OMG just visited coinmarketcap (the link El Dude posted):  Are you serious? What in the fucking world is this? Metapets? Animaltycoon? Doge Run? Totally a Rug Pull?  What a shitcoin shithole coinmarketcap has become... yea, but a simple solution: push that "highlights" blue bar to the left and it is gone. |
|
|
|
These dumb-ass 5% bitcoin sales are annoying: It's not worth cashing in coin to buy back lower as the ~21% Capital gains tax will wipe out any profit.
Oi.
IOW: Capital Gains Tax makes it so that selling to rebuy lower is a losing move unless the after-sale dip is more than the CGT rate. Not limited to bitcoin: it's the same with stonks or any other financial asset. unless it is long term rate sale. ...and, first $80,800 in long term cap gains are FREE (if you are married). |
|
|
|
@JJG December 22 2021Why bitcoin is worse than a Madoff-style Ponzi scheme A Ponzi scheme is a zero-sum enterprise. But bitcoin is a negative-sum phenomenon that you can’t even pursue a claim against, argues Robert McCauley. https://archive.fo/acY5HAn opinion, while a strange one, i'd summarize the article. What stands out is this: And the operators take away a large portion of the money.
Who should resemble the "operators" of the "ponzi scheme", Bitcoin is accused as in the scope of the article? Early adopters? Miners? While in the fiat scheme, the "operators" do not take away anything. Amirite? in the other "ponzi", who do i "pursue a claim against" for giving me 0.001% on my savings account and brrr-ing 40% of currency in 1-2 years? a rhetorical question. |
|
|
|
Not really, of course, right now, but in 1981, the interest rate was 15.8%, imagine that.
Savings accounts died in 1971. Numerous investment opportunities exist for those who do their own research. Sure, but there is no guarantee. Typically, when talking about retirement funds, people don't talk about some active investment schemes. Of course, you can get VTI and get 7% average (over long term), but to get 10-20% year in and out, those are more aggressive strategies (preferred's, selling calls, REITs, etc., etc.), which are NOT guaranteed. |
|
|
|
Basically, in US, if the family has $1mil in ret funds
With that much you can get 10-20% interest and never run out. That's $100-200k/yr. Not really, of course, right now, but in 1981, the interest rate was 15.8%, imagine that. |
|
|
|
Yes, people need to seriously think about this, @phil.
The critical part, imho, is when to switch from accumulation to distribution (for regular funds especially).
The dude who came up with 4% safe withdrawal doctrine now says that it is actually 4.7% of 'safe" spending per year.
Basically, in US, if the family has $1mil in ret funds (which should be quite doable if you had 401K and worked for, say, 30-35 years) and $3.1/k a mo from soc sec ($1550 is average for a person), then such "average" family should have about 47K+37K=84K/year in available funds, which should be enough in most parts of US. NY-maybe 125-150K/year, but in NY most people might have accumulated more because salaries there are higher as well.
Therefore, bitcoin is mostly extra, which could be either given to next gen, to charity or to the extended family.
I have been thinking about this a lot. I still like mining. But it involves some work and I am 64. Plan is work to 70 . Sell the business share I have to my partners. Cash in 50% and hodl the rest for 5 years. revisit the coins in 75 and decide what to cash. If all of the above happens. I could maybe touch 2 or 3 million at 70 plus the pensions and the wifes 401k It would mean a decent living standard for us. Barring a very nasty inflation spike, $2 mil (will go from a lower number) plus pension(s) plus a decent 401K PLUS proceeds from part business ownership (difficult to value) PLUS 50% of btc portfolio and even without btc makes it "very likely not to die poor" situation. btc is just the icing on the cake in this situation. Well done! |
|
|
|
|
Yes, people need to seriously think about this, @phil.
The critical part, imho, is when to switch from accumulation to distribution (for regular funds especially).
The dude who came up with 4% safe withdrawal doctrine now says that it is actually 4.7% of 'safe" spending per year.
Basically, in US, if the family has $1mil in ret funds (which should be quite doable if you had 401K and worked for, say, 30-35 years) and $3.1/k a mo from soc sec ($1550 is average for a person), then such "average" family should have about 47K+37K=84K/year in available funds, which should be enough in most parts of US. NY-maybe 125-150K/year, but in NY most people might have accumulated more because salaries there are higher as well.
