holy shit way behind, in a trauma ward atm.
Bike accident sunday night, gonna be ok will post more tomorrow hopefully,
Sorry to hear that. Careful with that bike. You're a Bitcoiner, your body is far too valuable for such risks!  All the very best. Get well soon! |
|
|
|
It's the same old narrative: "we must make Bitcoin use less energy"... Those who advocate this idea cannot see that it is a fallacy by definition. It's precisely that inflow of energy that gives Bitcoin its value. This is a popular fallacy. Please help to correct others’ misconceptions about it, instead of spreading it. Bitcoin’s value does not derive from the inflow of energy. This gets causality backwards—and it doesn’t even make any sense. Bitcoin’s value causes its energy usage, rather than vice versa. The higher that Bitcoin’s market value is driven by factors that have nothing to do with its energy use, the more that miners are incentivized to spend on energy. This drives up the difficulty—thus closing a feedback loop that tunes Bitcoin’s BFT transaction ordering security, the effect, to follow Bitcoin’s market value, the cause. To the extent that miners thus do contribute back to Bitcoin’s value, it is strictly a second-order effect—not the primary cause. Higher market value needs higher security. Higher market value indirectly pays for the higher security that it needs. The system is subtle, and it’s brilliant! A clear understanding of this is important for rebutting anti-Bitcoin misinformation and POS propaganda. The supposed analogy between POW miners and POS stakers is a deceptive illusion, which I can rebut on many key points. This is one: Miners do not have economic primacy in Bitcoin’s POW system.Miners are essentially paid employees of the Bitcoin network. Their job is security-critical, so they are paid well; but they are neither the bosses nor the owners of the network, and they do not create the network’s value as a first-order cause. By contrast, POS essentially means a network by the whales, of the whales—for little retail moon-chasers to pour in their dollars, for the benefit of the whales.
This was the signal issue of the Fork Wars. Bcashers contradicted what I said; their attempted “flippening” was based on the fallacy that miners have some sort of dominant role on the network, economically and otherwise. Their theory failed. And my theory, set forth above, was proved in practice. If I were wrong about this, then we would all be using Bcash or S2X as the “real Bitcoin” now. A related key point: The security of consensus validation in Bitcoin is independent of miners, for all purposes except for transaction ordering. Miners have a sharply limited function in Bitcoin: BFT agreement on transaction ordering, to prevent double-spend attacks. All other security is provided by the Bitcoin Core node you have running at home on a Raspberry Pi, consuming 10W of electricity at negligible cost. This is not the case on POS networks. On POS networks, so-called “validators” with high capital stake have total control of the blockchain.This was just proved in practice a few days ago: The Terra blockchain executed a contentious hardfork in 10 days (!), over massive community opposition. To exercise central authority over an allegedly “decentralized” blockchain, Do Kwon and Terraform Labs needed only the collusion of a relatively small group of large, wealthy DPOS companies. Imagine if Bitmain had that type of power over Bitcoin, and you get the idea of how POS really works! The amount of energy has to be kept high, and should actually increase, for the price to be able to reach 6 digits and beyond.
Nope. When the price reaches 6 digits—the cause—then miners will spend enough on electricity to secure the transaction ordering on a network holding trillions of dollars worth of value—the effect. It is indeed a “closed-loop” system, as you say; but the loop runs in the direction opposite to what you suggest. I like your response, and I do not disagree with what you're saying. It is a different viewpoint that I can accept. The point is that Bitcoin's energy usage and its value are linked like the two sides of a coin, and this is by design. If one is affected, the other will be affected too. It is indeed a feedback (i.e., closed) loop, and if one puts a limit anywhere in that loop, it will affect the entire loop. We can debate endlessly about cause end effect, but the fact is that the Bitcoin network is essentially an energy storage container, and as such, it is subject to the Laws of Thermodynamics. Bitcoin cannot simply "become very valuable" and then be left to stay that way forever without an energy inflow, as if it is a Perpetual Motion Machine. There is no "free lunch" in this universe. Energy must come from somewhere to sustain movement in that loop, regardless of direction. |
|
|
|
It's the same old narrative: "we must make Bitcoin use less energy"... Those who advocate this idea cannot see that it is a fallacy by definition. It's precisely that inflow of energy that gives Bitcoin its value. Cut down the energy usage, and you cut down Bitcoin's value. If there's something they should be targeting, it is not the amount of energy used, but the energy source (fossil fuels vs. renewable sources). The amount of energy has to be kept high, and should actually increase, for the price to be able to reach 6 digits and beyond. It is precisely the immense amount of energy required for mining that gives Bitcoin its scarcity, and hence its value. It's a closed-loop system. Those bureaucrats don't have a clue. |
|
|
|
Those cards by Lina Seiche are so cute. Keep posting them, thanks! |
|
|
|
We can finally see some green! Well, this was predictable after 9 (10?) weeks of red. Not a real pump yet, but hopefully we'll see some $32-33k soon.  So, is this a: * relief rally to $38-42k? * mighty bull starting back to ATH? * weak dead cat bounce to $30-32k with moar pain following? All of the above! Oh, and the cat is Schrödinger's. |
|
|
|
Some of you may remember that a few months ago I invested into Bitcoin heavily at the price of $36,850 per Bitcoin and was quite positive about the outcome. I am sad to say that the last few weeks have been difficult with the price of Bitcoin going down by a lot. I am still optimistic that Bitcoin will recover but seeing the price going down each day is a big contributor to my mood every day. I try not to look at the price but when I have invested this much money into btc it is hard to not look at the price. My wife has been great during these times and she has been the one person keeping me getting up every day. I read comments in this topic and most are positive and give me a bit of hope. I have not sold any of my Bitcoin yet and I do not intend to. My original goal was to keep it in until I could retire on it which I am prolly seen as a older gentlemen so it is not to far fetched but I was certain at the time I invested at the right time and now I am looking at a big drop and feeling the effects of that. I might stick around a bit and try and get involved in discussion a bit more then I have because I think most are positive and that could help.
