mememememe



Ps.. do I count as a "person"?  #justasking

Of course, a lot of things are actually possible, and even more things may be possible, whether we are talking days or longer.  

In udder words... not saying much to proclaim something or another "may be" possible.


You, Dabs, are making the question more involved, and seem to be wanting to push some kind of agenda.. or at least to discuss the Pascal wager, when that was not even brought up by anyone except for you extending the conversation into never never landia, if there even is such a place?.

Largely, all that was being asked or talked about by AlcoHoDL were probabilities of whether there is and afterlife in terms of whether he is actually going to have any kind of capacity to see his lil ded selfie during the funeral or whatever, which is also contemplating whether death is actually final.  So surely we moved quickly passed that part because we were both largely in agreement that the odds were pretty damned low.. but still maybe something to mention as a kind of possible fantasy.

So now you, Dabs, seem to want to double down and talk some more about whether some peeps should be motivated to be "goodie goodie" based on if they believe that they could end up getting punished in the even that they do not live sufficiently "goodie goodie" in this current life. In some sense you are coming off as patronizing and pretentious to act as if some of us have not come across such ideas, but you may well being patronizing and pretentious as well to be trying to push us into some kind of nonsense religious topic because you want to talk about it, when it was NOT even mentioned beyond as a kind of passing thingie.


Nothing wrong with that, and in that regard, I doubt how you remembered is dependent on their being an afterlife or not.. but maybe how you remembered is one of the ONLY forms of actual afterlife that exists - so you are kind of alive - even though not materially - until the last person forgets you... perhaps?


We (that's the royal we plus 1... and all that matters for all intents and purposes) have already ruled it out, here.


Surely that point has something to do with the price of tea in China, especially if we dig down really MOAR deeper.  


They are both way out there.. but sure.. freezing your head at least seems to have a some kind of "chance" (in the Dumb and Dumber Jim Carey sense).. gosh, not even sure if that is greater than 1% whether we are referring to 20-50 years or 100 years, 1,000 years or even longer.. but hey science does have ways of surprising us regarding what is actually possible in terms of ending up actually being able to later carry out what was initially theorized as to being impossible.

Loyce, maybe I am misunderstanding you, and maybe we are deviating from the topic of the thread a bit to be figuring out number of users and level of adoption and then maybe considering if that information is more obscured or less obscured by lightning network.  Seems to be more obscured, just like the quantity of coins held by an exchange, even if there might be points that claims are sent back to individuals on line with an exchange or channels are closed though lightning.

In any event, your acknowledgement of Coinbase potentially having 56 million users (as they seem to claim) and your earlier description of 37 million funded bitcoin addresses seem to contradict your point about the number of funded bitcoin addresses as being the "upper limit" in regards to the number of bitcoin users, because even Coinbase's claimed number of users (of 56 million) exceeds the number of funded addresses of 37 million.

Sure those coinbase users count, but we hardly know anything about them.  Coinbase knowns quite a bit about them.  With lightning, how much are we going to know about those users?  I don't claim to be technical enough, and sure some folks running nodes and compiling information probably have better ideas about the kind of users and number of users, but they are likely guessing, while at the same time the value that goes through the lightning network is going to have a lot of variance between users in terms of their whole bitcoin value (how many bitcoins they own as compared with how many they might be using to facilitate lightning network transactions).

We seem to have a lot of black holes in trying to figure out both number of bitcoin users and how many coins that they might own (even if held and gatekeepered by a custodian).

There are also various ways to attempt to figure out if some of the members are just dabbling in bitcoin, yet those dabblers have way more potentiality to put way more value into bitcoin, so surely there are no coiners and there are way the hell underfunded bitcoiners.  Probably, there are not too many Michael Saylors in the world, because he seems to be ok with putting a real high percentage of his wealth and the wealth of his company into bitcoin, but even his extremeness can be contagious and show that otherwise folks who we considered to be well funded in bitcoin having 10% to 30% of their wealth in bitcoin, might be ready, willing and able to invest way more into bitcoin, even if they already have a decently large stake in bitcoin.

