Bitcoin and Crypto Thread

Lonewolf1968 said:
I know Charles and ADA gets a lot of hate, but long term Mr Hoskinson raises some interesting points in this video.
Click to expand...

Good video. The most important part, imo, is the 7:25 minute mark to the 10:18 mark.

Hoskinson raises the following scenario: elites buy up a massive amount of Bitcoin to control Bitcoin. Some say this cannot happen because the Bitcoin miners control Bitcoin. Hoskinson rejects this idea because if Bitcoin forks (hypothetically) into Bitcoin chain A and Bitcoin chain B, the elites will choose which fork becomes dominant. If the elites choose Bitcoin chain B, they will sell any assets they had supporting chain A, causing the price of chain A to plummet which will then cause the miners to abandon chain A in favor of chain B (since the rewards for switching over to chain B would be greater). Centralized exchanges would also get to choose which chain they want to list and they will naturally go for chain B (more money backs it).

What do others think of Hoskinson's concerns? Is he missing something?
 
JoeChill said:
Good video. The most important part, imo, is the 7:25 minute mark to the 10:18 mark.

Hoskinson raises the following scenario: elites buy up a massive amount of Bitcoin to control Bitcoin. Some say this cannot happen because the Bitcoin miners control Bitcoin. Hoskinson rejects this idea because if Bitcoin forks (hypothetically) into Bitcoin chain A and Bitcoin chain B, the elites will choose which fork becomes dominant. If the elites choose Bitcoin chain B, they will sell any assets they had supporting chain A, causing the price of chain A to plummet which will then cause the miners to abandon chain A in favor of chain B (since the rewards for switching over to chain B would be greater). Centralized exchanges would also get to choose which chain they want to list and they will naturally go for chain B (more money backs it).

What do others think of Hoskinson's concerns? Is he missing something?
Click to expand...
Unclear to me what would really happen but in this case I’m thinking about what the SEC and Robinhood did to GameStop shareholders.

In the above bitcoin scenario, a viral twitter/reddit movement could cause retail BTC investors to flock to Chain A just to screw over the elite. And the only thing that the elite could do is try to ban chain A exchanges, which is possible on many jurisdictions but not all. Very interesting scenario. I hope I never find out how it would really go down.
 
JoeChill said:
What do others think of Hoskinson's concerns? Is he missing something?
Click to expand...
I'm sure others know the details better, but the moment a fork happens there is enough of a dialogue and friction to cause distrust, since the writing will be on the wall that the powers that be also can then "influence" or control miners, which would be an obvious eventuality and one that no one that actually cares about or believes in BTC would want to do. This is where his idea isn't realistic. What's more, in a fork scenario I don't think you are selling anything as a discriminator - you either are on the proper/correct/true BTC chain (whatever you believe that is) or you are not. I don't see people participating in the controlled fork should it arise, since that defeats the purpose of BTC.
 
UserUnavailable said:
It may be worth looking into $TAONU. It appears to be the (official?) memecoin associated with $TAO. This coin has gone up 10x in the last month coinciding with the rapid rise in the price of $TAO.

It seems to have a certain manic fever attached to it. If people expect the price of $TAO to go parabolic which it very well may (if it hasn't already), this coin may just do the same.

Only a $10m MC, plus everybody loves a cute dog.
Click to expand...

This play was an obvious money printer.

Buy memes on fresh chains at basement prices.

IMG_20240222_102901.jpg

JoeChill said:
Hoskinson rejects this idea because if Bitcoin forks (hypothetically) into Bitcoin chain A and Bitcoin chain B, the elites will choose which fork becomes dominant. If the elites choose Bitcoin chain B, they will sell any assets they had supporting chain A, causing the price of chain A to plummet which will then cause the miners to abandon chain A in favor of chain B (since the rewards for switching over to chain B would be greater). Centralized exchanges would also get to choose which chain they want to list and they will naturally go for chain B (more money backs it).
Click to expand...

The cost of doing that would be huge. More than $1t for a chance to manipulate a decentralised coin. The question would be how much BTC do ETFs have. I don't think it would go down well. Huge amounts of BTC is held by true believers who wouldn't move to Fed Coin.

