The problem is that your ordinary citizens do not know the difference between the two. If CBDC is "government supported," then it must be legal, right? Educating the public in some way about actual value support seems to be the only way to ensure that CBDC has nowhere to go.
Also, if you interact with CBDC in any way, the CBDC issuer can actually develop a full financial online profile of yours. They might be developing very sophisticated interfaces for CBDCs and cryptocurrencies such that they ultimately get to know exactly who you are and what you are up to. The herds will fall for it I guess. |
|
|
|
The oil industry moves unthinkable amounts of money in the world which goes directly to the pockets of the establishment's members who rule their local societies on the backgrounds. That is the reason why electric cars and similar technologies are never fully implemented or opened to everyone for an affordable price.
Oil was indeed black gold many years, but it shouldn't remain like this anymore, because it's already possible to replace it, if there was legit interest from governments, businessmen and bureaucrats.
However, modern slavery is more profitable for them, as renewable sources of energy turn people less dependent, just like bitcoin and financial system correlation, so oil will last as black gold for a long time yet.
Oil prices are not what it used to be, it dropped significantly during last year's pandemic crash, and it never really fully recovered, it is going to be less and less wanted in the future. It doesn't matter how much money they make, which is less around now compared to back in the day, it is all about how many people prefer it. As long as people keep improving the renewable energy platforms, get more energy from solar panels, drop the capital required to build it and so forth, that R&D will come back and result with people using renewable energy. At the end of the day which one would you prefer, keep paying for oil, or would you rather have something that you pay a lot at first but then free forever? Look at Tesla cars, you wait 30 minutes to recharge it, but then it is free of charge give or take, maybe few cents, whereas cars that run on oil may fill it up in a minute but it costs how many dollars? Eventually people will realize the difference. Well it never really full recovered back to its ATH, but congratulations who bet on oil big time when it his its ATL. Wasn't it that you could get oil at negative prices? That the paid companies to put oil on their tankers and just park it in the ocean to keep production going despite lack of storage space? Oil was so low that I can't believe I didn't play a nice long position with leverage at some point. Who knows how far it will recover, gasoline prices are about to go to ATH. |
|
|
|
In my opinion, from a technology perspective and ease of use, blockchain is the right place to replace the traditional banking system.
We see over the last decade, the payment system has transformed so rapidly. From real-time cross-border payments, to using blockchain and cryptocurrencies.
Recently, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) and stable coins also emerged that made traditional banks rethink their business models.
Blockchain technology has been very useful and beneficial to each of us but i think replacing our traditional banking system with this won't happen easily and will definitely take a long process. Blockchain still needs a more room to grow because its still young and not mature yet. People has entrusted their whole finances into traditional banking system in their whole life so if this will be replace with the current blockchain, then let's expect that there will be more issues that will come out. when one day blockchain has matured in its development, and if the government views the old banking system as no longer relevant, it is very likely that blockchain will replace it. but for now it may not be possible, because to replace it directly I think it's difficult where banking must always run every day Your opinion is correct, we don't know what will happen in the future. Blockchain technology is currently still in the process of development, we will never know what stage the development of blockchain technology will reach. If the development is getting faster and it is considered ready to replace the old banking system, there is a possibility that the government will start to change its mind and accept that blockchain technology will replace the old banking system. But if we talk now, it is definitely impossible to be true. Because the government still feels comfortable with the old banking system. Therefore, there are some countries that still reject cryptocurrencies, because they still consider the old banking system to be worth maintaining. then fear that accepting cryptocurrency will replace the role of the old banking system. If we try to extrapolate a little bit what we have seen so far that blockchain is able to do and what it is not able to do, I think we can get at least an idea where we might be heading. Blockchain can sure solve certain problems or deliver services that banks are used for these days. Algorithmic loan provision based on reputation systems and so on, but those need time and data to develop. There will be a lot of prototyping to make sure the credit default rate is in range with what can be accepted compared to the banking system and their rigorous screening procedures, but still I do believe we will see certain banking functions be replaced blockchains or let's say protocols and algorithms. |
|
|
|
That is one important aspect and the other one is that even stable coins aren't a solution to that problem because the hassle is too big as hardly any business accepts Tether. Also, why use Tether if you can just use the USD in your bank account. Less explanations to financial authorities, overall less trouble. We are not quite there that more and more people get paid in crypto because it is more practical to them. Some do receive or take crypto as payment because they want to drive adoption, which is a good and important endeavor.
