I think that they are not so much giving up their bitcoin, but since 2017 fresh retailers pump their money into altcoins.
Many new "investors" consider themselves too late to make monster gains with bitcoin (because "too expensive", "too late" ... and so on).
This is my impression of the 2020/21 market.
Everyone's trying to pick the next facebook to Bitcoin's myspace but in reality, most of them are betting on Friends Reunited and there's no sign of Bitcoin failing yet. |
|
|
|
Basically, yes and yes.
The supply and demand formula tells us that when there is a limited supply (or infinite demand, like for example hospital treatment for a life threatening heart attack), the price goes up much, much faster/higher when demand increases then in a normal market situation, it's called inelastic supply.
Now assume that about two percent of the world population owns bitcoin today, and the price is already at 60k, then just imagine what the price will be when 50 percent of the worlds population owns bitcoin, and add institutional investors on top of that, then 1 bil doesn't seem to far away anymore.
Well, the demand part is also important. Bitcoin doesn't solve "life threatening" problems. I always like to go to first principles. Supply and demand as it relates to Bitcoin is not a first order effect. It always comes down to one person trading with another on an exchange. Multiply that by thousands of someones and supply/demand effects on price falls out of it but it's a stochastic effect. Sentiment is always going to dominate. If everyone absolutely agrees that a Bitcoin is worth $60000, it doesn't matter what the supply/demand is, that's what it's going to trade at. Fortunately, everyone has a different idea of what it's worth and over time, those who believe it has higher value are winning. |
|
|
|
You know, my brain's wheels are turning right now with a thought:
"Is an inflationary money policy the driver behind the desire to endlessly consume?"
Really, I never thought about it in this direction. Thinking......
They explicitly claim inflation as a method to "stimulate the economy". So yes. Sound monetary policy is demonized as leading to a "deflationary spiral". Otherwise known as sensible spending. |
|
|
|
I think his third paragraph makes an unfounded assignment and a couple of shaky assumptions but still gives a good general idea. |
|
|
|
Poor deluded man thinks the financial system is real. |
|
|
|
A clear sign of a global pandemic with people dying left and right is a housing shortage...  🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟 🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟 🧟🧟🧟🏠🧟🧟🧟 🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟 🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟🧟 |
|
|
|
Housing bubble never properly corrected. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin up $4000 in 24 hours. Tell 2013 myself that and I'd probably look at you incredulously.  |
|
|
|
That's actually a good thing, but I'd wait for a confirmation in this case. They can always bump the fee higher to get it included faster in the next block. RBF would probably be a non-issue if it's a withdrawal from a custodial service you more or less trust. They may be doing it so they can merge or add transactions together while it's not yet confirmed, but eventually you'll get your coins and they may possibly save on fees if it ends up batching more transactions together.
Yes, a withdrawal is a given anyway since you just have to wait for it. It's more the low-to-medium value purchase realm that double spends could potentially be an issue. |
|
|
|
5 to 10 seconds is enough time for a transaction to get to almost 90% of all nodes, and if there are no double spend attempts by the 11th second after you've seen the tx, if it has a decent enough tx fee (estimate up to 24 hours) then you know it will confirm, just a matter of time.
You might want to check that it's not marked as opt-in rbf too. https://bitcoincore.org/en/faq/optin_rbf/(Note that I'm not making any comment on RBF). |
|
|
|
Doing this right is a balance of security and simplicity. If we try to do it in a way that is overly convoluted, or requires a very good memory, or would be difficult to communicate to another trusted human, we are increasing the possibility of a "foot gun". When I have thought through these I have tried to come up with schemes where I would combine a set of keys for multi-sig with decoy amounts in the wallets associated with the single keys, along with BIP39 passphrases, AND the use of exotic derivation paths. I began to realize that if I over-engineer the method in the name of "security" I am increasing the chances that I can make a mistake, or simply forget one of the things I did.
The great thing about Bitcoin is that (unless you do it wrong), you start from a position of unimpeachable security. A random 256 bit number (or series of such) completely unknown to anyone else. It's true that management of that poses some difficulties but solutions tend to be problematic only in that they have reduced security compared to the maximum security bitcoin provides and not in comparison to more traditional options for wealth storage (which look pretty poor in comparison). And unfortunately, for some (most probably) users a bitcoin bank may be the safest solution even taking the counterparty risk into account. Leaving your bitcoin on an exchange, or in your CashApp wallet is rightly frowned upon by we OG elite... but until we have better trust minimized options it still might be best for the masses.
I wouldn't really agree. That's kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It may just require more sophisticated key management techniques and for people to become more aware of their availability. Your bank and another party might participate in an m of n arrangement, for example. (Though bviously, you are sacrificing some security there, it's still better than trusting someone else with all your funds). The major thing is education though. Of the people I gave Bitcoin to in the past, none of them took notice of my warning to take backups of their wallets. |
|
|
|
I've always wondered at what level it becomes 'communism'?  The pie-in-the-sky communism that always gets no-true-Scotsmaned or the more realistic kind of ugly communism where political opponents are persecuted and the inner party are privileged and protected? Cause I may have news for you. |
|
|
|
|
Y'know, one alternative to taxation is for the government to just print the money it needs. We're basically there anyway and it avoids all that messy taxation business. This only works at the federal level obviously though it would be interesting if it extended to the state level too. A bit of competition between currencies and the ability for people to express confidence in the various levels of government with exchange rates would probably be quite revealing.
|
|
|
|
Industrial diamonds do. But industrial diamonds are dirt cheap. |
|
|
|
Don’t tell me they got this rumor from WO?
Possibly CNN's "anonymous sources". Rumors are not news, regardless. |
|
|
|
I think you do: If you move coins from an address to another then I thought it was a taxable event ("work" is being done, like those crazy Jewish sabbath rules). Maybe if it's not in your control, but if that's the case then the argument should be move coins around at will, tax when converted into fiat.
They could not tell anyway. The way Bitcoin transactions work, the "change" gets sent to a different address than it was sent from in a modern wallet (indeed, it's not possible to distinguish the spending part from the change part without more transactional data and advanced analytics) |
|
|
|
CG is tricky. I've always found it annoying that my labor is taxed at a higher rate than luck+"incredible foresight to invest wisely" (when you come out ahead). Putting the two on a more even footing (they are all "work", some are physical, some are mental, some are a combo of both) always struck me as more fair, but your mileage may vary.
It's a trick question. Both are shitty. |
|
|
|
I'm actually semi seriously interested in tape backups. The tech for it has improved dramatically and it is still one of the highest density backup systems in the world, and the high end ones are not that slow too (but then, it's like a library with those arms and stuff).. Still, I'd like to have a single tape that backs up my stuff and stores maybe 20 TB or more by now. LTO-8 had 12 TB back in 2017.
Sony and IBM already had tape up to 185 TB in 2014.
I tried doing tape for a while. I found a 40/80 left in a PC for trash pickup at work. The problem is, I soon found my backup needs exceeding tape capacity and upgrading tape drives is *expensive*. Backing up to hard-drives is much more sustainable. I'd still do tape if money was no object or for a business but for personal use, prices would have to come down a lot. |
|
|
|
There is also a theory that a convergence of both systems (cap and comm) is actually occurring.
 |
|
|
|
I mean yeah I guess that sucks, but compare that to someone who ignored bitcoin and has $0 and none of their avoided investment lost and didnt pay those evil taxes (the freeloaders!)
Or compare it to the government who ignored bitcoin and has $200,000 of your wealth to spend from it because they decided that's the way it's going to be. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