Mmm... You're not a true HoDLer yet, and you still neither understand, nor believe in Bitcoin and its long-term performance. There are two choices for you: 1. you mindrust (a.k.a. sell) it all away and end up at a loss or break-even at best, 2. you ignore current price, DCA/BTFD and wait patiently for Bitcoin to reach 6 digits and beyond, something that WILL happen much sooner than your fear allows you to expect. Your choice. |
|
|
|
|
Models, models everywhere! [insert meme here]
So much talking about models, when everything we need to know has already been given to us in the White Paper.
Three things:
1. Supply is halved every 4 years -- 50 > 25 > 12.5 > 6.25 BTC ...
2. Buy whenever you can (disregarding current price -- "It's going up forever, Laura!").
3. Sell only when you must (disregarding current price -- you only live once).
I just apply the above and not worry one bit about current price action. Has served me well over the years. My Bitcoin's value is currently around 15x of my initial investment (down from >30x at ATH, but still massive). Why change something that works?
Sure, one could try to time the market and buy/sell at local minima/maxima, respectively, but is it really worth the risk, stress and effort? To me, NO! I just apply (2) and (3), and let (1) practically guarantee profits in the long term. Emphasis on "long", because time is an essential ingredient to the above sauce. It won't taste good if you serve it early -- and might kill you too.
My 2 sats.
|
|
|
|
Hey here's an idea, how about NOT pre-mine 90 million ETC before launch? Or how about not moving to POS?
Bingo. I attended Vitalik's speech at Decentral in January 2014 where he unveiled his plan for Ethereum. I liked his idea of smart contracts and multiple mining algorithms. At that time ASICs were replacing FPGAs and the idea of being able to mine with CPUs and GPUs again was appealing. The deal breaker though was the pre-mining. What a scam. I didn't get into Bitcoin to try to make money. I believed in the technology and what it meant for escaping central banking tyranny. I saw through the blatant money grab and while I had the chance that day to get in at the start and make a lot of money, I took a pass. I like having a clear conscience and keeping my karma clean. Fuck Vitalik (and his buddy Tony DiIorio) and fuck Ethereum. Exactly. We all want to make money, but there are principles and red lines too. I'd rather have a clear conscience and support something that's pure and true and good for the world, rather than support something inherently flawed just for a quick money grab. Best of all, Bitcoin keeps your karma clean and makes you money too. It's the cleanest, most ethically sound money I've ever made. |
|
|
|
|
It's been a fun few weeks -- in Bitcoin price action, and in WO. Too much talking (typing), too much analysis (astrology) from self-proclaimed "experts", while Bitcoin does what Bitcoin has always done from day 1: slowly climbing up the price ladder, slowly winning the monetary race, while weak hands cry "I told you so" and look for "a way out" in cryptocoinery. Nature has a way of sorting out the men from the boys, and that's exactly what's happening now. Business as usual.
