I get the sense that you don't know nuttin, maybe even less than nuttin, if that is possible?
All I know without a shed of a doubt, is that you’re a blithering-toxic-faggot-fuckbot, which needs to be turned off and trashed for ever.
You must be one of the most sophisticated wannabe twats that I never did meet.
FYI: Cryptotourist is dead.
Oh gawd...
You are desperate.
FYI: Cryptotourist is dead.
What a plot twist indeed!
Kick ass it is.
You sure that you aren't going to get ur lil ass
(hole) in trouble for your sybil attack?
Yeah? Show me proof of reserves and "maybe" I will believe it.
Yes, it's hard to believe without transparent proof of control. In the past this has only been done with SR coin auctions.
Yep. With the passage of time, governments (and even public companies) more and more obscure and convoluted, which should be the opposite.
Individuals should have a lot of privacy and presumption to be able to be private, yet governments and/or public companies should have more transparency.
For sure, "ought" and "is" can be quite a way apart, and sometimes the trade-offs are not exactly clear or even agreeable when getting into specifics and/or the various injustices that can happen both on the privacy side and also on the transparent side. I am not going to claim to know all of the answers, even though voting with our feet (and allowing the market to work it out) has its own inefficiencies and trade-offs.
MSTR's bag is now 715k coins, US domiciled ETFs possess 1.265M, while all other US corporate treasuries sum to roughly 340k, for a grand total of 2.645M US domiciled above-ground on-shore bitcoin resources, or 12.5% of supply.
That is an interesting theory - which is that various private BTC holdings (to the extent that those entities are under USA jurisdiction) count as "USA" holdings. I am having trouble with that framework, even though surely there are folks think like that and talk like that.
The decision was made that it is more efficient to seize "criminal proceeds" rather than criminalize bitcoin (except in the case of small amounts for decorative NFTs and keepsakes) and direct all to deposit coins with treasury for fiat. Isn't the result the same?
I am not sure if that was the trade-off, since I am bothered by built in incentives for governments to seize coins - and there has been a lot of abuse in various seizure laws around the USA, and I would imagine such abuses happen in other countries too.
In the USA, for example, there is supposed to be certain presumption of innocent until proven guilty, yet frequently in many jurisdictions, seizure laws reverse those kinds of presumptions (too much from my perspective) so that once some property ends up being seized, the burden is on the "owner" to show that the property was obtained in "legal" ways. I just consider that a lot of injustices come from those kinds of laws, and surely, if there are supposedly bad guys who are getting their property seized, then we might agree that such outcome was good and just, yet there is still a reason why the US constitution and even many states have their own constitutions with due process laws.
The question becomes whether the bag can be filled without expanding criminality very much and what constitutes "full". The "finders-keepers" extraction technique also has the desirable side effect of not immediately increasing spot price, making the MSTR angle more effective.
The distinction is made for gold such that below-ground reserves are also considered: the same makes sense regarding unmined block acquisition capability and all above-ground on-shore bitcoin tax resources' holdings, in which case the total-total is probably around 5 million? At some point, too much supply controlled by one entity begins to make it look like scrip or coupons.
I am not going to proclaim to know all of the balances and/or outcomes, yet I remain uncomfortable with BIG daddy governments being incentivized to steal coins, and I am also skeptical in regards to whether it is "good for the people" to attempt to pigeon-hole bitcoin into already existing systems that already seem to have a lot of built-in corruptions, whether we are talking about various coercions that are placed on foreign goverments to specialize in their products with export economy type structures and similar kinds of specializations that push domestic farmers into mono crops and even attempts to make beef (and various other "natural foods" eggs, butter and other perversions of the supplies and even exploitative regulations around milk) illegal.
I thought that removing some of the abusive power (including money printing and other kinds of monetary exploitations) was partly the various value propositions that bitcoin was bringing to the table.
blowing up on the manipulators who are proclaiming to have way more bitcoin than they actually have
All it takes is a wall of new fiat
Those walls of fiat cut both ways, and so frequently a lot of members of the population don't recognize and/or appreciate the extent that they are being diluted and robbed from.. and sometimes the diluting and robbing are to "save the system" in cases that aspects of the "system" do not deserve to be saved or to be bailed out for the risks that they were taking with other people's money.
Poll
