Parsad

I know for a fact...from the horse's mouth...that Paul's departure had nothing to do with Fairfax. It was for personal reasons. And based on those reasons, I would assume Paul would be welcomed back if and when he was ready or wanted to return...perhaps not in the same role, but advisory/director/etc. On the investment side, large investments are approved by the committee...not any one individual. So suggesting that any investments were Paul's fault would not be fair. The committee's investment style has been tweaked in the last couple of years primarily by the addition and more significant duties of Wade and Lawrence and the decision to stop shorting. Cheers!

Bluegold did a great job replying to the first two. Let me handle a couple others...I will give you non-fungible and harder to split. In terms of moving...you sell your property, move your cash. Yes, not as liquid, but is movable. Easier to create...not true...there is only a limited amount of land. For example, here in Vancouver, we are surrounded by three borders...two natural (coastline and mountains) and one man-made (the U.S. border). Because of that, we have house prices comparable to San Francisco or New York. I'll give you a few reasons not to own BTC where real estate has the advantage: Cash flowing...generates income. Only some BTC wallets pay interest. Far less volatile...my house price may fluctuate, but not as crazy as BTC. Tax deductions...self explanatory. Provides low-risk leverage...can you imagine using any sort of leverage with BTC? You would never know when you get a margin call. Accessible...my house isn't going anywhere. As long as I pay the mortgage and taxes, no one can defraud me out of my house...in other words, no hacks! Cheers!

Real estate. Cheers!

Explain the large hacks of wallets that occur all the time. Cheers!

There is a natural increase in illiquid wallets as the price drops. The large whales are holding onto their coins. Here is a breakdown of BTC's liquid and illiquid markets...you can see that liquidity drops when the price of BTC collapses as it has. Cheers!

BTC is not a hard asset. If anything to lend any sort of credence to your argument...it would be considered a hybrid asset. I personally categorize it as intangible. Cheers!

It's not if you give someone the keys...they steal the keys. Big difference! So to suggest that the network is the most secure in the world for transactions is not fully correct. The network, like most networks, is secure...but fraud and hacks are prevalent...theft of wallets is prevalent. Cheers!

A lot of people try and use BTC for short-term as well...as a replacement for fiat currency with no scrutiny. In fact, I would argue that most transactions are short-term in nature...not long-term buy and holds. I've never said that BTC wasn't more efficient...especially with layer 2 protocols. That's why I believe blockchain networks are the future. When people discuss the security of BTC, you cannot exclude the exchanges where wallets are kept. Keys are no different than e-transfers where personal/transfer information is hacked. If you have the keys, you can do whatever the hell you want. We've seen it...regularly...where wallets have been hacked and millions, if not hundreds of millions, stolen. Cheers!

I was explaining why crypto payment systems aren't going to replace fiat currency payment systems anytime soon. The whole debate today started because Rka called BTC a hard asset. It isn't. It's an intangible asset...simple! Cheers!

Again, let's be clear about this. Only if you keep your keys off any exchanges. Otherwise it can be hacked like anything else. Cheers!

What did I get wrong? Stability...look at the volatility in BTC over the last few years, months, weeks, days. If I value my house at $400K, and the swing in one day of BTC values it at $360K after the deal closes...how is that going to work?! If someone invoices a company $20K, and then suddenly the next day they get $18K...how does that work?! Liquidity...look at all of the wallets that are inaccessible and driving businesses into the ground because they can't get at their BTC. Portability...any more portable or efficient than current fiat networks? Security...hacks up the ying-yang! Trust in the system! Cheers!

When have I said anything different? I've always stated that a decentralized network is essential for a functioning replacement to current fiat currency networks. Blockchain allows those decentralized networks to exist. End of story. My argument has always been that crypto is too volatile to replace fiat currency. By itself, it has no value. That blockchain is in its infancy and that the outcome/winners isn't clear. That this isn't investing, but speculation. What have I said different? Cheers!

That's not what most on here were arguing. That's a completely different stance. As a store of value, it will only work if the network is functional and can provide the utility that fiat currency networks do. There has to be price stability...liquidity...portability...security...etc. The BTC on-chain network was not capable of that. Layer 2 networks have some promise. That was my argument...that as things stand, it functions as a payment system, but not one that can replace fiat currency networks. That without functional networks the currencies are worth nothing. Blockchain is also in its infancy. BTC and Ethereum may be akin to AOL and CompuServe...not Google or Meta. To suggest that I don't understand what you are talking about is the result of you not making a compelling enough argument on the practical utility of crypto as it is. If I don't agree with you, then I must not understand. Cheers!

