Cryptocurrency

nocsious3

Well-Known Member
Aug 23, 2013
882
768
93
Not to be nitpicky, but fiat is by definition government issued currency. Bitcoin is not fiat.

So if you think an automatic system does rules better what do you envision as a solution? Would it be under global authority, or decentralized?
Nah. It doesn't matter who the issuer is. Backed by or not backed. The fact that currency is typically issued by governments and declared legal tender is irrelevant to my point.

 

melt

Active Member
Apr 5, 2006
313
156
43
Chicago, IL
All I know is seeing a lot of crypto based hedge funds go under recently makes me think a bottom could be coming in soon.

But a lot of the crypto exchanges last week that shut off withdrawals to customers, that is fairly unethical and I bet a 1,000 lawsuits come about due to that. It's an unstable place right now for sure.

I can't justify any significant part of my portfolio to crypto because what utility does it have? Internally it's almost set up as a multi level marketing scheme.
Yea crypto doesn’t actually have an utility except to scam people out of money. A lot of crypto platforms are experiencing the 2008 market crash and all the ponzi schemes are being exposed.
 
Last edited:

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
67,640
63,705
113
Not exactly sure.
What was the crypto that some guy owned like 60% of it with several billion worth at its peak. If he was smart, he was peaking off 100k every day or two up there. Enough to have real money but not so much people aren’t buying it and you dump the market on yourself.
 

JustAnotherTimeline

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2021
2,192
214
63
43
What was the crypto that some guy owned like 60% of it with several billion worth at its peak. If he was smart, he was peaking off 100k every day or two up there. Enough to have real money but not so much people aren’t buying it and you dump the market on yourself.

Quite a few of em like that
 
  • Agree
Reactions: dafarmer

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
26,459
19,620
113
What was the crypto that some guy owned like 60% of it with several billion worth at its peak. If he was smart, he was peaking off 100k every day or two up there. Enough to have real money but not so much people aren’t buying it and you dump the market on yourself.

The podcast series I posted above had a pretty crazy stat - a huge percentage of bitcoin is still owned by only a few players, many of whom were very early adopters, and almost all bitcoin is 6 or fewer trades away from those early miners.
 

JustAnotherTimeline

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2021
2,192
214
63
43
The podcast series I posted above had a pretty crazy stat - a huge percentage of bitcoin is still owned by only a few players, many of whom were very early adopters, and almost all bitcoin is 6 or fewer trades away from those early miners.

Thanks for sharing. I just binged the whole thing! Always a fan of Freakonomics. It did a pretty good job presenting both sides of the discussion.

I do have a bone to pick with any criticism of early adopters or the assertion of poor distribution. The podcast was misleading in this regard. Bitcoin launched with a price of ZERO. There was no pre mine, venture capital, or rich oligarchs backing the project. All coins initially mined were by people who believed in the project and wanted to participate with ZERO promise of financial gain. The bitcoins were worth almost nothing. There is a large chunk of whale holdings that are almost certainly lost coins which bears fail to acknowledge. Remember, these coins were worth nothing, so losing your keys to a fried hard drive or a lost piece of paper was extremely common. The podcast analysis also failed to discuss that large entities like exchanges or wrapped bitcoin, etc, and how they represent a portion of large holders. Depending on how you look at the data, you can easily come up with figures that show BTC to be better distributed then worldwide legacy system wealth.

Lastly, since BTC is a fixed monetary system, on chain data shows distribution continues to improve as the network grows. Conversely, the wealth inequality in our legacy system continues to favor the rich and feast on the poor.
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 23, 2006
26,459
19,620
113
Thanks for sharing. I just binged the whole thing! Always a fan of Freakonomics. It did a pretty good job presenting both sides of the discussion.

I do have a bone to pick with any criticism of early adopters or the assertion of poor distribution. The podcast was misleading in this regard. Bitcoin launched with a price of ZERO. There was no pre mine, venture capital, or rich oligarchs backing the project. All coins initially mined were by people who believed in the project and wanted to participate with ZERO promise of financial gain. The bitcoins were worth almost nothing. There is a large chunk of whale holdings that are almost certainly lost coins which bears fail to acknowledge. Remember, these coins were worth nothing, so losing your keys to a fried hard drive or a lost piece of paper was extremely common. The podcast analysis also failed to discuss that large entities like exchanges or wrapped bitcoin, etc, and how they represent a portion of large holders. Depending on how you look at the data, you can easily come up with figures that show BTC to be better distributed then worldwide legacy system wealth.