Alephium looks ready to blast into the billions. There is currently only about $12m TVL on POW
Chains. Compared to $76b on POS chains. It's looking more and more like a top 10 coin.

The strongest narratives this season are AI, 10k-40m TPS POW chains, Bitcoin side chains, gaming. POS narrative weakening.
 
Last edited:
eradicator said:
Alph is doing quite good. I think it can realistically do a 10x to 15x from here
Click to expand...



Looks like ASICs have either moved in or will move in. They've been mining on the test-net for a few days.

ASICs push the price up.

 
Last edited:
JoeChill said:
Good video. The most important part, imo, is the 7:25 minute mark to the 10:18 mark.

Hoskinson raises the following scenario: elites buy up a massive amount of Bitcoin to control Bitcoin. Some say this cannot happen because the Bitcoin miners control Bitcoin. Hoskinson rejects this idea because if Bitcoin forks (hypothetically) into Bitcoin chain A and Bitcoin chain B, the elites will choose which fork becomes dominant. If the elites choose Bitcoin chain B, they will sell any assets they had supporting chain A, causing the price of chain A to plummet which will then cause the miners to abandon chain A in favor of chain B (since the rewards for switching over to chain B would be greater). Centralized exchanges would also get to choose which chain they want to list and they will naturally go for chain B (more money backs it).

What do others think of Hoskinson's concerns? Is he missing something?
Click to expand...
IMG_1110.webp
 
Blade Runner said:
Will governments even bother to look back at BTC exchanges and participants, or just move on? I wonder if Kratter is right that coinbase is a honeypot and the US gov will eventually just seize coinbases holdings for the ETFs - interesting theory since blackrock owns most of the newly bought BTC for ETFs, though many others are buying and holding now too.
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe the temptation is too great. What happened to legal contracts, laws, and property rights in general during the COVID “emergency”?

Just wait until we have a real fiat crisis. The government is going to make up whatever excuses and have no accountability or recourse. In the words of MLK jr, “everything Hitler did, was legal.”

Look at the FTX creditors. They had claims on BTC, but got paid the fiat value of it at the time of insolvency, not in actual BTC. The government will take the coinbase BTC, claim it was a Russian led “cyber pandemic”, and refund coinbase creditors (including most of the ETFs) with worthless fiat.

individuals, I guess it depends on how many people give in vs take a stand and say NO. If resistance is high, that would make the cost to obtain too high I think. I would probably destroy all of my keys if I had to give up more than 10%. That’s about all I’m willing to pay the mafia government before I would just destroy all of it out of spite.
 
Last edited:
chance vought said:
Yes, I believe the temptation is too great. What happened to legal contracts, laws, and property rights in general during the COVID “emergency”?

Just wait until we have a real fiat crisis. The government is going to make up whatever excuses and have no accountability or recourse. In the words of MLK jr, “everything Hitler did, was legal.”

Look at the FTX creditors. They had claims on BTC, but got paid the fiat value of it at the time of insolvency, not in actual BTC. The government will take the coinbase BTC, claim it was a Russian led “cyber pandemic”, and refund coinbase creditors (including most of the ETFs) with worthless fiat.

individuals, I guess it depends on how many people give in vs take a stand and say NO. If resistance is high, that would make the cost to obtain too high I think. I would probably destroy all of my keys if I had to give up more than 10%. That’s about all I’m willing to pay the mafia government before I would just destroy all of it out of spite.
Click to expand...
I feel so stupid since halfway through my red pilling on the network, I lost my hard wallet and keys in a boating accident. Damn.
 
Blade Runner said:
Do you think a whole coiner in the next 15 years will be looked at as a "millionaire"/rare type person or something more ridiculous as in some of those projections that classify the amount one has, moving forward?
Click to expand...
15 years, 2039? I would guess that 1 BTC = $4M in today’s dollars. Nominal $20M. That’s my conservative estimate…assuming we aren’t to the suddenly part of gradually then suddenly.

I think 3 cycles from now a whole coiner is going to have enough to be comfortable, but not wealthy.