I personally suggest that normies (and I do not see any reason that normies, rich peeps or institutions should be very different in this regard) invest between 1% to 10% of their investment value into bitcoin, but if they model after guys like Saylor they could become way more bullish about how much they put into bitcoin.   There are also likely a lot of people who do not have very much stored wealth in anything, but they start to dabble into bitcoin, and their ideas might change, which would include some of the increased adoption in El Salvador which also seems to have some increased uses of the lightning network that might cause some of the lower paid people and the less likely to adopt bitcoin people to start to dabble more and more in bitcoin and start to add value to the both the adoption quantity of persons and the percentage of their wealth in bitcoin may start to increase, too.

Of course, there are governments too, that are considering dabbling in bitcoin in terms of considering if they might want to hold some reserves in bitcoin, and that could become complicated if they start to act like Saylor rather than acting like a currently hesitant no-coiner considering dabbling up to 1% into bitcoin, and again the seemingly increased uses of the lightning network in El Salvador might get them thinking about bitcoin in one kind of way in terms of the utility of usage (including increasing economicalness of remittances), but then cause some of these governments to consider keeping more and more on its balance sheet in bitcoin, whether those are more prudent conservative levels such as 1% to 10% or they end up going full Saylor.. which gosh who knows?  50% or some seemingly ridiculous leveraged amount that seems to even be approaching more than 100%.

So, of course any assertion of 100x increase in adoption from here (such as the one that you made, Loyce) has a lot of vague aspects concerning "what do you mean by adoption exactly", but then also if we think about some of the increased use cases and then how consciouses can be changed in terms of using lightning network causes them to have more and more ideas about increasing their storage of value into bitcoin, then 100x from here seems likely conservative rather than overly zealous as a near to medium prediction.. and maybe super conservative if we are talking 10 years from now, but I still am not sure about how we go about measuring adoption level like we might measure whether a house has a microwave, fridge, dishwasher, fax machine, and/or washer/dryer.  

Even measuring internet connection seems easier than measuring binary ideas of adoption of bitcoin or not, but bitcoin is not binary in that category... In the case of the internet, there maybe materially less significant even if there might be redundant ways of person x to connect to the internet from his/her own home versus when out of the home, but bitcoin there are so many gradients in terms of level of adoption and how bitcoin is used can cause incidental adoption.  Accordingly, attaching value to an asset (bitcoin) seems to be a bit of a different kind of cat as compared to material items.. and digital value - a concept that peeps are still trying to grok.. (those paying attention).

Fair enough Wind_FURY that we might be saying the same thing in terms of difficulties to know if we are going to either be able to have more buy opportunities in the lower $30ks and even in the sub $30ks, and so maybe part of the confusion comes from the chart that you linked that seems to show that there are going to be more sub $30k future opportunities - maybe even several months worth of sub $30k opportunities to buy.

Of course, none of us have any kind of certainty in knowing whether there is going to be more down before UP, and I would certainly prefer to be in a financial and psychological position that I am NOT part of any FOMO situation but instead it might be O.k. to watch from the outside.. It's not as if there is much that we can do, on personal levels, to stop FOMO situations from happening, but hopefully we can set ourselves in such ways that we do not become part of the FOMO participants (in other words, if we get ahead of our trades, we are prepared for either BTC price direction - and ultimately less emotional regarding quantity and quickness of price direction when the BIG moves do happen from time to time).

Maybe it is good that we cannot read behind the paywall ?  Not to be so gloom about the misinformation that sometimes can come through some of the mainstream renditions of what is going on.

In some senses, I become more dependent on members such as fillippone and maybe even some others to tell me what is really going on or to issue an updated chart in order to distinguish what is different from offer 1, versus offer 2, versus offer 3 versus what I believe is going to be Microstrategy's offer 4.

The first three are listed in the below chart listed by fillippone with the latest $500 million (which I am characterizing as offer 3) being listed as a kind of redundancy that may well get filled in later in terms of what is the split between what portion the American investors took of the $500 million versus the non-Americans.  Also, you can see from the chart that usually the MSTR buying and announcement comes several days after the "issue date," which was yesterday, which would imply that this week MSTR is in the process of buying BTC for that offer 3 - unless this time is different.. which we do not have evidence to say that this time really is different... in terms of the order of the buying coming after the issue date.


My understanding in terms of the $1 billion amount of offer 4 that was announced through an s-3 yesterday is a form of stock offering that seems to suggest that either MSTR would be selling some Class A shares that they already own.