Therefore, bitcoin is mostly extra, which could be either given to next gen, to charity or to the extended family.
|
|
|
|
..funny..."he" listened. $45K, 50K or 60K on Dec 31? I hope for 58K |
|
|
|
Along with the fact retail are currently mesmerized by the latest big chain narrative being crammed down their throats by all the vest wearing VC assholes. My, how those narratives have morphed over the years. A pile of solutions looking for a problem. World computer. Sound money! ICOs, No, Sound money! WEB3! No sound money! No WEB3!!!
I want to take a moment to outline why Web3 is massively retarded, then I will go back into my hole.
Web3 will fail for one simple, elephant-in-the-room reason that seemingly no one wants to discuss or think about: People do not want to, and will simply REFUSE to, pay more (beyond their internet access cost) in order to access content on another version of the internet. No matter what it contains or how great it is. Period. It's basic human nature. The VCs believe that they can incentivize people with fake incentives to PAY MORE to be on Web3. It too will also fail. People will just flat out refuse to pay for it. Just look at the internet today. When most are confronted with a now-required subscription to a website that formerly had free content, most people just leave that website and kiss it goodbye, never to return. That's why almost all major websites make the subscription completely optional, or offer exclusive subscription-based content along with the free stuff. Because if they didn't do that and made the subscription mandatory for all their content, they would lose the majority of their viewers, and thus ad revenue. Once you've opened Pandora's box and made the internet free and open for 40+ years, you cannot go back and then make it pay-to-play, or micro-transactions everywhere. All the other reasons why Web3 might fail are little more than window dressing. Maybe, but they do pay for Netflix, Hulu, Disney, Prime and Xfinity, sometimes simultaneously for all five. People also take roads with tolls around here, even when no-toll roads are available. I am more concerned about some web3 companies doing play to earn where you engage in some meaningless activity to earn small amounts of "currency". You are basically sell yourself (as a human being) short. |
|
|
|
fence buddy thread farmer moon sandwich mind spare banana joke lousy articles coat which die blocked discussion seconds steam hashed just debate boy seed
Is this a donation to the cause OR Chrismas present to the guy/gal with the fastest draw? Too lazy to check. |
|
|
|
|
Today's discussion about wallet security made me think:
The idea about "not your keys, not your btc (or anything else)" is extremely difficult to explain to no-coiners or to even any non-technical people.
How to solve this to bring bitcoin to billions? Some upcoming solutions are Orwellian-some token wants you to scan your retina. Yikes!
What could be better without writing down words or an extremely long string of letters and numbers?
Some people/projects are claiming that they would provide decentralized identity. I am VERY skeptical of this for the moment.
It seems that at some point there will be an adequate phone wallet with both advanced (to get your private keys) and basic functionality (for noobs).
I looked into wallets and some are gaining more and more functions lately and seem on the way to a more polished product.
Maybe a good phone wallet is going to be a solution.
Additionally, financial institutions might eventually do 80-90% of custody.
They already approved Anchorage for institutional deposits, maybe something else (could be Fidelity) is coming for retail later.
|
|
|
|
I am not quite sure how they ported the phone.
I suspect they used tracfone had the cell number hoped by getting the email
that the email linked to tracfone and to coinbase was the same
so if they hack just the email
they could try to port the cell to their carrier.
then get into coinbase change password and use 2fa to allow withdraws and alter the email
...
Best to buy a burner phone set up google to microsoft auth.
the coinbase account does not know that phone number so no one can port it over to another network.
Sorry that it happened, but I cannot figure it out from your description. coinbase did have some SMS troubles last May or so, maybe it is somehow related. The ported phone would jeopardize both methods (text or Authenticator), wouldn't it? what's the "email linked to tracfone"? why there is such a thing? ...I do have an email/phone account so they could have ported the phone from trac phone to Verizon mobile by entering my cell number They could have hacked the email using recovery to the phone. Is this coinbase system so bizzaredly inadequate? the pnone can be ported JUST by knowing a cell number? the email can be reset just by providing a cell number? This sounds outlandish. EDIT: nevermind, it happens that email recovery was linked to the phone number, that seems to the gist of the problem (together with porting), but using auth for withdrawal saved the day, thankfully. |
|
|
|
Here is an interesting case: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/employee-embezzled-154-million-sony-165821367.htmlTo me what is interesting is how it was recovered. The link in the text goes to more description and it seems that the perp transferred stolen funds (that he converted to bitcoin) to what they called "offline cryptocurrency cold wallet". Yet, they recovered the funds. I guess it depends on what that "offline cold wallet " means and on the perp cooperation. If he cooperated, that's one story, but if not, than it is completely different and could mean something important. |
|
|
|
I was lucky I had one more roadblock to stop them.