If we get to a Bitcoin standard in a short 15 years, then 1 BTC is going to be a good amount of wealth. Assuming the worlds assets, $800T are priced in BTC, that 1 coin is $40M in today’s buying power.
 
I've been thinking for a while about the totalitarian potential of Bitcoin as the base layer money. My current conclusion is that there is no gradually then suddenly for the adaption of Bitcoin. Only gradually, on and on, until everything that can be valued, will be valued, on the scale of 21mil BTC. It's a scary hypothesis to wrap your head around.

But currently, Bitcoin is not at odds with the USD, and infact, they form a perfect partnership for the digital age. Where the USD is over complicated with monetary theory and money supply, Bitcoin acts as an anchor for finite valuation. And where Bitcoin fails as a user friendly method of daily transaction, and as a stable pricing mechanism(because number go up theory is accurate), the USD will hold strong.

Until all the material value in the entire world can be measured out into 21mil BTC, it's value will continue to go up. And therefore it will have to partner with a currency people are willing to transact in daily.
 
Keep in mind the BTC Core Devs may modify, update and improve BTC Code however it is the core maintainers that SATOSHI HIMSELF GAVE THE KEYS TO THE BTC Blockchain to apply said Changes, Modifications and Upgrades.

Satoshi clearly panicked that he could become a CIA blacksite inmate once BTC prices started to surge and his little coding experiment became worth BILLION$$$ so he bugged out with a block of BTC and gave away the keys to a bunch of stoners too high to worry about CIA Blacksites.


A few years ago, in the first BTC Mega Boom - havings concerned miners so much that they would be adversely impacted with every 4 years cut in half mining revenues that the core dev maintenance teams were thinking about changing the BTC Code to allow 100 Million plus BTC instead of the Current limits of 21 million with a dwindling halvings revenues model.

Is Blackrock actually going to leave its BTC IBIT ETF future success up to chance controlled by a bunch of FTX type basement dwelling stoner devs in a haze of potent Colorado Spice fumes???

Or will Blackrock and others quietly take over Core Devs and Maint teams (Most can be bought with a sizeable bale of Colorado hyper bud).

Blackrock IBIT Corp MBAs will then hire Indian H1Bs and dangle US Citizenship for line-by-line code reviews of all current code and only allow Mods and Upgrades that benefits IBIT and others. Go figure.

 
Last edited:
Deepdiver said:
Satoshi clearly panicked that he could become a CIA blacksite inmate once BTC prices started to surge and his little coding experiment became worth BILLION$$$ so he bugged out with a block of BTC and gave away the keys to a bunch of stoners too high to worry about CIA Blacksites.
Click to expand...
That reminds me of how DaVinci says that Satoshi chose the one algo that the CIA didn't have a backdoor to (whichever hash was chosen). It's a pretty amazing story overall, how an inch and central .gov hubris enabled a crazy innovation to really take off.
 
chance vought said:
Really hard to say, since best practice is not to re-use addresses. At least 1 million whole-coiners out there.
View attachment 5465
Click to expand...
Surely there are some people with multiple wholecoin wallets. Seems to me like a lot of people participating have multiple wallets. Then also individual accounts like Coinbase represent many, many wholecoiners within one wallet. Though those people don't have their keys.
 
cosine said:
Surely there are some people with multiple wholecoin wallets. Seems to me like a lot of people participating have multiple wallets. Then also individual accounts like Coinbase represent many, many wholecoiners within one wallet. Though those people don't have their keys.
Click to expand...
I agree, but there are 8M addresses between 0.1 and 1, so there could be whole coiners there with multiple as well.

I‘ve encountered 2 in my personal life. One I have a business relationship with, and I don’t know what his stack is, but he accepts BTC preferentially for work, which is usually $3k+. The other I encountered at work, and he had a sizable stack (of IOUs).

it’s a wild guess and there is probably no way to know, but 1M seems correct to me. Maybe it’s less than that.

How about 10M people that have 0.1 BTC?

There are 2 billion people on earth who have at least $10,000 net worth. 0.1 BTC would be 50% of their net worth, which I would say is adoption.

As far as adoption, worldwide, BTC is at 0.5%

So, we are still early…we aren’t to the steep part of the S curve. The best is yet to come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top