The latest that I checked today their stocks are $614 on the open market, suggesting that MSTR would have to sell around 1.6 million MSTR shares to reach $1billion.. and my understanding is that those class A shares have 1/10 the voting power of class B shares, and Saylor owns most of the class B shares (see the OP of this thread for voting rights descriptions). 

Again, I cannot figure out if they are just selling some company shares that they already own or if they might be issuing some new shares or maybe both?

I surely have misunderstood the significance of various other earlier MSTR announcements, so I would not be surprised if I don't understand the actual details of this potential $1billion situation very well either.

What do you mean about maximalists being unhappy?

Strike.me gives the option to convert right away to dollars or to stay in bitcoin, and so what?  people should have those kinds of options.  

Are you referring to that?  or something else?

Let's say hypothetically 90% of the merchants (or the peeps receiving bitcoin) convert to dollars, so there ends up being less demand for bitcoin because almost all of the merchants/recipients are converting to dollars as soon as they receive the bitcoin.  Sure, I am being generous with my hypothetical, but surely we already know that strike makes it easy to convert to dollars, no?

Given the potential for vast conversion from bitcoin to dollars, do you believe that overall that there is going to be less demand for bitcoin because of the allowance to convert to dollars, even with a big assumption that a vast majority of merchants/recipients could chose to convert to dollars right away?

I would bet that so called "maximalists" would prefer that people have options to do whatever they would like and they would likely figure it out, sooner or later, that it is good to hang onto some bitcoin  (maybe even there might be times that it is better to hold more bitcoin and other times that it might be good to hold some in bitcoin and the other part in dollars) rather than converting everything back and forth to dollars... might take some of them a while to figure out some balancing that is comfortable for their own particular circumstances, but I am sure that they will have way more abilities to figure it out when they are actually having experiences and opportunities to use it rather than merely speculating about what they may or may not do if they are NOT in such a position to try it out.

I hardly even understand the rationale of holding $500 billion in cash and waiting for higher rates.. while expecting inflation.. hardly makes any sense.

It's like you are saying.  "We have $500 billion in cash and we expect this cash to be only worth $400 billion in a year, but we would like to sit on such cash and wait for this stack of cash to lose value because we think that there might well be an opportunity out there at some point.. we do not know what that opportunity is, but we think that maybe interest rates might get raised [as if that's going to help shit?]"... It's like having on blinders, unless he is just trolling us.  In other words, is he really that damned dumb?


Surely we already know proudhon's seemingly broken record game... He usually ends up being quite wrong, but surely sometimes he is right, and calling for down in the past few weeks has been working out pretty well, and sure it works out pretty well, until it doesn't - and surely seems to have lower odds of working out well in a bull market - which seems to be where we continue to be, even though there have been some pretty strong doubts in the past few weeks.

Funny how peeps can so quickly presume that we have gone from a bull market to a bear market on the kind of data presented, so far... but whatever, I suppose that several of us longer HODLers are ready, willing and able to go through a premature bear market if we have to, even if it is NOT our preference(s).

I am also NOT going to presume that the $30,066 bottom is "in".. too early for that kind of partying.. so there could be some challenging areas on the way of returning to UPpity - presuming that we have decent chances of returning to UPpity.  

Surely, beartards and bitcoin naysayers do need to attempt to take advantage of these kind of DOWNity corrections as much as they can - if they still have any coins to dump, financial instruments to deploy, FUD to spread or other ways to attempt to either push the BTC price down (which would be their preferred scenario) or to keep it from going UP, which could also be acceptable if it does not cost them too much money...

Personally, I would very much appreciate to see the low BTC price betters (close of some of the futures at the end of the month and sure it is the end of the 2nd quarter, too), get fucked up the ass with their bets and their hopes that bitcoin would be below a certain price points by the end of the month/quarter.. I would personally love them to get ripped to shreds, but that might be too sweet... and more of a fantasy than a reality.. It does not really matter to bitcoin either way, if the shorters get fucked by the end of the month/quarter or they end up being correct and we end up getting some more local bottom testing (at $30k or whatever)..