There is no point in using Tether (or any other stablecoin), when their acceptability is far lower than fiat currency. As of now, none of the cryptocurrencies have an acceptability rate which can be compared with that of fiat currency. On top of that, the usage of these stablecoins may create issues for you, when you file your tax returns. And finally, I would not consider Tether (USDT) as a safe asset. From whatever data they have published so far, it is clear that only a minority of the reserves are being held in cash. That will be an issue in case of a mass liquidation event. It is even worse than that... I think they published only a sort of pie diagram and provided the % for each of that asset classes they hold to back their Tether, but nobody knows how much value the assets they hold to back Tether really have!  They could provide a pie diagram and have less than a million available to back billions of Tether. What a ridiculous report!  |
|
|
|
That is a one-sided point of view in my opinion. Yes the cryptocurrency space shows that people desire for something that is different from what they are used to, which is first and foremost something that does not support quantitative easing and also raises capital mobility on the individual level, but we shouldn't forget that we are also all better off if we do indeed have some tools in place to get fraud under control as much as possible without sacrificing freedom at the individual level. I know that is a dilemma and it can never really be fully controlled for, but it is in our best interest to find the sweet spot. Crypto has its own set of problems that needs to be addressed.
The financial crisis does not always bring positive changes, for example in my country. The crisis in 1997 has saddened us to this day, the exchange rate of the Rupiah which was stable against the Dollar is now very low when compared to the Dollar. The hereditary state debt has become the biggest burden to date. However, currently crypto does not provide the alleged crisis potential because crypto does not use a qe policy. Everything is left to the market and if banks adopt crypto then people will realize that there is no need for a central bank anymore. Because the whole economic system is rotten today is the central bank everywhere. They are regulators as well as creators of chaos in the economy. We will never have a sound financial system, we can only thrive for a system that is less rotten than the last one. That is similar to what Musk said: Whether Bitcoin is the perfect solution that we are looking for to become a global currency. He answered no, Bitcoin is just less bad than fiat. I think I see some truth in that. Bitcoin will also be far from perfect because there is no perfection. Whenever it is about money, you will see powerful actors try to get control over it. This time it is just much more difficult as Bitcoin is way more resilient to power-drive attacks due to its decentralized nature and its incentive system. |
|
|
|
Yeah, Bitcoin price doesn't care much about Tesla or any other company now. It doesn't fluctuate too much like the old times when these companies make a statement like they are going to hold Bitcoin or to accept payments with Bitcoin. I like that the market is getting more resistant against these kind of manipulations.
It's not really manipulation. The price is driven by individual investors who are trying to get rich or FOMOing in. When a company would announce they were accepting bitcoin, the speculators would pile in hoping to make a quick buck on the hype of "mass adoption." To the extent these types of things don't happen anymore, it's because it's just too big at this point. "Adoption" isn't really a driving force anymore in the price because the speculators can't buy enough to meaningfully move the price. It just takes too much money at this point. It's just that a relatively calm time has come and investors have calmed down for now, because the big players themselves are tired of the frenzied volatility and decided to take a little break for now. But I assure you, this will not last very long and when some global financial or cryptocurrency events occur, the crypto market will not remain indifferent and a very cheerful autumn awaits us. It's just that when the market is inflated, there is a hysterical reaction to any event and the cryptocurrency market, due to its youth, is no exception. Therefore, I am not sure that the market has matured and become very stable, so future news from Tesla and Amazon will shake up the market more than once  I agree and we are actually ver far from having a stable a crypto market. The dynamics in the market might also lead to crypto never becoming a more stable market. When you have some innovation in the car industry, authorities inspect everything closed and either allow a certain innovation or not. In crypto this different because it is unstoppable. You can't regulate something that you on the one hand don't see coming in the first place and on the other hand don't know where to go to because innovations are published as open source code in a decentralized manner. This will cause an ever ongoing uncertainty that will ultimately lead to market volatility. That is just my stance on it. I am not mad about it, I am happy to be part of this as Bitcoin or the Bitcoin code seems to be the sincerest realization of the freedom of speech principle we have seen so far. You can't stop it, you can just try to undermine it. |
|
|
|
Tesla is trying to manipulate the crypto market just like what Elon Musk also did. But unfortunately, things don't come out exactly what's on their plan. Even Amazon has leave a big impact on bitcoin but later on, the price still recovers.
