According to a report from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, filed Sept. 27, the Morgan Stanley Europe Opportunity Fund, which invests in established and emerging companies throughout Europe, owned 58,116 shares of the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust, or GBTC, as of July 31. At the time of publication, the price of GBTC is $34.28, making the investment bank’s exposure to Bitcoin (BTC) roughly $2 million — Morgan Stanley reported thatthe shares cost $2.4 million.
Previous filings show that Morgan Stanley has increased its shares of GBTC by more than 105% since April. Cointelegraph reported in June that the investment bank held 28,298 GBTC, worth roughly $1.3 million at the time. https://cointelegraph.com/news/morgan-stanley-doubles-exposure-to-bitcoin-through-grayscale-sharesnot sure if it's cause they're so bullish with BTC and couldn't find a cheaper alternative, or they're just betting on the ETF that'll erase the current 16% discount |
|
|
|
China banning bitcoin, again:
~
Filippone QuickTake: LoyceV QuickTake: China fears their real estate bubble might pop when Evergrande goes under, so China tries to force more capital into traditional stock to postpone this a little further. Sarcasm: Let's sell Bitcoin and buy Evergrande, it's a bargain now  Fucking China again…..
How long until nobody gives a shit what they do, pathetic. As long as you (and I) post about it, apparently we still care. Looks like a full out ban on mining and exchanges in China, and we (so far?) only go back to where we were 3 days ago? Doesn't look like there are that many left that care anymore, or couldn't foresee this happening with Chinas push for CBDCs. |
|
|
|
Just looking at bitcoin.org home page and I see a dispute between CSW and COBRA over the publication of the white paper.
Does anyone have any more details regarding what is happening to bitcoin.org?
Is it going to be run by that ego maniac Wright?
CSW is using whatever buggary he can to get his name associated with Satoshi. Unfortunately, in the actual Satoshi's absence, there are a few places where this can have actual legal repercussions. He's likely also trying to take advantage of antipathy towards people on the BTC side of things that many from BCH and BSV* view as having acted unfairly. This all regardless of the fact that the real Satoshi could prove himself with almost no effort. In other words, just the usual jibber-jabber. *Personally I consider the whole of the BSV project as disingenuous and acknowledge that many here view BCH disfavorably. Bitcoin Judas started it. CSW forked BSV off BCH afair, so it isn't even "Bitcoin" any more, no matter how often he claims BSV is the real shit. But... To be true, it is real shit  EDIT: Cobra could well have fought the case, by giving up anonymity. I would also consider this price too high for hosting the damn whitepaper. You can also guerilla host it in Panama and point a link to it, and if CSW fights this too, place a link to a google search that delivers the whitepaper url as first/only hit. I see bitcoin .org hack as a net positive. Bitcoin doesn't have or need any rulers or websites. I applaud the "hacker" and find it hilariously suspicious that after getting full control of such website all they do is put up double your BTC scam. Can't think of a better way of discrediting such website without causing harm to underlying BTC. In fact I'd love to see all of the devs go fully anonymous, and just sign the released code as their sign of approval that they have vetted the code. i.e. just take the roll of official "auditors" of the code As far as faketoshi, BSv is now outside of top 50 on coinmarketcap behind "Klaytn" (whatever that is). Market has deemed him irrelevant, and i couldn't agree more |
|
|
|
... That is not what I am asking. I am asking from where you got this quote: >>>>>>>>>> Grayscale Bitcoin Trust does not currently operate a redemption program and may halt creations from time to time. There can be no assurance that the value of the shares will approximate the value of the Bitcoin held by the Trust and the shares may trade at a substantial premium over or discount to the value of the Trust's Bitcoin. The Trust may, but will not be required to, seek regulatory approval to operate a redemption program.
So, when you invest in Grayscale shares, you are actually locked into that, and the only way to get rid of those is on the secondary market, after a minimum of six months.