Whatever happens, happens, the price is going to do what it is going to do based on a variety of factors.. and looks like Saylor is not only buying another $500million but today he announced another $1billion... Probably going to be somewhat difficult to outdo him (holy sheeeeiiiiit), even though some of the BIGGER investment funds already have that kind of money that they could throw into bitcoin and it would ONLY be 1-5% of the holdings of their fund.   In any event, it is always good to be prepared for either price direction, even if a large number of us have preferences for UPpity and continue to see a lot of seemingly strong-ass UPpity signs...Institutions likely want to get in, but they are slow to act, but Saylor et al is not very slow to act, relatively speaking. hahahahaha

Surely, I am not sure about the agenda of forum member bounceback, and I was largely responding to the way that he provided a kind of free interpretation to what had happened in El Salvador, which was not factually accurate.

What was approved in El Salvador, and the legislation and efforts that we are talking about seem to ONLY be about bitcoin - and surely it seems that the President of El Salvador had learned about a kind of bitcoin mini-ecosystem that had developed in and around bitcoin beach in El Salvador (in recent times - maybe a couple of years), so that inspired their bitcoin and lightning network focus in the early stages of their approach.

Time will have to tell how they are going to treat shitcoins, and/or if shitcoins become a problem or if shitcoins can actually serve any helpful role in the country.

In some sense, we already know that a large number of shitcoins free-ride and free-load off the various infrastructure, security and good will that is created, built and maintained through bitcoin, so bitcoin ends up giving a variety of shitcoins and other shitcoin related projects some kinds of cover, or the diptwats take advantage of such cover to both promote their sham bullshit or try to present their shit as if it were the same thing as bitcoin or even better than bitcoin in a variety of ways.

So, even if El Salvador does not give preferential treatment to various shitcoins, shitcoins can end up attempting to take advantage of such an atmosphere - and who knows if there might be some attempts to crack down on shitcoins, which actually would be a good result - but not an easy thing to carry out.



I am surely not going to predict the demise or death of any shitcoins soon - and of course, there can be ways to get in and out of shitcoins and make a lot of money... so even though some of us might consider that to be a waste of time, too risky or even too shady, there seem to be plenty of people who are willing to gamble on various shitcoins or to believe the various baloney talking points.  In other words, if any of us are banking on there no longer being vulnerable people (suckers) to buy into that various crap, we are probably making the wrong bet.



I am not even going to suggest that I have any ideas of what kind of pattern might play out, whether one shitcoin gets replaced by another, or there are new shitcoins or new projects, ICOs, Defi, NFTs or some other "innovative" hook for shitcoiners/scammers to make bank on the next fool.. and lots of fools out there.  Probably more than 95% of the worlds population have no stake in any kind of crypto, so there is a very large potential audience - and surely El Salvador is quite new in this matter too, even though I anticipate that development is ongoing in order to prepare for their 90 window when the law goes into effect on September 7, I believe.  

Maybe El Salvador will also need new laws or enforcement efforts that are ONLY noticed with the passage of time - and probably adoption will still take a while, even though Jack Mallers claimed that at various points prior to the Miami announcement, there had been days that they had onboarded 20k new members per day ... .. so those kinds of adoption numbers are nothing to sneeze at - even though they may or may not be sustainable because perhaps people who already have smart phones are easier to set up than those who do not have that, but some folks might have computers or other kinds of internet devices - especially if we are referring to various kinds of merchants and businesses selling goods and/or services.

Well played, sir.

hahahaha

Probably you are correct that it is not a great topic to debate about, and I am going to stick to my number (less than 1%) absent getting better evidence than a lot of people believe that the number is higher.



Sure... lot's of people hope

and sure a lot of people want there to be an afterlife.

Sure, a lot of these people are very smart, too.

I am sticking with my less than 1% number.



Oh so you think that if I believe in something that is not likely to exist, the fact that I believe is going to increase the chances that it does actually exist.

Does not sound like a good reason to move up my number.

I am sticking with my less than 1% number.



Actually fair enough that the answer is likely to be a binary.  

Either an afterlife exists or it does not.

I still don't see how my believing makes any difference?

You are suggesting that my behavior is more likely to be immoral if I do not believe in the yes of afterlife?, so therefore you would prefer me to be MOAR moral and civilized and therefore you believe that I need to believe in order to be constraint my lil selfie from doing what I would really want to do, whether lambos, hookers, blow or otherwise?  

Makes little sense.

I am sticking with my less than 1% number.


Just remember that no matter how much you "like" such number, the number is temporary.