This just proves that bitcoin is not relying any one or any big company to create an upward trend. Remember that China has also leave a huge impact into bitcoin and resulted into a long dump but through positive news and great opportunities offered to bitcoin, its price still manage to recover.
Everything you say makes sense, because if we look at the few times Bitcoin was manipulated, then the price fell quite deep. But not long after Bitcoin managed to recover again, this proves Bitcoin does not depend on big companies to grow. Because Bitcoin is decentralized, it means that no one can control Bitcoin. This is what finally upset China and spread FUD to make Bitcoin die. But China has always failed to make Bitcoin die, this is what ultimately makes the trust of many people increase in Bitcoin. Then Bitcoin will always grow and increase in price, even though big companies don't support Bitcoin. I think when Bitcoin was manipulated there were a few things that happened simultaneously. Whales could have manipulated the price down, but then the herd lost their nerves I guess as when Bitcoin crashed hard, it was always the case that the market felt quite overheated anyway. It is not like Bitcoin totally crashed out of a sudden and nobody would have expected that. It sometimes did drop more than people expected, but anyone became more careful with buy orders out of a sudden anyway. Many things can happen when Bitcoin is manipulated, sometimes because it is manipulated, the Bitcoin price drop is often drastic. This is what makes many investors panic and sell their Bitcoins at a loss. Even though investing in Bitcoin requires patience, which is a market dump situation, there is no need to panic too much. Because of how deep Bitcoin falls, it always rises again, and can rise to a higher price. So there is nothing to worry about if the whales manipulate and make the Bitcoin price suddenly dump, but Bitcoin can always recover again. That's what causes Bitcoin trust to increase. Patience and especially stress resistance. You need to have the mental state to watch your investment go down by 40% and still keep your fingers calm. Understandably, many people lose their nerves and out of a sudden feel the urge to save whatever there is left that can be saved in that moment. It is definitely hard sometimes to be into Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I think that cryptocurrency and fiat currency can be used together. The feature of cryptocurrency is that fiat currency does not have, and the feature of fiat currency is that cryptocurrency does not. If there is no fiat currency, how do we buy cryptocurrency, and now various countries are launching digital fiat currency , This is actually a threat to cryptocurrency, because the government cannot control cryptocurrency. It will prohibit the use of cryptocurrency for everyone to use legal digital currency. It will be a blow to cryptocurrency at that time, but we Everyone likes to use cryptocurrency because it is relatively free, not regulated by the government, and there is no third party. Your own information will not be easily leaked, and now transaction payments are more convenient and fast
Digital fiat currency isn't much of a threat to decentralized cryptocurrencies. Digital fiat currencies are a threat to society because they undermine privacy like no tool did ever before. You can't transact anymore without the banks and the government knowing where you were at what point in time and what type of items you most likely bought. If you have to go to a pharmacy twice a week and buy something, they know you must be sick like hell. If you pay the price for a package of cigarettes and they see the exact same amount every day on your financial report, they know you are a heavy smoker. What you're describing isn't any different from electronic payments as they currently are. You don't even need a digital currency. There's no reason to suspect that a digital currency though would allow the government to know what specific items you're purchasing though, just like the current digital payment systems don't provide that information. That concern is overblown, but I agree a digital currency is a potential nightmare for consumers because of the extra power it grants the government over the economy. Alright, let's assume you go to a store and a certain bottle of well known cheap whiskey has a certain price. You go to that store seven days a week and buy that bottle, most of the time between 6 and 7 pm. Maybe you add some other stuff that has a price everyone could pretty easily identify. Now you ask your bank for a loan. Don't you think they might have a clue because of your spending habits? What if you attend a "certain" doctor three times a week and you pay privately? Do you think the doctor has a hidden company on the Cayman Islands such that nobody knows you are visiting that doctor three times a week when the transaction with all details shows up on our account every single time? No, it will say "Doctor Smith bla bla bla". What about paying in a whorehouse? Or going into a pub more often than the average person, paying your bill with digital money there? Or you frequently have to pay a lawyer, anything wrong with you? Are you a criminal? Should I go on? I know I am mentioning stuff that might reveal so called "weaknesses" of some people. But as long as they don't harm anyone when they drink 7 bottles whiskey a week and have usually been paying back reliably, are you sure that insurance companies and banks won't use that data? |
|
|
|
I always watched financial crises as a time of change! Yes, many big ones fall down, some new arise... while ordinary people suffer in that game of power! Usually the ones at the end of the food chain!