I wonder if it is inside work with :
a guy at coinbase
a guy at tracfone
a guy at Verizon
I am very sorry to say this, but you have to also look at people you deal with often. |
|
|
|
I am not quite sure how they ported the phone.
I suspect they used tracfone had the cell number hoped by getting the email
that the email linked to tracfone and to coinbase was the same
so if they hack just the email
they could try to port the cell to their carrier.
then get into coinbase change password and use 2fa to allow withdraws and alter the email
...
Best to buy a burner phone set up google to microsoft auth.
the coinbase account does not know that phone number so no one can port it over to another network.
Sorry that it happened, but I cannot figure it out from your description. coinbase did have some SMS troubles last May or so, maybe it is somehow related. The ported phone would jeopardize both methods (text or Authenticator), wouldn't it? what's the "email linked to tracfone"? why there is such a thing? |
|
|
|
Percussion-techno always gets me going strong remember it going viral at the beginning of the run-up, last year. yeah, this year smallish run-up is meme-less (apart from laser eyes), but I still enjoy polkka, though. I am sure that if we would pop to 100K or above, there would be new memes. |
|
|
|
I think that everyone should ponder this question: why this cycle so far did not pan out as expected by almost EVERYBODY? To some it might mean that the exponential boom-bust cycles are over. To me it means that bitcoin is in transition: it has to go over the technological chasm from the early adopters to early majority. The volatility in that is less than during "innovators" and "early adopters" stages, but still significant with periodic setbacks. I am perfectly fine if the four year cycles are mostly gone and we are simply in a price discovery mode. I expect the prices much higher eventually, but short term the price seems chaotic (does not really follow any prior predictions). It zigs when it was "supposed" to zag, etc. This 'perversion' actually started in 2019, but most people dismissed it as a one-off aberration. Remember "the fractal" idea? It fit for a while. All TA guys seem to be befuddled if not outright 'amused' by the current situation. Albeit, we have no coherent theory of what to expect since S2F is currently on the brink...barely hugging the lower grey band. planB did not throw in the towel yet, but it is getting close, unfortunately. https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1472241754837557256 |
|
|
|
I explicitly believe that there will be new highs in 2022, but i also have an eye on exchange illiquidity, which would make sense to me to strike somewhere in 2023.
You may call it a triple-top. The unprobabilistic part is the fact we didn't have this formation before, which is supporting my idea (or vision) of said outplay.
And it could be the slow squeeze of illiquidity that will make the 2022 blow-off less steep, and the liquidity crunch in 2023 more unexpected from the now terms of view.
Of course, i would be a moron if i would only believe in this one scenario and not prepare for other possibilities (which are more likely to play out by probability), even more so reading your past postings and ignoring their message to develop a flexible strategy, or strategies.
But since this is an inverse approach to the ole school probability type of reasoning, i would not be surprised if future happenings would come near that.
Just mainly because of SOMA fundamentals. And Murphy's Law...
Short version: Bullish on 2022, but not suprised if 2023 gets even more bullish because of the effect of the supply-crunch, when the majority would expect the slow fade out of the bear market. As you know, i plan to hodl the vast majority of my stash for years and decades to come, i will be fine whatever will come.
This scenario looks pretty realistic to me. Triple top is something we haven't witnessed before but why not? I mean BTC can't be that predictable to follow the same pattern over and over again. Back in October one of my nocoiner friends mentioned something about taking a loan and buying BTC as it's bound to skyrocket in December. Easy-peasy, piece of cake, no-brainer. That's when I understood moonshot is not going to happen most probably. Sorry, there are no triple tops or triple bottoms...with >90% probability. Well I'm not a trader or a TA person I'm not sure if it exists or not (well it does in theory but I'm not sure about RL) I just used this term to make it clear there's going to be a third top (wave) going considerably higher than 2 previous ones. If you're good at TA you can come up with a correct term for that.  It is the correct term, but unicorn is also a correct term. I was simply saying that it almost never happens. IMHO, people are still counting on the swoosh back up in bitcoin, but we might have a flat before this. BTW, TA may rarely predict something, it is almost always post factum. However, the same could be said about the fundamental analysis, which often misses something "fundamental' and the results are skewed. Tons of people were "fundamentally" bearish on Amazon from 2000 to 2015, but they were wrong because market anticipated large current earnings and almost unshakable market position of that company. Market was using advanced algebra when some or even most analysts were following simple arithmetic. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