That's all.

This one doesn't count either.

Just feels so temporary.. right?

Oh?  I feel so dummy on the inside... (even though I feel o.k on the outside).

yes.. upside-down.. ok... fine.  You little tricksters...  

It's like version 1 of the vroom helicopter.. that is now fixed.


Aren't you the smartiest of smartie pants, toxic-moxic.. joining the "club" of know it alls.  

I am a big fan of the afterlife too... but what are the odds.. pretty damned low.  I would be surprised (shocked) if such odds were even as high as 1%.


Fuck that reminds me of my long-ass conversation with my friends the other day, and I remember saying a few things several times and then figuring that they understood what I was saying because I was attempting to frame the matter in various basic ways, and these are relatively smart and successful guys.. but a few times they said things that caused me to realize that they were not understanding some relatively basic ideas that I had been attempting to communicate.. and a few times I just went back and attempted to clarify what I meant about a few of the terms that I had been using so that we were all on the same page, and then other times, I just had to give up or abandon some of the areas that I was trying to elaborate on because neither one of them was getting it, even after I repeated the idea in a variety of ways and even after I tried to dumb it down to very basic concepts.. like what I had thought were ELI5 kind of levels (while trying to NOT come off as patronizing - which also did slip through on more than one occasion, for sure).    For sure, people need help, and I am not even blaming anyone for that.



Don't give up on society... It seems to me that bitcoin is doing so well is because some parts of society are actually ready for bitcoin.. and sure there are going to be transitionary vehicles and a variety of options, but if society was not ready, bitcoin would have already failed... but neither has it failed it is likely more successful than even satoshi himself would have speculated - even though surely within the realm of possibilities but kind of playing out even more bullish than reasonably expected.


I am NOT denying your characterization there, AlcoHoDL, but at the same time some of them are going to learn and even learn well, and others will learn in modest kinds of ways and others will learn very little and even slowly, but the longer that they have bitcoin and are "playing around" with it, the smarter and smarter they are going to become about not only using it but likely even finding new and creative ways to use it that will likely add to the bitcoin ecosystem.. and even possibly create some attack vectors, too... I am not even saying that all of the learning or the finding of ways to use bitcoin are going to be positive.. but they are going to continue to grow the ecosystem.. and perhaps we will have another satoshi come out of the El Salvador additional bitcoin infrastructure or a roger ver or a craig wright, or a Adam Beck or a Greg Maxwell... or some combination of those all in one, including with a kind of volcano (perhaps explosive?) expertise..


What else is new in terms of having a variety of options, and some people being more capable of using some options as compared/contrasted with other options.  I surely would not claim to be any kind of expert in terms of even using or knowing about various options that are available to me or might be available to me with a bit of POW (or attempts to research or develop the matter).



Sure.. but you know that not all of us have to use the Tor version.. We could use the dumbed-down version or we might design our own ways of interfacing with king daddy, or we might have some combination of interfaces that we learn along the way or even try to match our ways of interfacing with our personality traits or discover traits that we did not know that we had.

Something is wrong with this meme because we first reached $40k on January 5... #justsaying


Oh?

And?


I looked again.

It's not helping.

Feels like grade school, again....

everyone knows except mmmmeeeeee.

 

You have too many questions, dude...... .and not enough answers.


... especially the etc, etc part because you are just signaling that if any of us were to be so brave as to even attempt to answer your previous 4 questions, then you would just have more and more and more...

 


We need answers, here.  NOT MOAR questions!!!!

 


First of all, I had to fix that for you.

Second, I am surely grateful for your lame-ass attempt at providing an answer; however, we have already had quite a bit of not so good luck with variations of your "$70k soon^tm" framenings.

I am feeling penetrated. #nohomo.

Didn't you end up being wrong in citing this one, bitebits?

Surely there was a wee bit of a down right after you posted it from $39,500 to $38k, then there was some flat for a few hours then an up to $41k - and currently we are bouncing around $40k - about 10 hours after your post.


Good idea for a password.  I am going to use that one, especially since it's so solid.

The trust fund aspect is something that I have been thinking about creating a thread on such topic because it can be quite involved. 

