Going to continue as the devil's advocate here, trying to think adversarially.

If they do this they will have a lot of money and high level marketing behind it along with the attention of politicians.  I think it could be a bumpier road than the last fork adventure.

I hate that my analysis is different than Proudhon's  I am worried something might be wrong with my science or sources... not sure.

But I am seeing a fairly clear pennant pattern with descending volume.  The interwebs teach me these usually break in the UP direction.

This must be an reverse bearish indicator of some sort?

I agree.  Sort of.  But what stops there from being a fork backed by this "initiative"?

I hope you are right... Maybe I forgot that bitcoin does not give a crap about any "Crypto somethingornother Initiative".

I am sure you are right.  You always are, somehow.

But where is the double top you are talking about???

The issue, as I see it, is PoS fits in with the current political narratives that @jack seems to be controlling, lol.  The whole "environmental impact of bitcoin" is where the FUD narrative goes next, IMHO.

I would not doubt that block size, and the issuance cap will also be up for discussion.

Brian Armstrong has been trying to "fix" or replace bitcoin the whole damn time.

Someone please tell me there was just something sour in my coffee this morning...  I do not like being this paranoid.

This is, unfortunately, a valid observation...

The BCH narrative flag is being carried by the front line Monero evangelists on Twitter and elsewhere now.  And I know there are many here in this thread that also believe the Blockstream = evil, Peer to Peer CASH, whitepaper, NgU is evil etc. thing.

I also think Monero is a better fulfilment of what most of us (possibly SN himself) wanted Bitcoin to be, but I feel like the anti-BTC narratives are more harmful than anything else...

I could be wrong, I guess.

But I have ALWAYS seen BTC and XMR as two sides of a coin.  I am not a fluffy disciple, but I pretty much agree with his (at least public) stances on BTC vs XMR, and the community has drifted towards a Bitcoin hostile vibe that reminds me very much of the Roger Ver type of stance.  I don't like it.  But that's just me.

Ugh.

I know I am constantly defending the idea of "Bitcoin Banks", and "Trusted second layers" which probably ruffles cypherpunk feathers a little...  And I stand by the idea that bitcoin is big enough for "all the things".

But this?

This smells like NYA 2.0   It's the same usual suspects, all of them seem to be anti-segwit.  The Square team is the only one that seem like it ever had a pro lightinig stance.  I dunno.. I feel like Fidelity has been a good actor.  But I do not trust that bald f^%k.

The next war begins.  Get ready for a push for PoS, the rejection of the Lightning network etc.  I imagine this time there will be a public marketing campaign to sell the ideas... I have a feeling it is gonna get nasty as hell.   

I am most worried about the seeming inevitable push for PoS.  Because would a group of the biggest custodians benefit from PoS?  Yes.  They would.

I hope I am wrong.

I would include that in the list of ways to safely produce the private key.  But as you say it requires a little "know what you are doing", and just being able to get TAILS up on an air-gapped machine might be just enough to fortify the naïve user's bias that they know what they are doing when they do not.

It ends up being complicated.  How do we define "air gapped"? for example.  Turning the WIFI off on a laptop running ANY persistent OS (INCLUDING Tails under certain circumstances) would not meet my personal requirements.  People will print their seed words on printers that cache prints.


There are even simple pitfalls people can make that are obvious seeming to us, but not maybe all folks.  For example going to all the trouble to produce the private key safely and then typing the seed words into a wallet on a HOT machine.

Or something simple like people do not use  a BIP39 password(phrase).  Or they use one that can be brute forced.  Or one that is on a list already.

Bitcoin security is NOT for the lazy.  For sure.

And then there are the nuances.  What risks do you take by subjecting even your XPUBs to exposure?  Sure people will not be able to spend, but now we are delving into the privacy issue.

Shit... my BSOCD (Bitcoin Security Obsessive Compulsive Disorder) is kicking in hard. 

If we made a list of the X most important posts on this behemouth thread, I would vote this to rank highly... or one like it.  It cant be overstated, and I guarantee there are people here reading this that don't get why.  (Probably not most of the regulars... but maybe even some of us!)

100% = amount you HAVE to trust a third party wallet that holds your keys.
100% = amount you have to trust closed source wallet software even if you can access your keys
100% = amount you have to trust open source software for which you have not (or cannot) personally reviewed the code
100% = amount you have to trust open source software for which you have reviewed the code but not compiled the binaries
100% = amount you have to trust the above when you HAVE compiled the reviewed code, but don't really know what you are doing, but think you do.

That last one is a bitch.

It seems extreme, but in the end you can only trust a cold wallet for which you generated the keys in a *safe manner*, which is too long a process to detail here.  Then you can send your money to a hot wallet using procedures that are again too long to detail here, for spending.

This is most CERTAINLY one of Bitcoins biggest pain points.  Maybe tied with privacy.

A decent compromise:  Use a well reviewed and vetted hardware wallet to do the above.

A somber prediction:  "Bitcoin banks" and all the trust and regulatory risks that come with them are an INEVITIBILITY in the foreseeable future for almost all normal users.