I believe that crypto is a new player in that game! The true power of crypto are people behind, there is a strong/rich group of people who stand behind the fiat/monetary systems around the world! We saw many little battles between crypto and government/bank sectors from different countries and looks like crypto is winning, simply because more people are joining, disappointed in traditional institutions!
It will be interesting to see what will happen, I expect some bigger battles in the future! More organized and widespread, probably after some big disaster, like it always happen!
I agree with your words that crisis is a time of changes. In my opinion bitcoin and the whole crypto thing shows how it can be - open market for everyone anonymously with no credit ranks. Crypto market is a surgery tool, that shows us how a rotten system we have. And yes, it can lead to mass disappointment in the old markets and therefore results to financial crisis on these markets. Government and central banks denyed crypto at first, then they started to launch own crypto products Because they know, if changes dont come from reforms, they come from revolution. So central authorities are afraid of this foreseeable financial revolution That is a one-sided point of view in my opinion. Yes the cryptocurrency space shows that people desire for something that is different from what they are used to, which is first and foremost something that does not support quantitative easing and also raises capital mobility on the individual level, but we shouldn't forget that we are also all better off if we do indeed have some tools in place to get fraud under control as much as possible without sacrificing freedom at the individual level. I know that is a dilemma and it can never really be fully controlled for, but it is in our best interest to find the sweet spot. Crypto has its own set of problems that needs to be addressed. |
|
|
|
Many companies are also considering allowing their employees to choose to receive partial or full compensation in the form of cryptocurrency. If you can get paid through cryptocurrency, which one would you choose? If the boss pays in Bitcoin, would you want it? Or you continue to prefer to pay in fiat currency to facilitate the purchase of tokens you like.
Do you think cryptocurrency payment will be a new trend in the future?
I would still prefer fiat currency. You know you can't pay your bills using crypto currencies. And what if you get paid in a non stable coin and the next day the market crashes really bad? We have seen the price of crypto currencies go down more than 20% in just few days. You will be in trouble then. Then there is those transaction fees which sometimes end up being very absurd. Get paid in fiat, buy crypto with fiat . I see that your chosen indicator can only be used as a trading tool, isn't it very simple? BTC is like gold, gold can't buy a good must be exchanged first to fiat then do you still prefer fiat to gold? If given the opportunity to choose then BTC is the best choice. Although it cannot be used as a direct transaction tool, BTC can be the best store of value than if you store it in fiat. What you get by filling an account with fiat for 10 years when compared to BTC is a very clear growth chart. Given the current fees and Bitcoin's volatility, I doubt it is the best choice to get paid in bitcoin in every single situation. If you earn pretty much exactly the amount of money you need per month to pay your bills, I would probably prefer fiat over bitcoin honestly. What are you going to do if it does crash during those days or the week you are getting paid usually? indeed for now the use of bitcoin is less relevant for all levels of transactions. because of the high volatility and the price of an item is fixed in fiat units, then we will find it difficult for small entrepreneurs, because not all of them understand crypto. it's different if crypto is accepted in all countries and the unit of goods uses bitcoin for the price, of course at that time we can spend it calmly That is one important aspect and the other one is that even stable coins aren't a solution to that problem because the hassle is too big as hardly any business accepts Tether. Also, why use Tether if you can just use the USD in your bank account. Less explanations to financial authorities, overall less trouble. We are not quite there that more and more people get paid in crypto because it is more practical to them. Some do receive or take crypto as payment because they want to drive adoption, which is a good and important endeavor. |
|
|
|