HoDL... and buy if you can!
|
|
|
|
How old are these shitcoins? I can't be bothered to check, I guess they're pretty recent, yet their blockchains have already been halted... Will shitcoiners ever learn? Bitcoin has been beating every 10 minutes non-stop for 13+ years and counting! What more proof does anyone need?  |
|
|
|
Birthday this weekend, who likes my cake   Man, that's some mighty cake you've got there! Are the BTC parts edible? And...how exactly are you going to cut that thing? Happy birthday, all the very best to you and yours, and congrats on a well-played move to increase your stash. Also thinking of sending some fiat to Kraken to buy some corn. Should do it soon have already done it, because the bottom may already be in, and by the time the fiat gets deposited, we could be back to mid-30s (which is still a bargain)... As for LUNA, serves the shitcoiners well. Will they ever learn? I'm sorry for the suicides and all, but these guys had already committed suicide when they pressed that BUY button. Let's hope it serves as an example for the noobs and the less experienced coiners out there. |
|
|
|
Much better than Bored Ape TM. This could generate some serious gas... |
|
|
|
One of the benefits of buying BTC early is that the average buy price of one's stash can be very low. So low, that dips like the one we're currently experiencing can be treated as almost non-events. Informed, hardened HoDLers, the ones who understand Bitcoin and have endured the 2017-2020 bear season, can go through such dips without any fear or uncertainty of what's coming. But even newbies in Bitcoin should not fear the volatility. We're still so early in Bitcoin's journey, that any amount of selling to keep fiat in a bank is much more risky in the long term than HoDLing and waiting. There are those who are willing to take the risk and ride the short-term wave, like LFC_Bitcoin's well-played sell near the top and subsequent buy near the local bottom. Good for him and I'm happy that it worked out, but I believe luck played a big part in it -- it could have gone the other way. I'm not even considering taking such risk -- Bitcoin is just too precious to sell and risk not being able to buy back lower. What I do is DCA by buying small/medium-sized chunks of corn to add to my stash whenever I can. Not as profitable as selling high and buying low (if I'm lucky), but it's 100% safe (in the sense that my stash is always increasing and always stays under my full control), and still taking advantage of each BTFD opportunity as it comes. As for the worth of one's stash, I'd use the 200-Week Moving Average (200-WMA) as a reliable, robust wealth size metric. The 200-WMA has grown to be my go-to metric when it comes to past Bitcoin performance and future expectations. The problem with observing spot price and zooming in, is that patterns tend to get dissolved and lost into the randomness of the short-term price action. The magic comes when zooming out -- patterns spring out of the noise and become clearly visible, while noise is averaged out and disappears. You can let your monitor and your eyes/brain do the averaging, or you can let math & science do it. I choose the latter option, combined with Bitcoin's 4-year Halving cycle, hence the 200-WMA. Two things: 1. The 200-WMA is monotonically increasing (i.e, has never decreased at any point in its history), 2. Spot price has practically never dropped below the 200-WMA for any significant length of time. Those two things should be enough to see where things are going. Measuring one's Bitcoin wealth in terms of the 200-WMA is a safe, conservative lower bound, that's backed not by weeks or months, but by 13+ years' worth of historical data. It's currently at $21,719. Of course, with Bitcoin anything is possible, any model can break, as seems to be the case with Plan B's S2F model, and HoDLers should be prepared for anything. Still, IMHO, the odds of Bitcoin's spot price getting and staying lower than the 200-WMA for a significant amount of time are pretty low to non-existent. tl;dr: Don't be a weak hand, don't be scared by dips, no matter how deep they may appear to be. Just zoom out and use math & science to separate the trend from the noise. The 200-WMA indicator should put your mind at ease regarding where we're going. Yes, spot price and the 200-WMA tend to meet every once in a long while, but only briefly, before spot price quickly shoots upwards. Still worried and thinking of selling? You do what you have to do, but I fear that along with the fiat you're going to get, you'll soon have to put an 'M.' in between your first name and surname. Not to mention the batslaps and rusty pipes you're going to be receiving... Your choice. |
|
|
|
Boris Johnson pledging a further £300 million to Ukraine. We have already committed more than £1.5 billion in military equipment and £100s of millions in further assistance via loans and humanitarian aid. Not that I suspect anyone is keeping count. It's only taxpayers' money after all.
Mourners forced to rent coffins – media Surging inflation in the UK appears to be behind the growth of casket-renting services. Cash-strapped Brits are renting temporary coffins for funeral services before having their loved ones buried in cardboard, the Sun reported on Monday. Funeral directors say the cost-saving measure is becoming more popular as Brits struggle with a skyrocketing cost of living. https://www.rt.com/news/554873-rental-coffins-inflation-britain/While I see your point (or, rather, the article's point), I find buying (or renting) a coffin a total waste of money and resources. IMHO, the entire funeral business is pointless and totally wasteful, preying on emotions to milk relatives' money. Religion plays a great part in all this, instilling fear and feeding these traditions. I have made it clear to my family that when I die I do not want a luxurious (or any) coffin, or anyone paying for flowers, services, priests, candles, crosses, and all the rest of it. They can donate the money to a good cause. They can put me in a cardboard box and bury me in the ground, with no tombstone, for all I care. If law requires a formal procedure, I would like to be cremated. Hopefully, by the time I'm gone, there will be cremation services that use the generated energy to mine Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin gives us choice, a choice we did not have before.
