How about you buy some, hodl it some, and call it a month?

Because your name isn't Japanese enough. 

Right, but answers pushing towards M$-Xbox adoption could eventually have some marginal effect on these here getlemens' quality of life indeed.

It might also be just weekend fuckery. Bring it down while liquidity on exchanges is low, before you buy moar. The buy pressure is all there - it's just not visible on exchanges because most of it is not from retail.

Merited also for using old.reddit 

Breaking 60k this weekend would be a semi-major event, given the temporary cooling off climate. I say: we wait until next week, padawans.

If they have their way with the IPO, the company will be valued around 100 billion dollars. 6.5 mil is just peanuts, "cost of doing business". At the hypothetical valuation of 100 billion, it's ~0.0065% of the projected market cap. That's 6.5 dollars each 10k. Pretty cheap, I'd say.

There will be no justice until fines for companies are measured as a fraction of total value or yearly income.

You mean the boat that capsized, throwing all your coins at the bottom of the deep sea?

I will gladly merit your fart-in-a-jar storyboard.

Ah, the pains of fungibility. If each dollar carried the buying value it had when it was "minted", it could be a legitimate trade.

I'm sure it's possible to figure out some relaxation technique to help the rich bitcoiner remember the key phrase - or at least part of it. She's just got to try a little harder, before the Feds come and spoil the party. That would give the dream a happier ending.

Butbut... China ban bitcoin....!? 

It feels like a bit too early to wipe out the leveraged longs, but maybe whales like to keep ahead of things today.

Yes, a wild financial assumption. It is unimportant to know how much it turns out to be when expressed in dollars. What matters is the total economic output of humanity as it relates to 21 million coins. Let's assume you can also buy things with dollars, or gold, or salt, or water. Let's assume the weeks' worth on bread on the planet are 21 billion instead - or 210. Do these assumptions change the picture much?

I think NFTs could ease and lubricate the trade of original limited edition art - but only for the traders: people who invest in art for its transfer of value over time. The enjoyment of said art is totally out of the equation here, which sounds a little weird when speaking about art. Besides, the applicability of these tokens to mass market production such as digital music or desktop pictures seems dubious at least.

More useful if it comes to adoption for other physical/semi-physical assets: stocks and gold are prime examples, as I said. Wherever re-hypothecation can be a problem. The tech should be much more refined to allow the tracking of each "item" (be it a single stock ar a specific ingot) singularly and in batches in a mathematically clever way.

Interesting times ahead, gentlemen.

You: What a bleak future. No more than 21 million weeks' worth of bread on the planet! How many humans left?

How caring, to check how women dress (not men, oh dear, of course) before they do something they might regret. The poor young ladies risk a personal punitive lightning thunder or something even worse, such as the confirmation getting unconfirmed.

Assuming a 100% fungible bitcoin (which is still not the case - which I must concur is unfortunate enough), it is simple enough to add a level of non-fungibility, and as Elwar has pointed out several times, it has been done with colored coins. However, they came at a time when bitcoin still had to "prove" itself - so to say - to the normies, so the focus was elsewhere.


Indeed. I can see a possible bright future for NFTs - including colored bitcoins, which I won't even mention from now on - they perfectly match the definition, so are included in the discussion; indeed, they've been the first of all NFTs. These tokens can be used to create unforgeable, easy to verify titles of ownership. These titles would not be restricted to digital items. On the contrary, I see the digital use case as more remote and less interesting for the time being.

Personally, here are a few use cases I would love to see implemented.

- Stock certificates. Once, certificates were ubiquitous, and you didn't "own" a stock until you had the paper in your hands. Now you can't really "own" a stock. It's just an entry in a ledger, and the broker/custodian is the only entity that can actually do some things with the stock, such as lending it to a margin shorter. If stock certificates were digitized by NFTs, naked shorters would have a hard time, as auditing would be quick and easy. With NFTs based on a permissionless blockchain, an additional property of auditing would be: available for anyone to see.

- Gold. The problem here would be matching ingot and NFT at the source, of course. But the total amount of NFT (and therefore, of ingot) would be much easier to... again, audit. Bye bye, paper gold.

Of course, real estate etc. could also benefit from something similar, although re-hypothecation of RE is much less of a problem in practice.

I agree that the following points are moot, and mostly come from lack of understanding.


With one exception: “The scarcity is artificial.  Anyone can make perfect copies of it.”

The scarcity of ownership is artificial, but it's as real as physical scarcity. There can only be one owner. So this point is moot/baseless too, BUT my objection pertains to those goods where ownership is not needed to be able to enjoy the good. As in, picture files, digital music or similar items. The issue here is enforcing DRM based on NFTs. This could be a thing, right, but then apart from the technical details, the creator, too, should be prevented from making additional copies ("reprints") of the creation. So you release, say, a tune as a NFT, and as a consequence no radio can legally broadcast it? Or can they? You sure shouldn't be allowed to release more "declassified" copies, or you are "inflating" the supply. Or I can use the song even if I don't "own" my copy's NFT? So you decide once and for all how many copies you are releasing? Shaky technical terrain. Shakier legal terrain. IANAL. Some legislation will be needed. No, not the SEC, that's right.

Right vroom, I forgot the "going to zero" part. Silly me.

Stimmy hitting the exchanges, or is it just wishful thinking?