This will be one of the keys moving forward... it is an interesting detail.  2nd layers are still nascent, and most of them are trusted.  But I think trusted 2nd layer use will be encouraged.

I also am developing the theory that the 6102 of our generation will come about through these trusted 2nd layers.  You leave your coins on CashApp, PayPal, Blockfi, or the exchanges, there MAY come a day when you CANNOT take possession of them with keys you control.

I am not anti-trusted layers... but I will not be parking any significant value on any of them, that's for sure.

Dear Lord... would you be careful just waving that thing around like that!

Already posted?

https://twitter.com/vikrantnyc/status/1378829801159585793



FWIW, I do not know lot's about Vik Sharma, but I believe he is the developer of the Cake Wallet (Monero) and is considered a fairly reliable, in the know, sort of person... Not likely he would make up stuff like this...

PPS.  Hmm... he is also the person who predicted Oracle was coming in a while back.. so nevermind... probably just baseless rumors.  But I am leaving it for conversation value.

Yup.  This is why I would not hold more than a trivial amount of value at any of these places in, frankly, any form.  In fact the only reason I would even buy bitcoin at one of these is to "support" them though at this point I do not think they need any support.  The system is up and running.

I have nothing against these orgs, and also believe that TRUSTED layers are a valid and useful evolution of technology.  They offer a set of tradeoffs, as long as we are aware of them, makes what they offer useful to some.

But some folks will likely get burned.  I think we are further along in your dystopic prediction than many would believe.

Yes.  And this detail is lost on most.  Though we are not the only chain with organic growth... our old arch-nemesis DASH comes to mind.

But in time (short time) ways to use BTC transactionally will become more and more appealing and eliminate the other chain's artificial utility.

But for BTC to replace Monero's utility a LOT of work will need to be done, if it is even possible (I think that it is dubious).

I think my 300 by mid may prediction is pretty bearish really.

Going to the zoo!

(But I still stand on my earlier answer of 62k)

I would say your destination is ~ 62k.

Yeah, Monero's transaction growth is most certainly very bullish.  It's entirely organic and real use oriented. I find it very encouraging.

There are many other chains with good transaction volume, but some of them are just crazy.  ETH is going wild.  And I think it will be the chain that shows us first what happens when nodes have to be run in big data centers and end up centralizing completely.  With a history of rules being changed many times ETH will certainly be the defacto example of a chain of loosely federated consensus nodes, and known active leadership.  I have no real idea what will happen to the various ETH killers/clones.

The bitcoin forks are full of shit mostly in my opinion... but they are probably going to be used transactionally as bitcoin's base layer fees stay high, and before bitcoins layer 2 is still being built out and evolving.  Several other older alt projects will be used that way as well.  Litecoin, Doge, our old friend Dash etc.

But I think people underestimate the many forms Bitcoin will be used transactionally OFF chain.  CashApp, PayPal, etc will emerge as trusted transactional layers for everyday use (ie coffee purchases).  I bet a standard eventually emerges as those companies make agreements to settle between each other off chain as well.  I would not be surprised if they use Liquid.  I think it may become possible to send BTC from a PayPal wallet to a CashApp wallet without touching the base layer. It is still possible lighting overshadows them all, but the UX is still too shitty for it to really win that one today.  However, it will still come along over time.  And once lightning is really working well it might be the layer for power users as well as the settlement layer for the larger orgs.  But until then Liquid is the sleeper... I still think that's goona seem like it came from nowhere eventually.

Most folks will use bitcoin this way.  And they will not care that they are trading privacy for ease and cost.

In time all the computational use cases being built around Ethereum will eventually begin to move to layers on Bitcoin as the tech expands.  People will realize that trying to be the base monetary layer for dapps and running dapps too is having your cake and eating it.

But Bitcoin's privacy issues are really starting to show up as we have known they would.  I love listening to Matt ODell twist himself into gordian knots trying to advocate for best practices for BTC privacy. They have not yet realized that all their coinjoins and use of things like Whirlpool is just going to taint all their holdings.  We really need to see taproot and it's multisig advantages get built out.

SO... I think we are starting to see Monero's next renaissance kick off.  Folks are going to realize that it is currently best in class... and on some levels the only contender.

One concern I have... and I am not done processing it is the recent rise of BCASH like Monero evangelism.  We are seeing a LOT of anti-bitcoin, "Monero is what the whitepaper really meant" type of narrative forming.  And I am not gonna lie.  I hate it.  Not because I disagree with it entirely, but because I think it is ignorant and one dimensional thinking.  And I know there are folks here that might be on the side of the folks pushing that narrative currently.  But I have always seen Monero as a dark companion to bitcoin.  For example which chain would you rather want to see governments use?

On the other hand, which chain do you think governments would be more likely to use.

Interesting times gents!

300 before mid May.

If you are buying 600mm worth OTC what's 1% to keep the price "oracle" in line?

People are probably tired of me saying this, but I just can't see how this is not what is currently in play... and it is ridonkulously bullish once it stops working.