|
@Karartma1. Do you really assume that institutional investors are buying bitcoin presently on where its price is? This might be the bubble stage and buying now is gambling that it might pump more. Institutional investors do not behave like this.
|
|
|
|
Grin is a new coin and I have heard a lot about it. Bitcointalk forum admin has started to accept grin as a payment method. Is it worthy to invest in grin now? The current price is $4.50 or something like that. What do you think? Will it increase or decrease more?
It is very difficult to predict whether this coin will be able to increase in the future. And in General, personally I am now very concerned about new projects, unfortunately we do not know what to expect from the already well-known projects, so personally I will refrain from new in this market. You've seen the potential of Grin already and you're having doubts whether it will still moon further due to the present market conditions. Invest now to avoid missing the chance to cos in the near future it will be go beyond your reach. It's more preferable to invest in already trading project than new project Grin was not created to be as a speculative investment and getting rich quick similar to some of the other cryptocoins. Everyone should read its monetary policy before buying because you might lose value by speculating on this like it was bitcoin. As an experimental hypothesis, Grin's inflation rate may discourage hoarding early on, improving its distribution. Inflation disincentivizes "whales," who have an inordinate amount of control over the price of an asset, and should act to downplay speculative bubbles and price swings. Early adopters get just as much out of grin as those who adopt later. This argument is discussed at length in Bitcoins are not digital greenbacks, in which Wei Dai himself considers "Bitcoin to have failed with regard to its monetary policy". Grin is aiming for as equal access and utility as possible for all users, now and in the future.
Constant emission could provide enhanced supply/demand certainty for all types of users, and allow transparent and natural pricing. Note: Bitcoin becoming widely usable as a method of exchange versus a strict store of value depends on the concept of "Keynesian beauty contests." The experiment is ongoing.
Grin is focused on privacy, scalability and fairness. If groups or individuals "get rich quick," they will have power to influence the entire grin economy more than others. Grin is not for creating technocrats, but for providing private digital cash to as many people as possible. Hoarding is a huge centralization pressure, and grin emission policy hopes to mitigate this.
The idea is to use grin like you use your bicycle, to get you around and make you more efficient, not to store in your garage hoping its value goes up.Source https://github.com/mimblewimble/docs/wiki/Monetary-Policy |
|
|
|
|
@rodskee. The future of much of the cryptospace might depend on the outcome of this case because if Ripple is charged and ordred to take down XRP, the case might become a legal predecent for the SEC to take down other projects that can be defined as illegal securities based on Ripple’s case.
Coinbase delisted XRP because it is an illegal security? I can tell you what other coins they should be delisting hehehe.
|
|
|
|
|
@JollyGood. However, Ripple’s present situation is very different. There is a pending charge waiting to be determined by a judge against them. This is not the usual penny stocking style pump and dump.
|
|
|
|
|
@figmentofmyass. Sorry. I got lazy from reading all these different articles. I did not bother to look again.
In any case, you speculate institutions will fomo buy bitcoin on these high prices? They might be too smart for this. Dumping on the people is their job hehe. I do not think they will fomo buy to hold bitcoin at their own expense.
I am only being my skeptical self hehehe. People in the cryptospace can sometimes become very excited about anything to hype.
|
|
|
|
Washington Football Team Now, about that name; I read an editorial not long ago that claimed Dan Snyder (owner of the ForeSkins) who is a Premier League fan was considering officially naming the team Washington Football Club, or WFC. Although conflating football with football is likely to add confusion in some cases, I must admit I don't hate that. WFC seems to flow off the to tongue in a seamless way. Where as WFT seems destined to trip you up, almost taunting ones dyslexia. Anything is better than having the word "Team" in your team name. But I don't think they'd go for it because who wants to be confused with soccer after all. When times are desperate, or if I was stuck in a bar somewhere and the only thing on was soccer, I'd watch it. But it just doesn't get the adrenaline and testosterone flowing like the NFL.  However, why did they change the Red Skins team name? Is this politically correctness? Were native Americans offended? The Dallas Cowboys should also change their team name to the Dallas Cowpersons. |
|
|
|
Operation stop big short? This might be the beginning of a transformation in the stablecoin market from a USDT influenced market to USDC, GUSD and others that might be more favored by regulators. Also, it mentions that the document can be interpreted that public blockchains can be treated as infrastructure similar to Swift, ACH ad Fedwire. This is good news except for Tether and Ripple because the SEC has pending charges against them. The skeptical me thinks that there might be a conspiracy where there are movers behind this that favor USDC and Stellar. Am I watching too much movies again hehehe? Breaking major news from US Treasury OCC, the largest US banking regulator (@USOCC), with new guidance allowing US banks to use public blockchains and dollar stablecoins as a settlement infrastructure in the US financial system.