Surely there are a couple of ways of thinking about it, and one aspect would be if you already feel that you have an excessive quantity of coins, then you might put those coins into such fund and then practice managing them while you are still alive in order to get a kind of practice and routine going so that when you finally do kick the bucket (hopefully there is enough time in there), then a procedure is kind of in place and also you could then have some of your remaining and separate funds get funneled into the trust that is already in place and takes care of any of your value that you had failed or refused to spend prior to ded.

A second aspect would be if you conclude that you do not have enough coins or value (which actually could change depending on where king daddy prices go), then you merely attempt to describe whatever the process and procedure for the handling of such coins upon your becoming ded.  Surely, there would be some preference to putting some kind of practice in place prior to becoming ded, but still not everyone is going to feel that they have reached a sufficient quantity of value to set aside funds for that or to make some kind of processing of the coins through such trust to be "meaningful."

I don't really have any disagreement with your acceptance of Buffet kind of ideas in regards to considering putting limits on passing on wealth if there would be enough wealth to divide amongst some potential deserving folks that might be the right thing to do.. perhaps in addition to the trust.. or before even contemplating a trust if the value might not be enough in order to divide into those different categories that surely have differing considerations.

Bullshit.  The El Salvador bill (and even the various El Salvador govt reps - or peeps directly involved in discussing the direction of such developments) have not said anything about the "adoption of blockchain-based cryptocurrencies".. at least not so far.. Maybe you need to show me such a link if such a thing exists?

That sounds like your dumbass wishful-thinking interpretive way of framing the matter of what is going on in hope that you or some other dweeb can pump some kind of stupid-ass shitcoins, put out lame and misleading talking points or other nonsense.


At least you have not forgotten about the proper word to reference king daddy.. that's good.    

Of course, countries have choices.  They could have had a 100 year long rule about recognizing the currencies of other countries, but then they see this new situation that there previous rule would compel them to recognize bitcoin as a currency, but instead of just going with the existing rule, they can do whatever they want to make exceptions and try to describe the situation as "different" or "contrary to the public interest" or assert that El Salvador is part of the criminal cabash or whatever.

At the same time, countries also have limitations in what they can do in terms of the amount of public attention on the matter, so surely they would be taking chances if they create a bitcoin exception and they get a lot of backlash, and I am not even saying that government policies necessarily reflect the will of the people but there could be a bit of a tension , especially the more and more that bitcoin becomes embeded with more financial institutions and even governments, besides El Salvador.

Governments all over the world have already transitioned into various kinds of acceptance and recognition of bitcoin, even if they have not gone so far as either recognizing bitcoin as legal tender or as a currency.. but these recognitions and acceptances seem to be changing little by little, too.

Remember the BIG ass US Fed (US Marshalls) auction of the silk road coins (around 30k coins) in mid 2014... and then there was a follow-up auction of some more coins (maybe 10k or more coins) in late 2014.  Choices about conducting those two auctions had given the US Government some options about whether they would go down the path of auctioning off the coins, holding them or destroying them, and we know what they did.  Even if their choice to auction the coins did not constrain or require them to continue to recognize and accept bitcoin legitimacy, it still could have been recognized (for those willing to see it) that governments were increasingly going down the path of recognizing and accepting and allowing the embedding of bitcoin into various parts of normality.. that has increased and increased and increased through the years (for those willing and able to see it).

What are you talking about Wind_FURY?

There was already a chance to buy the dip down to $30k, and it seems that such opportunity so far had been around 3 weeks.  You seem to be suggesting that such opportunity is NOT over and from the chart, it may well last for a couple more months.  What are the odds of such a scenario playing out?  I am surely not opposed for preparing for such a scenario, but hopefully peeps are prepared for UP as well, in case such scenario does not play out. 

Hopefully peeps got a decent amount on this last dip, and so then if another dip happens they can pick up some more, and if it does not happen, they are also ok both psychologically and financially based on how much they had already picked up.

We will see won't we?  Betting on down in a bull market has fucked a lot of folks in the past, and sure there is a possibility that we are not still in a bull market, but I doubt that the odds are high right now of NOT being in a bull market.  Don't get me wrong also, dipping again does not suggest that we are still not in a bull market, but betting on down in a bull market still remains a problematic approach to meaningfully and adequately preparing for UP.. which tends to be a problem with lots of folks not limited to fence sitters, bitcoin naysayers, no coiners and shitcoin pumpeners.