<<<<<<<<<< Do you have a link for the quote source? There's nothing outlandish in that quote. It's almost entirely taken from their main site Grayscale® Bitcoin Trust is currently unavailable Grayscale® Bitcoin Trust private placement is offered on a periodic basis throughout the year and is currently closed.
...
Because each Product does not currently operate a redemption program, there can be no assurance that the value of such Product’s shares will reflect the value of the assets held by such Product, less such Product’s expenses and other liabilities, and the shares of such Product, if traded on any secondary market, may trade at a substantial premium over, or a substantial discount to, the value of the assets held by such Product, less such Product’s expenses and other liabilities, and such Product may be unable to meet its investment objective. https://grayscale.com/products/grayscale-bitcoin-trust/ |
|
|
|
<..> and funds are returning to GBTC.
<…>
How are you stating this? From my spreadsheet all I can see on the primary market is a constant funds outflow (due to management fees) , without any inflow since the beginning of March. Also, in secondary market, premium is still negative. Something that arbitrage activity should help rising toward zero. GBTC fund is closed so nothing is going into it. Bottom line shows GBTC premium over secondary. As we can see it's negative (discount) at last data point climbing to around -7%. Top two lines are market price and holdings in $ which is essentially same thing since fund is still closed.   This graph is for BTCC Canadian "Purpose Bitcoin ETF" showing price and AUM in CAD$ so once again they're both climbing because BTC is climbing. Nothing new to see here |
|
|
|
b) that it is due to increases in "greenhouses gases" and by how much and by which percentage of the gases that are anthropogenic.
What's your best guess as to why the CO2 levels are 35% higher than at any other point in the last 800,000 years?  No one is saying that we are not experiencing significantly higher co2 levels, what we are saying is that it's not affecting the climate. If you believe that the current levels are not significant enough to affect the climate, would you care to state your position on what levels of co2 you feel would have an effect? |
|
|
|
but you can now buy a used small form factor like a dell for 200 bucks.
toss in 32gb ram.
a 2 tb ssd and probably go up to a 4 mb block. as long as you have at least 100mbs internet.
beyond that block size you need more power and faster internet.
but a pc with 128gb ram
i7 core
4tb ssd and 200mbs internet
starts to become costly.
That first PC is already plenty beefy. Pruning can reduce the storage requirements and UTXO checkpoints (if added) even moreso It's pretty much the specs of my VR rig (not including the GPU). If you want a record of every transaction on the chain, even spent ones, you'd need extra storage but that's niche for most people and not horribly expensive if you do. Surely you don't think that fees will fall linearly 4x with 4mb blocks right? So how many minutes do you think it'll be, before 4mb blocks get back jammed with 1sat/byte transactions? And that will be the point where people will start making fun of you for trying to run a global currency network on such crappy low end PC. And now clearly you need to upgrade to at least 64gb ram and a 4tb ssd for 8mb blocks. And just few minutes after that will come a need for 8mb blocks with a mid tower, then 16mb, then 32mb with a high end server etc etc etc ...? So the trade of is, you wipe out Pie nodes while ... achieving absolutely nothing  (or at max managed to drop the fees 25% for few months) In any case, bitcoin is going the way of an El Salvadorian fisherman with an LN channel on a Pie node transacting his business for fraction of a cent. Surely this is not the end stage and there's plenty that still will need to be improved, but this is a best solution so far, if you think a global currency can keep every transaction on layer one while maintaining decentralization you're delusional. |
|
|
|
Why not a adjustable limit based on a previous median timeframe?
Because on top of compromising decentralization for usability (the degree of compromise can and has been argued to death, and no there's no free lunch here) it introduces new attack vectors Could you link that explanation for me, I'm not aware of how compromising decentralization could happen in this instance? I'm usually pretty good at identifying attack vectors but I don't see the one here. Ugh this again, it's rather simple, but lets try a flow chart -nodes matter to decentralization -------------NO---> go to: Faketoshi and BSv
|
YES
|
\|/
-larger capacity leads to higher resource use ------NO---> go to: math class
|
YES
\|/
-raising resource reqs eliminates minimum req nodes (Pis can't handle 100mb blocks) ----NO---> go to: math class
|
YES
\|/
-Less nodes, less decentralization -NO-> go to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralization
|
YES
\|/
-Voilà
Some big blockers went full retard and argued for unlimited blocks, enter Faketoshi with his enterprise data center nodes Other like Richy_T argues for cost/benefit compromise, for multiple reasons market decided against this thus here we are |
|
|
|
I just don't see that. Banks don't need small blocks to remain necessary.
