Cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, etc.)

[Nice Guy Eddie 13295]

1 hour ago, TreatyOak said:

Hot Crypto Friend Update: 

My hot Asian female friend is angry at me. She says I'm doing myself a disservice by not investing enough of my retirement into crypto through her friend's platform. I don't want to make her mad, so I am going to invest anther $150K. Unfortunately, our meeting-up in Taipei was delayed. She has gotten tied up in some sort of passport issue. I'll let you know when we set up the new meeting! ❤️ 

What’s really sad is that you’re probably talking to some guy chained to a table/desktop in Myanmar.

if you send 150k, he will earn a cookie with his dinner. 

Edited July 22 by Nice Guy Eddie

[TreatyOak 16078]

2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

What’s really sad is that you’re probably talking to some guy chained to a table/desktop in Myanmar.

if you send 150k, he will earn a cookie with his dinner. 

Apparently, they created an entire little city there just for this scam. So evil. 

[B00M 6024]

On 7/22/2024 at 3:56 PM, TreatyOak said:

Apparently, they created an entire little city there just for this scam. So evil. 

You got coordinates? 

[Chopper 16354]

Public service announcement:

[T’Boo Ted Marshall 2719]

Ouch. Just checked in to see what current prices were and saw the drop over the last week.

[wild_turkey 3078]

I like knowing that whenever I lose a thousand, Elon is losing hundreds of millions.

[Tailgate 2974]

Head scratcher here on the movement of BTC in correlation with stocks. Make sure you’ve got some cash under the mattress…damn.

[bluto 4804]

Head scratcher? Shits been this way for a few yrs, seems it’s just like everything else getting caught in the overall market swings 

[52-80 18982]

3 hours ago, Tailgate said:

Head scratcher here on the movement of BTC in correlation with stocks. Make sure you’ve got some cash under the mattress…damn.

There's roughly $10B of creditor repayment from the Mt Gox bankruptcy that started distribution just last month. One wonders how much of that newly-recovered funds is being liquidated to support or take advantage of the Nikkei crashing. And over the weekend there was also news of Jump Trading, a large prop firm / market maker, liquidating its books (shuttering the business?).  That may have caused some crypto accounts to deleverage

[Parliament 13997]

10 hours ago, T’Boo Ted Marshall said:

Ouch. Just checked in to see what current prices were and saw the drop over the last week.

[Captainant 26902]

4 minutes ago, Parliament said:

That's a weird thing for a store of value to do

[52-80 18982]

because real shit like physical gold is never volatile

 

[washparkhorn 9898]

5 hours ago, Captainant said:

That's a weird thing for a store of value to do

I view Crypto as an ETF for illegal transections worldwide. 

[Parliament 13997]

I pay Surly their yearly $3.50 with it.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13295]

3 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

I view Crypto as an ETF for illegal transections worldwide. 

lol. Crypto then gives you a way to legally invest in crime. 

[bernorange 8338]

Not crime.  Transections.  It's like high school biology dissections, but weird.

[washparkhorn 9898]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

lol. Crypto then gives you a way to legally invest in crime. 

In other news, the El Chapo arrests caused bitcoin to slump today. However the Russian arms dealers see opportunity with the unrest in the Middle East—a bullish sign to buy the dip. 

[Blotto 23245]

Cant wait for the Trump family attempt to shake up the crypto world, and make whatever their new offering they want to foist on their rubes so shitacular it fucks the whole sector. 

[bernorange 8338]

https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2024/08/08/coinbase-backed-vega-gets-into-prediction-market-race-chasing-polymarket/

Nascent venture might grow into something big.

[Blotto 23245]

8 hours ago, bernorange said:

https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2024/08/08/coinbase-backed-vega-gets-into-prediction-market-race-chasing-polymarket/

Nascent venture might grow into something big.

Gambling is already a pretty big deal. Its been going on for many years. before crypto even. 

[Conqueeftador 124]

Looks like Fed 50bps cut in interest rates  might have helped bring Bitcoin out of its slumber. Currently about 15% under its ATH with the initiation of a monetary easing cycle. 2025 will be very interesting. 
 

For those who are interested in exposure in their 401k, Microstrategy is very interesting. There are of course the etfs, but microstrategy is commanding a premium to the NAV of its BTC holdings. Why? In part because through their access of capital markets they are able to actually increase the amount of BTC per share over time. Pretty fascinating. 
 

They just raised another $875M from debt markets to buy more. Initially proposed $700M but there was extra demand. 
 

 

[Conqueeftador 124]

A pretty basic paper on bitcoin, but shows Blackrock’s commitment to the asset and their etf. Evidently Larry Fink has been “orange pilled”. 