I'm in no way supporting this draft, but most people here in the thread got the news wrong (so far, mainly mu_enrico got it right). Before the thread degenerates entirely: The EU is not planning to ban anonymous "transactions", but anonymous "centralized wallet services"!The planned legislation is based on the FATF travel rule. It is directed to companies who control cryptocurrency on behalf of their users, i.e. exchanges, web wallets, brokerage services and so on, and some other companies (e.g. in the real estate business). Most of them in several EU states are already forced to do KYC, so in these countries there would be only minor policy changes. These would have to record the data of the transaction sender and receiver if they participate in one (i.e. a deposit on a centrally managed wallet, or a transaction to a real estate agent affected by the law). It's affecting entities that are already obliged to record these data when they receive bank wires or other fiat-based transactions. So no, your Bitcoin Core, Electrum etc. are not affected. This may however affect services like the providers of smartphone wallet software, maybe also blockchain.com or Blockstream's Green Wallet (although at least in the latter two cases I think they could rebrand the service as a kind of "backup service for keys" or so). In any case the keys have to be managed by a central entity. I don't blame the thread participants, the Bloomberg article isn't "wrong" but pretty poorly written so it can be misinterpreted. Anyway, I consider this planned legislation extremely harmful. It would place the KYC burden on more companies than now, also potentially on smaller companies; this would mean more targets to hacker attacks, and potentially more danger of identity theft. So the EU is trying to combat one type of crime (money laundering) making other, potentially more threatening types of crime (identity theft) easier.  Thanks d5000 for the explanation. Although it is an obvious one, I didn't really think about KYC that way, but you are of course right. Legislators' goal to fight money laundering leads to more KYC burdens, which in turn makes any of the companies suffering from more KYC requirements an even more attractive goal to hackers. That in turn leads to more investment in security measures, that again hits the bottom line of those companies and rather leads to larger corporations who can afford security requirements financially, which again leads to further centralization of the industry... That are a lot of in turns, I know, but isn't that the way it will ultimately work out? |
|
|
|
What I don't get is how would they even enforce their plans? Am I missing something? How would they ban Monero wallets from being downloaded and then block transactions? This is bogus, seriously. They can't do shit about it. It will be the same as almost any other law: law abiding citizens will follow the law, while criminals don't care. It's the same as for instance gun laws: where I live normal people don't have them, but it doesn't stop criminals. Maybe they hope for the countries or the EU to turn into an area where denunciation becomes a thing again. If I know somebody who owns Monero and I denigrate that somebody, I might even benefit from it in some way. Otherwise I don't get the point. The only way to catch every single thing that you as a state deem criminal is to give up freedom as a concept and turn your area into a full police state. Even then you will have criminals. The death penalty doesn't even keep freaks from raping and killing others. |
|
|
|
Many companies are also considering allowing their employees to choose to receive partial or full compensation in the form of cryptocurrency. If you can get paid through cryptocurrency, which one would you choose? If the boss pays in Bitcoin, would you want it? Or you continue to prefer to pay in fiat currency to facilitate the purchase of tokens you like.
Do you think cryptocurrency payment will be a new trend in the future?
I would still prefer fiat currency. You know you can't pay your bills using crypto currencies. And what if you get paid in a non stable coin and the next day the market crashes really bad? We have seen the price of crypto currencies go down more than 20% in just few days. You will be in trouble then. Then there is those transaction fees which sometimes end up being very absurd. Get paid in fiat, buy crypto with fiat . I see that your chosen indicator can only be used as a trading tool, isn't it very simple? BTC is like gold, gold can't buy a good must be exchanged first to fiat then do you still prefer fiat to gold? If given the opportunity to choose then BTC is the best choice. Although it cannot be used as a direct transaction tool, BTC can be the best store of value than if you store it in fiat. What you get by filling an account with fiat for 10 years when compared to BTC is a very clear growth chart. Given the current fees and Bitcoin's volatility, I doubt it is the best choice to get paid in bitcoin in every single situation. If you earn pretty much exactly the amount of money you need per month to pay your bills, I would probably prefer fiat over bitcoin honestly. What are you going to do if it does crash during those days or the week you are getting paid usually? |
|
|
|
Looking at the past financial crises that happened, they all seem to have a few things in common, such as the mass adoption of a new financial product or technology (e.g. mortgage backed securities in 2008, dotcom boom in 2000). Given the extent to which institutions (and some influential figures) have been manipulating crypto recently, do you guys think this narrative is likely?