FYI, small block force a side chain solution which is centralized and there in lies the problem. I just don't understand why dynamic blocks are just not discussed, it smells of agenda. ... there is no discussion with dynamic blocks because think about for longer than 2 seconds, it goes like this: "Hmmm, dynamic blocks what's that about?" "Well the blocks can take any size up to a limit ...." "Oh a dynamic block size with a limit, what size should we make that?" ... and there it ends, it's the same discussion. Why not a adjustable limit based on a previous median timeframe? Because on top of compromising decentralization for usability (the degree of compromise can and has been argued to death, and no there's no free lunch here) it introduces new attack vectors |
|
|
|
I'm thinking that the president is moving ahead so quickly with the Bitcoin legislation that the US likely will not have time to react in time.
As governments tend to do, they will put together meetings, try to come up with their strategy, they'll make phone calls to gather information that we already know but will take them longer to figure out.
If El Salvador pulls it off in a week or so then it will happen.
If they get bogged down in the processes like the US government then it will likely be stopped.
Likely some investors putting money off the table until things are sorted out, politics wise. But what can the US do other than spread the usual FUD (money laundering and financing for terrorists) and start sanctioning ES? If Bitcoin works for ES, it might trigger an avalanche of adoption. As a poor country, what do you have to lose? Keep watching the slow grind down of your economy? It's fatal to wait in critical situations. You have to decide to move things towards a solution. And if it does get stopped what's the bet it dumps, even though it didn't pump on the initial announcement.
I think market stability is counting more than optimistic outlook. And this time it's uncertainty, because of lack of experience of how things usually turn out in a specific situation. The money will likely come in later again, anyway. A lot, there are plenty of examples of leaders in central and latin America that US didn't like. Let's just say they're not looking to well now. US can easily make another Venezuela out of ES, hyperinflation civil unrest and all the typical goodies. Looks like it might already have started El Salvador president's bitcoin push casts shadow over IMF efforts https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/el-salvador-presidents-bitcoin-push-casts-shadow-over-imf-efforts-2021-06-07-0And this is from two weeks ago US steers El Salvador funding away from government https://news.yahoo.com/us-steers-el-salvador-funding-222534762.html |
|
|
|
El Salvador is adopting Lightning Network. Will this be the kick-off of layer 2?
70% has no bank acount, few million working in the U.S, this will give their remittance market a major boost.
Impressive and mind blowing. The world will finally realize the awesomeness Bitcoin can offer, this is just the beginning.
Those shitcoiners in total disbelieve and so butthurted they running around like headless chickens, fck them all!
This sounds like big news. I just hope LN won't collapse under such a heavy load as an entire country officially adopting it. I'm in favor of LN, but from the few things I've read about it over the years, I get a bittersweet feeling, like it's not yet a polished protocol. I hope I'm wrong and it passes the test with flying colors. Lots of good news lately, not yet reflected in the price. I'm sensing a massive UPpity move in the coming weeks. You should be interested reading this article from Forbes. The Salvadoran marriage to Bitcoin has been two years in the making. Bitcoin entrepreneur Jack Mallers, who helped build the Lightning Network to facilitate fast, low-cost bitcoin transactions, has been working with Bukele and other Salvadorans to make bitcoin a feasible means of exchange for everyday purchases.
Another crypto entrepreneur, Adam Back of Blockstream, told CNBC that he “plans to contribute technologies like Liquid,” which like Lightning can speed up bitcoin transactions, “and satellite infrastructure to make El Salvador a model for the world.” Satellites can help rural Salvadorans connect to the internet, and thereby to the Bitcoin network, in places where land-based connectivity is poor.