All you're doing here is stating the stupidity of owning gold. Not actually suggesting why most current crypto currencies could actually replace fiat currencies. When you say that crypto is simply a payment system. I agree with that. When you say it could replace current fiat currencies as it is now...I completely disagree with that. ITEX uses electronic barter as a payment system. It isn't going to replace the USD. Cheers!

A can opener is useful...it's not a hard asset. Cheers!

Because I've been following blockchain and crypto ever since Patrick Byrne started buying up blockchain companies and $10M worth of bitcoin through OSTK, which was the first major retailer to accept BTC. I also tried to buy Netcoins over six years ago through PDH when it was still a private company. Cheers!

Lightning would only work if it is fully decentralized and off-chain. Currently, the P2P transactions only occur with a security on-chain transaction if I understand correctly...I haven't actually conducted a transaction on Lightning, so correct me if I'm wrong. Also, what is stopping someone else from creating another competing layer 2 network that is superior and aligned with a different currency. Remember, I said I have no problem with crypto and especially blockchain networks. I'm just saying investing in the current batch of crypto is like throwing darts. It's not investing...it's speculation. Cheers!

No, it's completely different. It would be like eliminating visa altogether. The idea would be the transaction goes from my wallet to your wallet with no middleman fee. The only fee would be a nominal one from my wallet institution to me for the transaction. The transaction would also be instantaneous with no hold, no fraud, regulated and could be corrected if an error is made. Current wallets cannot do that other than no hold. Cheers!

Ok, you guys are the ones making the argument that BTC will replace fiat currencies. Well, you don't need billions of trading happening, you need trillions each day! You need price stability in the currency...you need transparency of ownership...you need regulation otherwise you will create behavior that perpetuates destructive correlated risk. In terms of daily transactions...the USD and other fiat currencies aren't moving 10% a day in value. You need stability in any fiat currency. The lightning network you speak of has nothing to do with the cryptocurrency and everything to do with blockchain technology...which I've been a proponent of for 10+ years! Blockchain is in it's infancy, like the internet was or the combustion engine. It is incredibly difficult to predict long-term winners within early days of new technology. Trying to is speculation...not investing! Cheers!

I've been following blockchain and crypto probably longer than anyone on here, so I'm certainly not making uninformed comments. I have 100% belief in blockchain. I have far less certainty in the current batch of crypto other than maybe Ethereum. And even that is a longshot! I can tell you for a fact...not some nonsensical statement...that the support for BTC is based on speculative behavior. Not driven by technology, utility, liquidity, etc, nor is it backed by any hard asset. It is volatile, consumes massive amounts of energy, is currently not liquid like fiat currencies, nor is ownership transparent and regulated. That's a lot of things working against it! And here you guys are telling other people that they are wrong, when you have no proof or support that you are right either. Cheers!

Winklevii get deeper in trouble: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-charges-genesis-gemini-with-selling-unregistered-securities-220036368.html Cheers!

I think you're being unfair and perhaps a bit defensive. I've always argued that crypto at best is commodity-like...the operative word being "like". Very different than "same". Crypto has zero utilitarian value. Every commodity has some utilitarian use...gold, lithium, pork bellies, orange juice, etc. So crypto cannot be a commodity. Commodity by definition means "a raw material or primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee." So that argument has no merit! The truth is, crypto is essentially similar to art/collectibles etc, where the value is arbitrary and speculative. The network and adoption is irrelevant. It is too volatile and illiquid (in common daily use) to be used to replace dominant fiat currencies. At present day, I would argue that the current format of crypto is akin to trading stamps where they can be used similar to barter, but not really currency. One day, digital currencies will use blockchain and at that time, asset-backed networks of crypto may be used as replacements for some fiat currency, but we aren't there yet. And I have my doubts about the current batch of crypto being a dominant player in the future. Cheers!

Will be interesting to see what they did. Brian is probably one of the best in the world at what he does...rarely does he put a foot down in the wrong place. I was surprised by how much they were allocating in Q3...so they probably had some idea that things were peaking. Cheers!

One of my favorite videos of the three Gods...Page, Beck and Clapton...only thing missing was Hendrix! Page is at a whole other level, but shows how amazing those guys are/were. The different style and sound each had...the respect for one another! Cheers!

RIP Jeff Beck! One of the most influential guitarists of all time...right up there with Hendrix, Page, Santana, Keith Richards, George Harrison, Prince et al. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/11/entertainment/jeff-beck-death/index.html