[StassneyHorn 6429]

Company who offers a product makes marketing materials

[Trey3216 15308]

It's sad that so many of the bitcoin rubes don't realize that the creation of ETF's amounted to artificially increasing the supply of bitcoin and absolutely increased the legislative monitoring of it.  It's sad how correlated with the stock market its become.  

[bernorange 8338]

What do you mean when you say ETFs "increased the supply"? 

[TonyTexas 10406]

52 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

It's sad that so many of the bitcoin rubes don't realize that the creation of ETF's amounted to artificially increasing the supply of bitcoin and absolutely increased the legislative monitoring of it.  It's sad how correlated with the stock market it’s become.  

Wouldn’t the creation of Bitcoin ETFs increase demand? Explain how they artificially increase supply to me like I’m a rube. 

[Trey3216 15308]

1 hour ago, TonyTexas said:

Wouldn’t the creation of Bitcoin ETFs increase demand? Explain how they artificially increase supply to me like I’m a rube. 

Bitcoin ETF's increase the velocity of transaction and transactions.  There will only ever be 21mm bitcoin mined.   Prior to IBIT coming out, you had to go to an exchange or other method to actually buy it.   Then IBIT came out.   There are 649,640,000 shares of it.  Notionally, it is 80x the amount of BTC in the market.  Who's to say VelocityShares and 10 other fund families don't come out and make more etf's/etn's? Who's to say BlackRock won't issue another 650mm shares?  It creates liquidity in the market, but it puts a theoretical limit on the worth of actual bitcoin as funds can continuously issue shares if they need in order to increase their own liquidity.   Soon, they'll be trading options contracts on them.   Why go through all the trouble to buy on one of the coin exchanges when I can go 'buy' it on NASDAQ??  

 

It may have increased demand for it, but not near as much as it has increased 'supply' of it.  

[bernorange 8338]

https://www.ishares.com/us/products/333011/ishares-bitcoin-trust

$22,547,229,493 net assets / 649,640,000 shares = $34.70/share

IBIT owns 369,822.19680 BTC worth $22,562,349,270

Before the ETFs were approved, I asked Eric Balchunas on X/Twitter about how the ETF was supposed to work (ie. when they were supposed to buy or sell BTC from the market).  He said they are 1:1 dollar for dollar.  IOW, if the ETF sees $100 million in inflows, they will buy $100 million worth of BTC.

[TonyTexas 10406]

@Trey3216 I’m a bitcoin novice and just trying to make sense of what you’re saying. It seems that IBIT is a spot bitcoin ETF which requires it to actually own a corresponding amount of Bitcoin. If IBIT has 650M shares outstanding at $34/shr, that’s a current market cap of $22B, a small percentage of the total value of outstanding Bitcoins. 

[TonyTexas 10406]

 @bernorange posted similar thoughts while I was composing the above post. I think what you’re missing is the fact that each share of IBIT only represents a tiny fraction of a Bitcoin

Edited October 10 by TonyTexas

[Trey3216 15308]

4 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

@Trey3216 I’m a bitcoin novice and just trying to make sense of what you’re saying. It seems that IBIT is a spot bitcoin ETF which requires it to actually own a corresponding amount of Bitcoin. If IBIT has 650M shares outstanding at $34/shr, that’s a current market cap of $22B, a small percentage of the total value of outstanding Bitcoins. 

They most certainly do own quite a bit.  But as more and more come on line, and funds of funds are made out of them, it will ultimately lead to artificially inflating the supply.   Think about the derivative markets in general.  Think about what happened in '08 when we had financial institutions collapsing because 3rd and 4th order derivative tranches built on slices of MBS were collapsing.  You had a hundred trillion $$ of derivatives built on hundreds of billions of dollars of mortgages.  It was a fucking trainwreck.  

[Trey3216 15308]

14 minutes ago, bernorange said:

https://www.ishares.com/us/products/333011/ishares-bitcoin-trust

$22,547,229,493 net assets / 649,640,000 shares = $34.70/share

IBIT owns 369,822.19680 BTC worth $22,562,349,270

Before the ETFs were approved, I asked Eric Balchunas on X/Twitter about how the ETF was supposed to work (ie. when they were supposed to buy or sell BTC from the market).  He said they are 1:1 dollar for dollar.  IOW, if the ETF sees $100 million in inflows, they will buy $100 million worth of BTC.

My main point is that you will eventually have funds of funds of these things, and options on the funds and the funds of funds.  Supply supply supply.  

