll get it if you know it... Pretty sure Sir Azimuth will...


https://youtu.be/YVAzvWToMRA

Were you saying something?  This is what hanging on by a fingernail feels like...

Just let go... it will ALL be OK.

You'll just go to sleep Billy.  Just go to sleep...  that's all...

I have been waiting a LONG time to begin to see this start happening.  Since 2014 in fact.

1.  We are on the cusp of a much deeper interest in Monero from the wider cypherpunk community.
2.  We are possibly also going to be regaining the community focus as Monero as a COMPLIMENT to bitcoin rather than a competitor.

This recording of a Twitter Spaces hosted by Guns N' Bitcoins after they announced the intent to start to accept Monero (for obvious reasons) is worth a listen.

Behold the beginning of the beginning...

https://twitter.com/sethforprivacy/status/1455510248349962255?s=20



-edit avoiding multiple posts in a row for our mods-

So it gets juicy at about minute 52.  A listener states they do not understand why someone would be 100% Monero and reject bitcoin.  And another listener gave a good reason, and one that I think is fairly new-ish in the Monero community.  The answer was: Bitcoin has been co-opted.

Now.  I believe that person believes that.  Earlier in the talk someone brought up Blockstream and how they have programmed us to believe in small blocks etc.  Maybe the same person.

THIS is what I mean when I say the Monero community is using BCASH arguments now.

I am also aware that people in this thread probably agree with the assertion that is being made there.  But I think this is a really bad line.  Because there is a better way to bring people INTO an understanding of Monero without forcing them into an adversarial position with Bitcoin.

Let's use Michael Saylor as an example.  Anyone notice how he's often said he does not think Bitcoin challenges the US dollar?  If you have listened to him for more than 45 seconds you know he is smart enough to get that Bitcoin ABSOLUTELY challenges all fiat currencies.  But he is focusing on the "better at being gold than gold" angle.

His reasons are simple, in my humble opinion.  It's what Bitcoin needs to do FIRST.  And it's ALL bitcoin needs to do FIRST.  Because once it has basically replaced gold (not a trivial boss-fight in itself) then becoming a worldwide transactional currency is something that CANNOT be stopped.

But if Saylor was prancing around talking about how it is going to "destroy the dollar" then he'd be painting a target on it.  Not only is the approach sensible it's honest.  Because again, that is all Bitcoin needs to do right now.  Become the premium store of wealth.

Likewise Monero does not need to replace Bitcoin.  It just needs to COMPLIMENT IT.  And for those who truly believe Bitcoin has been co-opted?  Well don't use Bitcoin then, for sure.  But it will be in your best interest to work in a way that will make monero attractive to as many people as possible.  And you can coexist with the Bitcoin community and disagree with them.  Or even believe that Monero should and/or WILL replace Bitcoin in the end.

It is like the famous Hayek quote:


We don't need to replace Bitcoin.  We just need to keep pointing out that there are some things Monero does that Bitcoin not only does not... but CANNOT.

My final point.  This street works both ways.  There are tremendous advantages to an open transparent blockchain.  Bitcoin is better at certain things.  And it will eat all the other shitcoins features over time.  But one thing it can NEVER do is have an obfuscated base layer.

Selah.

Unfortunately I agree with you.

Just want to point something out i noticed...

Recently... Bull flags that want to rise after the initial UP segment have acted demonstrably different than Bull flags with a more "limp" follow through.

Like this.  So where do we go from here?  I say right into the next phase of pure price discovery... Hold on to your asses.

Exactly.  My thoughts with the quoted post are just that the centralization of the internet is kind of up to the user.  Thre are arguably fundamental points of centralization such as TLDs, but even then TOR and i2p solve these issues (at least somewhat).

So, you can use the internet in a VERY decentralized way, like using fedarated social media servers (mastadon), and TOR and VPNs etc...  Or you can just plug straight into Google.

And for some things I want the latter.

It will be the same for lightning.  There will be ways to use it in a centralized way and ways not to.

I will tell you this... I have thought about taking my family on the holy trip of the Bitcoiner to El Zonte in ES for a vacation.  If I do I will be taking at least two lighting wallets.  I will try to primarily use my own node (with Zeus), but I would also load up my Wallet of Satoshi to have as a standby. in case something went screwy with my node.

That is a perfect example on the simplest level of using decentralization and centralization to my advantage.