I don't think that there is a lot risk coming from crypto currencies to be the root of evil of the next financial crisis. We have been in a zero interest rate world for more than 10 years already. This interest rate makes loans so cheap which is making huge messes in the financial world. Everybody can get a loan for almost free right now which made real estate very expensive. Buying an apartment or house right now will put us in debt for the next 30 years. I think we will see another crash in the real estate bubble. As of now there isn't even a slight chance for cryptocurrencies to become the root of evil for the next financial crisis. Maybe if the overall market capitalization of all cryptocurrencies is above $5 trillion, we might slowly perceive cryptocurrencies and a potential massive crash as a systemic risk. Right now cryptocurrencies can't really do much in terms of initiating a financial crisis. Other markets are way bigger, riskier and way more dangerous to global financial stability. Just look at the housing market and the price explosion in real estate facilitated with newly printed money. Bubble? The way the financial systems are linked and the massive use of leverage, small problems can quickly snowball and become systemic. That's why you're seeing Janet Yellen start to talk about the risk posed by cryptocurrency because it's completely unregulated and operates in the dark. Nobody knows if or how big of a problem crypto could spark, and that's a problem. There is some truth to what you are saying, but there is also a difference between fiat money where you can create 9 dollars of inexistent credit money for every 1 dollar deposited in a bank account and cryptocurrencies where a bitcoin is a bitcoin, no matter what. You can trade crypto with leverage here and there, but you can't create a legal bubble like you can with fiat. What you can do is pump up bitcoin with printed Tether, but that can't be legal unless there is a real dollar (which in essence is a fake dollar) for every single USDT printed on the blockchain. |
|
|
|
Judging from developments, I think crypto can be a substitute for fiat money where fiat is the basis of the value of crypto itself, but prohibitions in some countries can hinder the process, because one country has its own fiat characteristics and usd is the world currency
Yes true, if we pay attention, what fiat does can be replaced with crypto even better because it is faster, safer and the transaction fees are cheap. I hope many countries will think about this so they accept crypto. Everything you mentioned as an advantage is not the case at the moment. If we deny the truth, we'll only do harm to the development process and progress of cryptocurrencies. The fact of the matter for now is that the safest cryptos we have are not faster and not cheaper in many cases, depending on the areas you want to transact from and to. The transaction capacity still is the big bottleneck that needs to be solved in order for crypto to be competitive in terms of speed and cost. |
|
|
|
Banks already partially use the blockchain and, in particular, the ripple network. However, their use of the blockchain does not mean that something will change significantly in this system, including towards its decentralization. Only the efficiency of banks' work on the old traditional principles will increase. So nothing significant in the banking system will change.
I think this is a question about whether or not blockchain can also fulfill many of the service functions that banks offer these days. Custody, financial management, and whatever else banks sell to people. Loans of course of different terms (short, medium, long-term). With DeFi growing strong recently I think we will still need some time to figure out what blockchain can actually do for people compared to banks, but the thing is that development in blockchain is going at a high pace and won't stop while banks don't really know what to do against that. Now they start to slowly embracing it just to stay in the game for as long as possible. |
|
|
|
Sometimes I wonder why the media is always saying that Bitcoin’s price went up because of Tesla and Amazon or maybe one of these big influencers, because I really don’t see it that way. Of course I do know that these people can make an impact, such as Tesla making a billion dollar investment in the cryptocurrency market, but then you can’t saying that every move they make is affecting the market.
We were already looking forward to an increase even before these companies into the picture. The halving alone was enough to lead to up trend, and moreover there are times Bitcoin goes up and down, so it doesn’t have anything to do with these companies.