[TonyTexas 10406]

12 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

My main point is that you will eventually have funds of funds of these things, and options on the funds and the funds of funds.  Supply supply supply.  

It’s OK to make mistakes if you admit and learn from them and not continuously move the goalposts in their defense. 

Edited October 10 by TonyTexas

[Trey3216 15308]

2 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

It’s OK to be mistaken only if you learn from those mistakes and not continuously move the goalposts in their defense. 

I'm not against bitcoin, or trying to move goal posts.  You've given the public a place to go and get bitcoin without having to, you know, actually try and go out and get bitcoin.  It's a lot cheaper to go buy a few gallons of gas than it is drill, pump and refine it yourself.  It turned gasoline into a common good rather than a rare good.   Bitcoin is no longer a rare good.  

 

I have some myself, and I have IBIT as well.   I just think the advent of the ability to trade it so easily will suppress the "hypergrowth" scenarios in the future.  It'll trot along with the stock market.  

[Captainant 26902]

1 hour ago, Trey3216 said:

Bitcoin ETF's increase the velocity of transaction and transactions.  There will only ever be 21mm bitcoin mined.   Prior to IBIT coming out, you had to go to an exchange or other method to actually buy it.   Then IBIT came out.   There are 649,640,000 shares of it.  Notionally, it is 80x the amount of BTC in the market.  Who's to say VelocityShares and 10 other fund families don't come out and make more etf's/etn's? Who's to say BlackRock won't issue another 650mm shares?  It creates liquidity in the market, but it puts a theoretical limit on the worth of actual bitcoin as funds can continuously issue shares if they need in order to increase their own liquidity.   Soon, they'll be trading options contracts on them.   Why go through all the trouble to buy on one of the coin exchanges when I can go 'buy' it on NASDAQ??  

 

It may have increased demand for it, but not near as much as it has increased 'supply' of it.  

it's also leveraging the hell out of the bitcoin market, there's a ton of sidebets and instruments getting made on top of BTC

[bernorange 8338]

The spot ETFs are not "increasing supply".  Folks that want BTC - even indirectly via spot ETF - have a limited supply from which they can acquire it.  This is and has always been true.  This is why the halving event is consequential.  BTC price action over the last few months (since spot ETF approval) been subject to a few inverse supply shocks with BTC from Grayscale Trust, FTX bankruptcy, Mt. Gox bankruptcy, etc. adding significant supply to the market.

I don't know what may happen with other derivative products or how they might be structured, but any investor funds they attract won't magically create more BTC supply.  

[Blotto 23245]

10 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

I'm not against bitcoin, or trying to move goal posts.  You've given the public a place to go and get bitcoin without having to, you know, actually try and go out and get bitcoin.  It's a lot cheaper to go buy a few gallons of gas than it is drill, pump and refine it yourself.  It turned gasoline into a common good rather than a rare good.   Bitcoin is no longer a rare good.  

 

I have some myself, and I have IBIT as well.   I just think the advent of the ability to trade it so easily will suppress the "hypergrowth" scenarios in the future.  It'll trot along with the stock market.  

I get your point and its interesting to think about possible market distortions from these derivative products and "funds of funds" that may move the price more than any actual demand for the underlying asset(at least traditional use case demand). So many guys with BTC hard-ons praise its uniqueness from traditional asset classes and tout it as a hedge against an inevitable financial collapse. But it appears to me that it trends more and more towards those asset classes as it becomes increasingly adopted by "big finance." The Blackrocks of the  world don't give a fuck about bitcoin beyond their ability to take the BTC "widget", create financial products/markets around that widget, and scrape fees/profits off those products/markets. The more influence the "establishment" gains, the more the BTC universe will mirror what it was originally created to combat. 

[Brisketexan 103515]

39 minutes ago, Blotto said:

The more influence the "establishment" gains, the more the BTC universe will mirror what it was originally created to combat. 

That's inevitable.  If you want to create a widget that's actually useful and usable, then it will get used by more and more people, and will naturally evolve into the kind of thing people are used to using.

If you want to keep it inaccessible and occult, then it won't be very useful or usable.

"Success" is a curse.

I truly don't get the "it's a hedge against financial collapse."  How? It's 1s and 0s.  I at least get the goldbugs ("it's a hard asset, man has been trading gold for goods for millenia!").  If SHTF, truly....how are electronically accessed 1s and 0s going to be of any real use or value?

[bernorange 8338]

 

[UpperWestside 6017]

On 10/10/2024 at 4:56 PM, Brisketexan said:

That's inevitable.  If you want to create a widget that's actually useful and usable, then it will get used by more and more people, and will naturally evolve into the kind of thing people are used to using.