The new interpretive letter establishes that banks can treat public chains as infrastructure similar to SWIFT, ACH and FedWire, and stablecoins like USDC as electronic stored value. The significance of this can’t be understated.Source https://twitter.com/jerallaire/status/1346233132396257282?s=12https://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2021/nr-occ-2021-2a.pdf
|
|
|
|
Many have tried to bring a true Bitcoin ETF to Wall Street over the years, starting with the Wiklevoss twins in July of 2013. The major problem cited has always been lack of liquidity that could lead to massive volatility. The answer to this problem has always been a bigger market. How big is anyone's guess, but given Bitcoin's history of tracking the stock to flow pricing model, you could see potential for this year to have a major jump in valuation that would likely meet any prerequisite for market size and liquidity. It may not matter anyway (because I think we're getting there for other reasons) but higher prices alone won't necessarily guarantee the sort of liquidity they want. In terms of market share, the SEC wanted to see volume and liquidity shift away from shady, unregulated exchanges who are hidden in uncooperative jurisdictions (Okex, Huobi, Binance, Bitmex, Bitfinex, Poloniex) and towards regulated futures and equities markets and American/European spot exchanges. A lot has been done in that respect. Bakkt and CME futures are growing, GBTC is growing. Bitmex obviously got cut down in size. Okex, Bitfinex, Poloniex aren't quite what they used to be. But I think Binance and Huobi are still really big thorns in their side. We're definitely getting there though, quite possibly during this bull cycle. Massive interest in the futures markets and in instruments like GBTC and Microstrategy might force their hand. Also, large institutional investors certainly should not want their dollars near those hack prone exchanges that are in a constant questionable position with regulators hehehe. |
|
|
|
I am very skeptical of this article. Institutional investors do not fomo buy similar to ordinary investors. says who? institutions aren't some mythical beings that only buy bottoms and sell tops. they may have stronger hands than retail---because they have deeper pockets---but they chase markets like everyone else. Also, a judge will determine Tether’s case on January 15. Might this be Tether held in exchanges are traded quickly for bitcoin for safety?
nope, the 35k outflow came from coinbase, who doesn't support USDT. Institutions hire traders who know what they are doing and do have a method for their trades. They do not fomo buy and cause the price to move up very fast that would also cause slippage. What outflow? Can you give me a source on this? |
|
|
|
Or a hack/bug. Why would they need to pump the price if they are exit scamming? Don't they already own/hold the exchange's wallet with all the coins?
Or are you expecting greedy people to deposit their BTC, try to sell them and get them stuck there?
Perhaps in this way they wanted to attract as many deposits as possible in order to steal funds. The price reached 2,000,000 USDT for 1 BTC and then the exchange shut down. Now there is such a warning:  It might also be something to make it appear that they were hacked not dissimilar to a distraction. Exchanges cryptcoin prices exist only in their trading engine. They can fake the price and claim that they were hacked while they pretend to be the hackers to steal the coins. |
|
|
|
Does this imply that the CFTC can also charge Tether? Yes. The CFTC hasn't expressed much interest in stablecoins but they did say this: A stablecoin backed by fiat currency or a tangible commodity is likely a “commodity” under the Commodity Exchange Act, but the CFTC should have no day-to-day oversight over such a stablecoin; it retains anti-fraud and anti-manipulation authority, however. https://www.cftc.gov/media/2731/TAC100319_Stablecoins/downloadIn any case, you agreed that Tether is shady and you also know that there have been no verifiable audits, however, you say any speculations and if someone asks questions about Tether’s legality and backing is FUD? This is ridiculous. I've explained in painful detail what is FUD and what isn't. Please stop beating a dead horse. Let it go. What would you say if Tether has been taken down? I'd shrug. What would you say if Binance got taken down? Or if Coinbase got hacked? Or..... I was asking if Tether was taken down and charges on it were proven, would this be the only time it will not be FUD for you? All the questions and speculations will be considered well founded? In any case, similar to what you have told me, let us agree to disagree. |
|
|
|
Everyone around here seems insanely pessimistic about an ETF approval. Makes me think one might finally get approved this time.
It's not 2017 anymore. Exchanges and derivative platforms have significantly tightened up compliance wise, fake volume is not nearly as rampant, regulators are constantly taking action, CME and Bakkt are steadily growing in volume and liquidity. This is exactly what Jay Clayton said needed to happen before an ETF could be approved.
Not to mention that Microstrategy, in terms of assets held, is turning itself into a de facto Bitcoin ETF. I suspect the SEC is feeling trolled by that and I wonder if it might make them more inclined to bring a real ETF to market.