This is done because they want to create false expectations, we must remember that even if the purpose of the media is supposed to inform the public with the facts this is not true anymore, they want to get clicks, they want to be seen, they waniat to become news themselves and how can they achieve this? By giving outrageous news, that's how, so they create a narrative that the price of bitcoin now is completely dependent on big companies like that and people are going to read their articles and watch their videos to see why this is the case, when in fact the price of bitcoin just has its own dynamics and doesn't obey anyone. Tesla is trying to manipulate the crypto market just like what Elon Musk also did. But unfortunately, things don't come out exactly what's on their plan. Even Amazon has leave a big impact on bitcoin but later on, the price still recovers. This just proves that bitcoin is not relying any one or any big company to create an upward trend. Remember that China has also leave a huge impact into bitcoin and resulted into a long dump but through positive news and great opportunities offered to bitcoin, its price still manage to recover. Everything you say makes sense, because if we look at the few times Bitcoin was manipulated, then the price fell quite deep. But not long after Bitcoin managed to recover again, this proves Bitcoin does not depend on big companies to grow. Because Bitcoin is decentralized, it means that no one can control Bitcoin. This is what finally upset China and spread FUD to make Bitcoin die. But China has always failed to make Bitcoin die, this is what ultimately makes the trust of many people increase in Bitcoin. Then Bitcoin will always grow and increase in price, even though big companies don't support Bitcoin. I think when Bitcoin was manipulated there were a few things that happened simultaneously. Whales could have manipulated the price down, but then the herd lost their nerves I guess as when Bitcoin crashed hard, it was always the case that the market felt quite overheated anyway. It is not like Bitcoin totally crashed out of a sudden and nobody would have expected that. It sometimes did drop more than people expected, but anyone became more careful with buy orders out of a sudden anyway. |
|
|
|
Only weak hands, newbies and Elon musk fans was caused the price dump in the past, they only follow what the self pro claimed and their role model doing because they trust them. They have a mindset since his role model is very rich, then to become a rich like him he need to follow anything what his role model do.
Yep, Elon Musk has millions of fans out there and makes him a role model... I've heard that imitating the mindset of someone who is rich will make you rich but will they by imitating the mindset of Elon become rich? Bitcoin doesn't need big inconsistent companies that just act to manipulate the market. You may have heard that, but how would you imitate his mindset if you don't know whether what he presents to be his mindset really is his mindset? He could think differently than he talks. You may fail to grasp his mindset fully because he is smart in psychology, knows what to say in order to get you do what he wants you to do, and you don't even realize it. How would you imitate the mindset of such a person that is able to manipulate you in the first place? |
|
|
|
|
The term blockchain here seems to be so one-dimensional. Blockchain alone, well probably yes if we have set up a whole reliable smart contract environment, it might be possible one day. One problem will be dispute resolution though. I don't know if you can solve any problem that can occur in financial relationships through mathematical equations. You would have to frequently tweak the incentive structure such that one day you really have a system that is sufficiently flexible to also be able to deal with yet unforeseen events. That will be hard to achieve, but maybe not impossible.
|
|
|
|
I think that cryptocurrency and fiat currency can be used together. The feature of cryptocurrency is that fiat currency does not have, and the feature of fiat currency is that cryptocurrency does not. If there is no fiat currency, how do we buy cryptocurrency, and now various countries are launching digital fiat currency , This is actually a threat to cryptocurrency, because the government cannot control cryptocurrency. It will prohibit the use of cryptocurrency for everyone to use legal digital currency. It will be a blow to cryptocurrency at that time, but we Everyone likes to use cryptocurrency because it is relatively free, not regulated by the government, and there is no third party. Your own information will not be easily leaked, and now transaction payments are more convenient and fast
Digital fiat currency isn't much of a threat to decentralized cryptocurrencies. Digital fiat currencies are a threat to society because they undermine privacy like no tool did ever before. You can't transact anymore without the banks and the government knowing where you were at what point in time and what type of items you most likely bought. If you have to go to a pharmacy twice a week and buy something, they know you must be sick like hell. If you pay the price for a package of cigarettes and they see the exact same amount every day on your financial report, they know you are a heavy smoker. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