If you want to keep it inaccessible and occult, then it won't be very useful or usable.

"Success" is a curse.

I truly don't get the "it's a hedge against financial collapse."  How? It's 1s and 0s.  I at least get the goldbugs ("it's a hard asset, man has been trading gold for goods for millenia!").  If SHTF, truly....how are electronically accessed 1s and 0s going to be of any real use or value?

I will never get this. The entire thing is a scam, but there are always willing participants on this kind of stuff. All you have to do is sing the siren song of “come here and get rich quick” and before long you have people handing over money they don’t have to spare. The sooner this stuff is outright banned by the government the better. 

[Brisketexan 103515]

I will never get this. The entire thing is a scam, but there are always willing participants on this kind of stuff. All you have to do is sing the siren song of “come here and get rich quick” and before long you have people handing over money they don’t have to spare. The sooner this stuff is outright banned by the government the better. 

I don't think any of it should be outright "banned."  If people want to speculate on collectible taxidermy toads, more power to them.  Just enforce existing legal frameworks/concepts with respect to the securities scam that it is.  
Got this text spam the other day.  This is how you know crypto is a totally for real legit thing and not a scam:
 

[UpperWestside 6017]

8 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

I don't think any of it should be outright "banned."  If people want to speculate on collectible taxidermy toads, more power to them.  Just enforce existing legal frameworks/concepts with respect to the securities scam that it is.  
Got this text spam the other day.  This is how you know crypto is a totally for real legit thing and not a scam:
 

That’s just amazing right there. Why Brisket if you join that guy you’re making a 100 grand today!

Despite all evidence showing crypto is a scam we still have people here propping this clown show up as being legitimate. It really is incredible what people will do to make a dishonest dollar. The love of money is not the root of all evil, but man it’s a heckuva drug for a whole lot of people. 

[52-80 18982]

On 10/15/2024 at 10:24 AM, UpperWestside said:

The sooner this stuff is outright banned by the government the better. 

Hoo buddy, have I got some news for you

[Captainant 26902]

16 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Hoo buddy, have I got some news for you

It's funny that you think a completely unregulated market that's more scam than opportunity is what's going to be protected, and not the consumers/investors of those crypto platforms

[Nice Guy Eddie 13295]

After a fair amount of time (crypto time) stuck in the 55-63 range, btc has easily pushed north of 70k. What I’m unsure is how this is related to the election or not. I’ve heard some macro Econ thinkers say that both candidates look to be adding to inflation with Trump potentially being higher. No CR intended but just relating what I heard.

and that with inflation, some big investors are looking to both btc and gold as a hedge against inflation. It’s one thing to read a reddit post about someone investing their life savings of $15k in bitcoin but it’s something else when millionaires if not billionaires are saying the same. This still gives me confidence in the future for bitcoin.

since I brought up the election, I could see a quick btc price drop if Trump loses. Once again no CR just speculation about a future possibility.

[Snake Diggity 4548]

I believe Bitcoin’s value will eventually be destroyed by 1 of 2 events:

1. A hack that destroys holders’ faith in the ledger.  I’m not knowledgeable about blockchain.  I’ve spoken to a shitload of Bitcoin evangelists but none of them know shit about how blockchain or the bitcoin code changes actually work.  I’ve spoken to 1 person who I would consider knowledgeable about blockchain and he was pretty ambivalent about Bitcoin and said nothing is 100% secure.

2. Legislation by the US government if/when it becomes a threat to the viability of the US dollar.  The US is not going to tolerate Bitcoin actually undermining the Dollar’s status as the world’s primary reserve currency.  They will use their economic, military, and political might to destroy it if they need to.

 

It may take years, but I consider one of those two outcomes inevitable.  (FWIW I own a small amount of bitcoin but not as a meaningful investment or significant % of my net worth.)

Edited Tuesday at 02:21 PM by Snake Diggity
Spelling and grammar

[Nice Guy Eddie 13295]

2 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I believe Bitcoin’s value will eventually be destroyed by 1 of 2 events:

1. A hack that destroys holders’ faith in the ledger.  I’m not knowledgeable about blockchain.  I’ve spoken to a shitload of Bitcoin evangelists but none of them know shit about how blockchain or the bitcoin code changes actually work.  I’ve spoken to 1 person who I would consider knowledgeable about blockchain and he was pretty ambivalent about Bitcoin and said nothing is 100% secure.

2. Legislation by the US government if/when it becomes a threat to the viability of the US dollar.  The US is not going to tolerate Bitcoin actually undermining the Dollar’s status as the world’s primary reserve currency.  They will use their economic, military, and political might to destroy it if they need to.