1. Want to be your own bank? With Bitcoin, you can, if you've got what it takes.
2. Too scared to be your own bank? A 3rd party can take care of your* BTC for you.
I believe (2) will be offered by banks, which will serve as the Bitcoin custodians for the non-tech-savvy, scared crowd. The vast majority of people want someone to take care of the technicalities. They want a customer service number. Bitcoin is raw fire -- (still) too hot to handle by most.
* "Not your keys..."
|
|
|
|
For the last couple of days, there's been some FUD and video views-fishing on YouTube, about Michael Saylor supposedly selling part of his Bitcoin. This is NOT TRUE, and even if it was, Honey Badger don't care, but would be at odds with his entire narrative of "never selling". https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=saylor+sellingElon/Saylor/Dorsey scam giveaways, fake news about selling their BTC... What will they do next? |
|
|
|
I am not sure what Elon's actual position on Bitcoin is.
There is the Doge red flag. And at the same time I cannot imagine he has been without some tutelage. Someone must have helped him understand the reason putting everything on the base layer is not a real possibility without centralization. you know... the thing that Hal Finney got in 2010.
So taking this down Binary paths:
He has not realized that basic fact for L1 - then he is either a moron (unlikely) or arrogantly unteachable (quite possible).
He HAS realized that but either does not care, or wants the centralization which makes him evil.
He HAS realized it but is being very careful about what he promotes after having wrecked a bunch of his acolytes.
Between Jack, and Saylor it's hard to imagine they have not talked about it with him, and explained why scaling in layers is the optimal solution. And also why Doge is probably doomed even worse than Bitcoin when it comes to bloat. I also think there is a sincere chance he actually believes the "inflation is needed for velocity. And he does not know that Bitcoin has solved this by reducing technical friction so much that we will see spending simply because of that.
So we will get to see which one of those categories he is in. To be honest I would not place a bet for any of it yet. And I pride myself in being a good people reader, and troubleshooter. It is very hard to tell with him. I do get the sense he isa bit of a narcissist. And is also on the spectrum somewhat. But he also seems to be an idealist. It will be instructive to see what he does with twitter, and as we move forward with crypto.
I say "crypto" because I would be surprised if he did not do more things to support Doge, sadly. Even if he has seen the light with BTC, I would expect a high possibility that he would try to make something good out of the giant mess he's made with Doge. It would be better if he just stopped playing, but I think this is unlikely.
I also can't make up my mind about Elon. I used to be a big fan, and, in a way, I still (want to) like him. Part of him at least. The idealist in him, with his rockets trying to conquer space, and his Teslas innovating how we drive. Out of the many talented engineers I've met in my professional life, I'd say that, to truly excel in engineering and science, moderate levels of ASD, OCD, and a good deal of perfectionism can be beneficial. You have to really care about the little details. I don't know where Elon stands in all this, but part of me wants to like him. His behavior and actions last year, with the tweet-farts, the DOGE stuff, and the removal of Bitcoin from his Tesla shop were all disappointing events, and certainly not "true Bitcoiner" material in my book. Edit: text enrichment, clarifications. |
|
|
|
[...]
If you drive a car you're a driver...
[...]
Yes, you're a driver, but not a car lover. I guess that's what I meant with my "true Bitconer" term. You can call it "Bitcoin maximalism" if you wish, but still I cannot call my greedy friends mentioned in my previous post "true Bitcoiners". It just doesn't seem right to me. I see your points though, and we agree on substance. The differences are in semantics really. |
|
|
|
Elian is a narcissist that will fire or ban anyone that disagrees with him as he has proven throughout his career.
jep! Coming back to the question "who is a bitcoiner?" I really would love to know how everybody in the WO thinks about that expression, or better how everybody defines it in measurable terms. What I think the fellow WOers are trying to say is that to be a "true Bitcoiner" is not to merely own loads of it, but to also (and most importantly) demonstrate an understanding of its core principles and the problem it solves, and to use everything in your power to support and promote Bitcoin every chance you get. Owning 50k BTC and at the same time promoting DOGE and removing Bitcoin payments from Tesla's shop because of environmental concerns, shows that 1. you don't get how Bitcoin works and where it draws its value, 2. you believe the misinformation that Greta and her team of EU "experts" are trying to feed to the ignorant public about Bitcoin's power consumption, or 3. you have some hidden agenda/goal and you use your power to achieve said goal, which may not necessarily be in the best interests of Bitcoin. That's excluding the ASD/narcissism aspect. I have some friends whom I've introduced to Bitcoin, and some of them have ended up owning varying amounts of BTC. From our discussions, I'm often disappointed to see that they haven't got a freaking clue about what Bitcoin really is and how it benefits mankind. They're just in it for the quick profits. I don't think I would call them "true Bitcoiners"... tl;dr: Simply owning BTC doesn't make you a "true Bitcoiner", just like owning a Picasso doesn't make you a "true art lover". |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