Agreed. Also, Microstrategy’s direct exposure to bitcoin clearly is making it to the price of the company’s stock. The stock has pumped from $135 from August to $388.55 to end the year. I speculate that other smaller companies might copy the same tactic to bolster their stock price also. |
|
|
|
|
I am very skeptical of this article. Institutional investors do not fomo buy similar to ordinary investors. Also, a judge will determine Tether’s case on January 15. Might this be Tether held in exchanges are traded quickly for bitcoin for safety?
|
|
|
|
|
@7788bitcoin. Is that what Dana really said or is that the translation of the video?
In any case, Dana is a businessman. Khabib has a new MMA promotion called Eagles MMA where he needs Dana’s help for distribution and marketing. I reckon Dana can use money and that as an offer to convince Khabib to return.
|
|
|
|
Big day on Sunday with an extra serving of games. What teams do you guys like to cover?
I find these to be interesting:
Miami/Buffalo - Miami really needs this game but I just don't see them winning or even beating a +3 point spread. I'm waking up early to watch this one though...
Agreed. Matt Barkley also tweeted see you in the playoffs which implies that there might be much more fans than presently allowed to watch the game. This should help the Bills performance in their home stadium and get the bye if they clinch 2nd seed. In any case, are the Dolphins a good team to be given only +2.5? Should it be not +7? |
|
|
|
@estenity. 2017 was our chance. We had the code rebase, /r/Aeon was attracting new members and the involvement was growing. Much of the people in the cryptospace did not care, however. I reckon that if Bittrex delists this, this might never return to 10% of Monero again.
i think smooth is waited for an update of situation. What situation? In any case, we might be next. Bittrex delisted Monero and the reasons for a delisting very unclear. Yes, we know that the reasons might be regulatory and for compliance. However, the other question. Did Bittrex do this to avoid a small headache or is this a signal that they expect more regulatory crackdowns? |
|
|
|
Bittrex delisted Monero along with ZCash and Dash which was a weird decision sparking concerns about a regulator crackdown on privacy coins.
Monero is known to have the best privacy and we have also read previously about the IRS hiring Chainalysis to find a way to trace the transactions.
Can Bittrex know something others don't or acted before anyone else for their own reasons? Will Monero be delisted by more exchanges? Price drops and I'll be waiting to buy.
Bittrex has always had shit volume that was driven by arbitrage and nothing else. They have major problems with regulators and are trying to show what good little boys they are. Agreed. Bittrex also has not delisted other anonymous coins Aeon and Grin. This makes me speculate that Bittrex only does not want to spend on legal advice on how to proceed with anonymous coins but also want to be safe hehe. @smooth. Did Bittrex contact anyone from Monero’s development team before the announcement? |
|
|
|
@exstasie. However, there are no more audits proving that Tether is backed by fiat reserves. No stablecoin has ever been audited. The most we've seen is a balance sheet attestation from Circle for USDC, which Tether also did a few years ago with Friedman LLP. does not automatically imply that Tether is 100% backed by $20 billion held in a bank. I'm not saying it does. I was just responding to the tired argument that Tether hasn't been audited. Since no stablecoin has ever been audited, that's a moot point. An audit (or lack thereof) isn't inherently what makes a stablecoin safe or risky to hold. It might also be under the authority of the SEC because USDT is a dollar derivative. Derivatives are securities. Derivatives are secondary securities, ~95% of which do not meet the SEC's definition of a security. Those fall under the jurisdiction of the CFTC. The ~5% of derivatives the SEC regulates are "security-based swaps" which include things like stock or bond-based swaps, or credit default swaps. The SEC said this recently regarding fiat-backed stablecoins: We believe that market participants may structure and sell a digital asset in such a way that it does not constitute a security and implicate the registration, reporting, and other requirements of the federal securities laws. https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/sec-finhub-statement-occ-interpretationYou can call it FUD, however, this leaves more questions and speculations without an audit.
Whatever dude, I just don't see the point in spreading so much fear, uncertainty, and doubt.  Does this imply that the CFTC can also charge Tether? In any case, you agreed that Tether is shady and you also know that there have been no verifiable audits, however, you say any speculations and if someone asks questions about Tether’s legality and backing is FUD? What would you say if Tether has been taken down? Similar to you, I want this pump. However, as learners and participants of the cryptospace, we should ask questions. Do you think I have been researching about Tether because I want FUD? I hold bitcoins also, however, we should not be thoughtless larpers. |
|
|
|
|
@ Harlot. It might only be a paid for advertisement from a new bitcoin payment processor called Strike hehe. This appears to be a new form of marketing tactic similar to reality TV became a new form of sitcom hehe.
|
|
|
|
It happens every month, where you been last 3 years? However, with Ripple’s pending case, should they not stop dumping XRP on the market until everything is legally resolved? Chris Larsen and Brad Garlinghouse should be careful not to worsen the case against them. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