 

It may take years, but I consider one of those two outcomes inevitable.  (FWIW I own a small amount of bitcoin but not as a meaningful investment or significant % of my net worth.)

As for 1, the only consensus that people have come up with is if quantum computing could suddenly break the security algorithm. Which would mean any password for crypto, bank accounts, whatever would be hackable. Obviously the impact would be greater to non -crypto. Bitcoin code is open for all to see and the developers are not pushing new code with a new sprint each week.

2 has a lower potential each day as more traditional investors are moving into it daily. Now both parties are taking big money from crypto so I don’t see the risk like I did 5 years ago.

disclaimer that you may be 100% right about both. I dont have a crystal ball.

[Maestro della Moneta 4]

First of all, congrats to all the hodlers 

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I’ve heard some macro Econ thinkers say that both candidates look to be adding to inflation with Trump potentially being higher. No CR intended but just relating what I heard.

 

This makes sense to me along with bonds being sold. 

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

since I brought up the election, I could see a quick btc price drop if Trump loses. Once again no CR just speculation about a future possibility.

Agreed

54 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I believe Bitcoin’s value will eventually be destroyed by 1 of 2 events:

1. A hack that destroys holders’ faith in the ledger.  I’m not knowledgeable about blockchain.

Say no more, fam. 

55 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

2. Legislation by the US government if/when it becomes a threat to the viability of the US dollar.  The US is not going to tolerate Bitcoin actually undermining the Dollar’s status as the world’s primary reserve currency.

What kind of legislation would serve that purpose? 

By the time something like that is considered, the cat may already be out of the bag. 

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13295]

In a hypothetical scenario the govt could attempt to make it illegal to hold crypto outside an approved custodian. It would be impossible to fully enforce but they could make it difficult to get new dollars into crypto. Like the following for US citizens.

1. Deposit USD into coinbase
2. buy crypto
3. coinbase is only allowed to transfer crypto to 1 of 10 custodians. Or whatever number.
4. coinbase rejects random crypto deposits. 

I’m not advocating this but this is a potential path that a govt could use to control crypto. Unfortunately it would only control it for more law abiding citizens. International options would still be possible.

[bernorange 8338]

36 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I believe Bitcoin’s value will eventually be destroyed by 1 of 2 events: ...

A hack of the BTC code has 0% chance of happening.  BTC code (ie. "the network") runs on thousands of machines (every machine that is a BTC miner).  Updates to the BTC code require proposals to the Github developer community and go through a process of code vetting and proposal voting.  It's very unlikely that malicious code survives that process.

A disagreement on the development of the network can happen and has happened in the past.  That is why Bitcoin Cash exists - it's a "fork":  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_Cash

Bitcoin is potentially vulnerable to a 51% network attack.  This can happen when a single entity controls too much of the network:  https://www.coinbase.com/learn/crypto-glossary/what-is-a-51-percent-attack-and-what-are-the-risks

The risks mentioned above are very unlikely to materialize IMO.  The much bigger risk for BTC is the security model failing.  By design, BTC undergoes a "halving" every 4 years or so.  This programmed into the system - it's not a human controlled event.  The halving cuts in half the amount of BTC generated by mining activity.  As that diminishes, miners generate less BTC and thus, less income to pay for their expenses.  Miners also get a percentage of the gas/transaction fees every time some BTC moves from one address/wallet to another, but BTC is also constrained by it's PoW design on the max transaction throughput it can handle.  It's possible that in the future, the economics might make it unprofitable for miners to maintain the network.

~~~

Fedgov is already prosecuting a war on crypto.  Sen. Warren seems to be one of the main drivers though she is likely just a pawn of the banking lobby.  SEC Chair Gensler is one of the main actors trying to bully players in the industry.  However, BTC is not like almost every other crypto that followed.  BTC was released to the world for free and the network grew without promise of commercial gain.  This is why the SEC has clearly stated that BTC is not a security (and not [directly] subject to their war on crypto).

Since Fedgov cannot outright ban/prohibit participation in the BTC network (1st amendment issues - it's just data), they have been prosecuting a second layer attack on the industry with Operation Choke Point 2.0 - trying to debank crypto companies:  https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/30008-operation-choke-point/

They nearly destabilized the banking industry in their efforts to kill Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank and First Republic Bank.

The crypto lobby has been flexing it's muscles this election season and some elements of the Dem party appear to have gotten the message.  Whether they are really serious about reigning in the Warren wing or not remains to be seen.  The issues of decentralized finance (crypto), CBDCs and the Federal Reserve are in the conversation lately.  I hope liberty and sanity prevail.