I wouldn't say it's "outdated" at all, it just doesn't apply to BTC. Traditional metrics for companies aren't going to disappear.

God damn it. Please let me know when to go 80x.

Edit: Wait, does this forum mark edited posts?

Did he actually pay a $1t valuation for his shares though?

But yeah, seems like he's gotten old.

That is better than I expected of him and his rhetoric.



Edit: Yikes. His Master thesis is a complete joke too. Just copy/pasting definitions and not a single proof. Most likely wouldn't even pass for a Bachelor here. In fact, this might even pass as plagiarism (*nvm since the regurgitation is cited). I'm too lazy to read the thing, but brushing over it it seems like there isn't a single original thought.

Leave it to fascists to come up with hypocritical terminology all the time. Unless they are implying that they are tipping the balance in whichever direction they please.

First we had Nazis on the right, now they're on the left.

First we had little to no rights for women, now we get less and less rights for men.


There's a reason why oscillators are so powerful at describing the world.

I mean depending on his stash it can make sense. Would consider selling in bulks of 50-100k per month though.

Yikes, this is still going on.

I would merit the OP to show my support, but I'm perpetually out of sMerits.

.---- ..... -....     .---- -.... --...     .---- ....- .----     .---- ..... ....-     ----- ....- -----     .---- --... .----     .---- ..... .....     ----- ....- -----     .---- ....- -....     .---- ....- -....     .---- ..... --...     ----- ....- -----     .---- -.... ....-     .---- ....- .....     .---- ----- --...     ----- ....- -----     .---- -.... ...--     .---- ..... ....-     .---- ....- .----     .---- -.... .....     .---- -.... ...--     .---- ....- .----     .---- ....- ...--     ----- ....- -----     .---- --... .----     .---- ..... -----     .---- -.... ....-     .---- ..... ....-     .---- ..... .----     .---- ....- -....

Did the Grayscale ad actually work?

Exponentially declining costs. But even those aside, $150 Billion is pretty cheap if you can mine trillions worth of metals on a fucking asteroid. You could spend ten times as much as on the ISS and still come out with profits.

In the force majeure tier case in which all depositors withdraw their money simultaneously I could still take out a loan myself.

Accumulated profits or initial deposits of mine could also guarantee 100% withdrawal at any time whilst leaving room for fractional reserve.

Depending on the ratio I could also take out a loan with variable rates of success to facilitate the withdrawals.

One could also offer different types of contracts for the deposits. Ones which don't guarantee 100% withdrawals at all times depending on the current dynamics but which offer interests on the deposit, perhaps variable with respect to the ratio of guaranteed withdrawals, and ones which offer 100% withdrawal rate but don't offer any interest or perhaps even have associated costs.


Will read your essays.

Life is just an experience machine. The second you die you'll piss yourself, literally and figuratively. And then proceed for another round on one of the many rides. /spoiler

Response to yours lightfoot's post (omitted for space).

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the banking system in general. But what you're describing seems to be central banking to me.



Let's assume that we now live in a world without central banking. I am the first person to create a bank.

People deposit their money with me for safe-keeping because I have state-of-the-art impenetrable security. I now realize that people only use 50% of the funds during peak load.

Meanwhile, businesses ask me for loans so they can eventually turn them into profits.

I decide to use an amount sufficiently below 50% of the money deposited in my bank to hand out loans and receive interest.

What I have now done was writing loans using money that exists as my clients put it in my care.

I decide to be a greedy cunt because I'm the only bank in town and very smart, so I keep all the profits to myself.

Someone who is very smarterer than me comes along and copies my system, but now hands out some of the profits back into depositor accounts.

This repeats until an equilibrium creditor and depositor interest rate is reached that covers all risks while keeping marginal profits for all three parties involved.


Would that not describe private banks without central banking?

And how does that differ from a hedge fund that offered plastic cards and wire transfers?

If you try to do it right now, certainly. But that doesn't matter whatsoever for two reasons.

1.) Costs exponentially decline whenever there is an incentive

2.) Asteroids have so god damn fucking much gold on them that nominal cost is redundant. If something costs 1 Trillion but returns 2 Trillion you've got a viable venture.

And without a doubt at some point in time the cost of trying to get some metals out of space will be so far below the value of the mined metals that somebody will do it.


Also. Nuclear fusion + synthesis.

Suppose it was transparent and properly compensated as opposed to the way it was now, e.g. if depositors were paid proper interest for their deposits used in fractional reserve schemes, would you still see it that way?

If yes, why?


The way I see it is that banks used to be necessary but not much longer will be, especially as Bitcoin establishes a status as an appreciating currency. As such I expect different banks running different schemes to attract clients, such as paying out profits made from fractional reserve trades.

The government is only trying to protect us from our own bad choices.

Such as getting a double mortgage to 80x long Tesla over a 420 meme Tweet.

Or getting a job when you're on social welfare.

This is what I like about jbreher, even though I am against BCash.

And despite some of our differences, HM seems to be working towards that style of arguing as well which I can appreciate a lot.

As much as I love trash talking in private, I feel that if the general public made an effort to argue in a fact based and objective manner (objective as opposed to emotional) the political landscape would eventually follow suit.
And that would overall be one of the most positive achievements of humanity, regardless of whether or not we follow a conservative or liberal approach. Right now there's just far too much of a school tier popularity piss contest going on.

My hunch is that rational and fact based discourse would eventually lead to a fiscally conservative and socially liberal population, which appears to be the most sensible and empowering middle ground between the two ideologies. Fingers crossed Bitcoin and the current overall shitstorm will help us get there before we need to go for another round of WW.


While centralization by volume is certainly a very plausible outcome simply due to Economics of scale, your post precisely outlines why it doesn't matter in the way that Roach suggests. There is nothing to stop me from starting a premium service for the disenfranchised. In fact, payment accelerators already exist and anti-censorship transactions are no more than a variation of such.

Capitalism just works.

Here is the obvious answer to censorship:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/30/youtube-algorithm-changes-negatively-impact-google-ad-revenue.html


What opponents of capitalism don't understand is that it is essentially a global voting mechanism. It's the closest we have ever gotten to democracy.

To clarify, my post was in reference to the cursive part.

As I see it the real issue is with central banking, over the top tax rates and government wastefulness. Fractional reserve can work if done sensibly and not bailed out by the tax payer. It's no different from debt, which is a highly productive tool.