Mallers has been working to increase Salvadoran adoption of his smartphone app Strike, a Lightning-powered analog to Venmo or Cash App. In 2019, thanks to a anonymous donation, crypto entrepreneurs founded Bitcoin Beach, as a way to pilot in El Salvador a circular Bitcoin economy in which residents and businesses transact entirely in bitcoin, without conversions to and from U.S. dollars. https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2021/06/07/el-salvador-to-make-bitcoin-legal-tender-a-milestone-in-monetary-history/?sh=3cd5186275b9What i feel is being way under reported is that El Salvador's current official currency is ... <drum roll> ... USD. So if they adopt BTC as a legal tender it will be in parallel, and in direct competition to USD over there. US printers going brrrr bring inflation to US, but at least the newly printed coupons stay in US, now think of all of those countries who pegged their currencies to USD. They see printers in US going Brrrr devaluating their own currencies, but can't Brrr anything themselves, so it's only a downside to them. They only get inflation without seeing new money. Think we all know how historically countries that challenged USD dominance (petrodollar) fared. Wouldn't be surprised to see US exporting some of its "freedom" to El Salvador to pinch the trend before other countries even consider doing the same. Things are heating up fast. |
|
|
|
Fuck me this guy is a beast I am still not sure if he will make into the history books as the biggest retard or the greatest genius. Time will tell. But if crypto really fails (because the system starts to fight it with all they have) he surely will be torn in pieces by the mass media. And yes, if one Elon Tweet can cause a 50% drop, the system has all the power to bring it down to 3 digits. By all the crypto fanboyism, we have to stay realistic. Just as the system won the war on drugs in the 90s right? riiight??  |
|
|
|
Jack Mallers Announces El Salvador Bitcoin Adoptionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uGOfqN2y9kWatch it in case you have any doubts about the future of Bitcoin. Worrying about the ticker price can sometimes almost be embarrassing. Bitcoin is hope. Edit:  The US and Canada enforces capital gains tax on currency transactions so it doesn't make a difference in my case unless the net gain (or loss) is less than $200... I can't live on that! Not a legal advise, but the way i read it, it's $200 capital gain per transaction. So if you you buy a $7 coffee in the morning, have a $40 lunch, and then pay $100 for a dinner, and then hit up few bars not spending over $200 in each, all of it shouldn't be taxable. such transaction is a personal transaction,
no gain shall be recognized for purposes of this subtitle by reason of changes in exchange rates after such currency was acquired by such individual and before such disposition. The preceding sentence shall not apply if the gain which would otherwise be recognized on the transaction exceeds $200. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/988 Wow! I find it hard to believe the US gov't would allow so much potentially unpaid taxes on the table. The way I understand the wording in the guidance provided by the Canadian gov't, it would be on all transactions. I'm not a pharmacist though so it's possible I have misinterpreted it. from canada.ca - the gov't of Canada website: Foreign exchange gains or losses from capital transactions of foreign currencies (that is, money) are considered to be capital gains or losses. However, you only have to report the amount of your net gain or loss for the year that is more than $200. If the net amount is $200 or less, there is no capital gain or loss and you do not have to report it on your income tax and benefit return.Yeah that reads as if it's cumulative for the year. That's pretty dumb, technically you're obligated to keep track of every cap gain on your FX, so if you had a quick trip to US on Jan 1st and bought crap that resulted in some cap gain even if it's under $200 you're expected to keep track of it, just in case on Dec 31 you do another trip that pushes you over C$200 Sucks for Canucks |
|
|
|
Jack Mallers Announces El Salvador Bitcoin Adoptionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uGOfqN2y9kWatch it in case you have any doubts about the future of Bitcoin. Worrying about the ticker price can sometimes almost be embarrassing. Bitcoin is hope. Edit: The US and Canada enforces capital gains tax on currency transactions so it doesn't make a difference in my case unless the net gain (or loss) is less than $200... I can't live on that! Not a legal advise, but the way i read it, it's $200 capital gain per transaction. So if you you buy a $7 coffee in the morning, have a $40 lunch, and then pay $100 for a dinner, and then hit up few bars not spending over $200 in each, all of it shouldn't be taxable. such transaction is a personal transaction,