Lastly, since BTC is a fixed monetary system, on chain data shows distribution continues to improve as the network grows. Conversely, the wealth inequality in our legacy system continues to favor the rich and feast on the poor.

Point taken but it's not the poor who are buying bitcoin in any capacity. It's young men with money to spend who are buying in at much larger rates than anybody else.
 

nocsious3

Well-Known Member
Aug 23, 2013
882
768
93
Thanks for sharing. I just binged the whole thing! Always a fan of Freakonomics. It did a pretty good job presenting both sides of the discussion.

I do have a bone to pick with any criticism of early adopters or the assertion of poor distribution. The podcast was misleading in this regard. Bitcoin launched with a price of ZERO. There was no pre mine, venture capital, or rich oligarchs backing the project. All coins initially mined were by people who believed in the project and wanted to participate with ZERO promise of financial gain. The bitcoins were worth almost nothing. There is a large chunk of whale holdings that are almost certainly lost coins which bears fail to acknowledge. Remember, these coins were worth nothing, so losing your keys to a fried hard drive or a lost piece of paper was extremely common. The podcast analysis also failed to discuss that large entities like exchanges or wrapped bitcoin, etc, and how they represent a portion of large holders. Depending on how you look at the data, you can easily come up with figures that show BTC to be better distributed then worldwide legacy system wealth.

Lastly, since BTC is a fixed monetary system, on chain data shows distribution continues to improve as the network grows. Conversely, the wealth inequality in our legacy system continues to favor the rich and feast on the poor.
What makes you come to the conclusion these early accounts with big balances are lost accounts?
 

twojman

Well-Known Member
Jun 1, 2006
7,755
3,927
113
Clive
Crypto is and will be a pyramid scheme. I guess people have been using it for illicit payments so there's that.
 

JustAnotherTimeline

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2021
2,192
214
63
43
What makes you come to the conclusion these early accounts with big balances are lost accounts?

It's pretty widely accepted that there are likely 3-4 million lost bitcoin. I have read several chain analysis reports about it over the years.
 
Last edited:

nocsious3

Well-Known Member
Aug 23, 2013
882
768
93
Not at all true globally. Lesser developed nations adopt bitcoin and other cryptos at a high rate.


It's pretty widely accepted that there are likely 3-4 million lost bitcoin. I have read several chain analysis reports about it over the years.
I'm not denying some Bitcoin is lost, but there's zero evidence many of these dormant addresses are locked out beyond the circumstantial fact they haven't moved any coin. That's just conjecture despite any "chain analysis" that's been done.
 

JustAnotherTimeline

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2021
2,192
214
63
43
I'm not denying some Bitcoin is lost, but there's zero evidence many of these dormant addresses are locked out beyond the circumstantial fact they haven't moved any coin. That's just conjecture despite any "chain analysis" that's been done.

Fair enough. Satoshi could also appear and sell his.

But I would wager a lot of money that we would see a US oligarch like musk sell his 20% of telsa before dormant Addy's become a supply problem.

There is unknown in everything.
 

melt

Active Member
Apr 5, 2006
313
156
43
Chicago, IL
Musk might sell 20% of his Tesla stock if he’s forced to buy Twitter. It’s way overvalued anyway, so I’d be selling that stock if I had any. That’s not really crypto related.

In actual BTC news, MtGox is supposed to release 130k BTC sometime soon, and that will very likely cause the price to drop fast.
 

JustAnotherTimeline

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2021
2,192
214
63
43
Musk might sell 20% of his Tesla stock if he’s forced to buy Twitter. It’s way overvalued anyway, so I’d be selling that stock if I had any. That’s not really crypto related.

In actual BTC news, MtGox is supposed to release 130k BTC sometime soon, and that will very likely cause the price to drop fast.

Old news. It's priced in. Bitcoin could drop, but nothing substantial from gox imo.
 

melt

Active Member
Apr 5, 2006
313
156
43
Chicago, IL
I don’t know how you could say anything is priced in to BTC. The price jumps up and down by $1,000 sometimes in a matter of hours.