no gain shall be recognized for purposes of this subtitle by reason of changes in exchange rates after such currency was acquired by such individual and before such disposition. The preceding sentence shall not apply if the gain which would otherwise be recognized on the transaction exceeds $200. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/988 |
|
|
|
Jack Mallers Announces El Salvador Bitcoin Adoptionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uGOfqN2y9kWatch it in case you have any doubts about the future of Bitcoin. Worrying about the ticker price can sometimes almost be embarrassing. Bitcoin is hope. Edit: I think he is wrong there, as far as I know capital gains tax is applied to all capital gains, including gains made from selling and buying currencies. At least were I live. There's a $200 exception in US. e.g. if you exchange 1.000USD for EUR at the Amsterdam airport, and the exchange rate moves in your favor so by the time you get to the red light district you get $1.200 worth of services $200 you're no expected to pay capital gains. Following that logic you should be able to pay for coffee over LN without worrying about taxes |
|
|
|
Wo bros....”Elon is irrelevant”
<Scans back a few pages...>...Observing lots of Elon posts....
In due time people will realize that Musk distancing himself from BTC is the best thing that could've happened. Of course pumpers want to see a leader shill the hell out of BTC to all billionaires, what they don't realize is that it would come at a huge cost later on. Tesla sold some BTC just to stress test liquidity, that makes me think that he's not as dumb as i thought, and actually distancing himself on purpose to lessen his cult of personality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality on BTC, or i'm giving him too much credit and it was Tesla's board's condition for delving into BTC. In any case moon will come naturally, worst thing you can do is to rush it. Any leader in a truly decentralized project should be frowned upon. |
|
|
|
Back in 2020 Interesting. My needs are the opposite (need to be able to spend my BTC) but this is a good way for people to onboard to LN with ease. Maybe their debit card could allow for that.
The Lightning Network has been a huge disappointment for me. Largely for technical reasons. Spent about a year back when it launched, running a top node, and it's a complete administrative nightmare handling channel balancing. It's ultimately what made me see it as the current critical flaw in The Lightning Network, and withdraw my funding and resources. I have not been impressed with the loop in/out options that have been presented as solutions so far. Liquid does not interest me at all, either. Gives me bad Ethereum vibes in a peculiar way. Currently US has PayPal bucks, Venmo bux, CashApp bux, zelle bux, EveryOtherPaltform bux etc... All of those balances are stuck inside their platform's walled gardens, now, what if those companies just had some sort of instant, almost free, magical lightning fast settling channel between them? Like when people "buy" BTC IOU in their respective apps, on top of seeing a BTC balance and getting exposure to BTC fluctuation they could also get an option to instantly transfer their "BTC" IOU between different apps/platforms. Can i Venmo you the rent, umm i only got cashapp can you do that? Ahh it doesn't matter just send me the balance in BTC IOU here's the QR All those apps can KYC/AML their customers before they'll set up a channel between each other. Then grandma can go, look sonny i'm using them bitcoins. At this stage that'd be the best use case, can be implemented yesterday, and masses would benefit from BTC as the underlying settlement channel Now in 2021 ...meaning that PayPal and Venmo users will be able to send Bitcoin not only to others on those platforms, but to services like Coinbase and to outside crypto wallets as well. https://decrypt.co/71982/paypal-users-send-bitcoin-off Ahh yes the underlying fabric bridging walled gardens, nice when things go according to plan, autumn/winter should get interesting |
|
|
|
ETF that'll offer up to 15% exposure to BTC through GBTC. Roundabout way of doing things but possible much needed new $$$ for GBTC |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
