Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 5/23/2024 at 8:36 AM, Dave86ch said:

Tether is the 19th largest holder of US Treasuries, and USDT operates on the Ethereum VM.

 

They regularly reinvest their profits in Bitcoin.

 

The US might face some trouble if the blockchain were to disappear tomorrow.

 

There is a game theory at play in converting the old and unreliable US debt protocol for value into a fully digital money protocol for value.

 

It's a checkmate situation, and someone's denial does not change the facts.

Separating money from the state is never thought to be an easy task; it takes time.

 

On 5/23/2024 at 8:36 AM, Dave86ch said:

Tether is the 19th largest holder of US Treasuries, and USDT operates on the Ethereum VM.

 

They regularly reinvest their profits in Bitcoin.

 

The US might face some trouble if the blockchain were to disappear tomorrow.

 

There is a game theory at play in converting the old and unreliable US debt protocol for value into a fully digital money protocol for value.

 

It's a checkmate situation, and someone's denial does not change the facts.

Separating money from the state is never thought to be an easy task; it takes time.

 

 

Posted (edited)

Who needs an audit if Howard says "don't worry it's all there"  and risks are well managed!  Good enough for me.  I mean, when has a stable coin ever f*ed up?

 

Meanwhile, I am highly skeptical the US Government has any trouble finding buyers for their t-bills.

 

Why are people eager to put their capital into a vehicle that buys T-bills but instead of paying the substantial interest on their USD denominated capital to them, some guy who doesn't want an audit keeps their substantial t-bill interest for himself and buys Bitcoin with it?

Edited by gfp
Posted
17 hours ago, gfp said:

Who needs an audit if Howard says "don't worry it's all there"  and risks are well managed!  Good enough for me.  I mean, when has a stable coin ever f*ed up?

 

Meanwhile, I am highly skeptical the US Government has any trouble finding buyers for their t-bills.

 

Why are people eager to put their capital into a vehicle that buys T-bills but instead of paying the substantial interest on their USD denominated capital to them, some guy who doesn't want an audit keeps their substantial t-bill interest for himself and buys Bitcoin with it?

Cantor Fitzgerald is one of the 24 primary dealers authorized to trade U.S. government securities directly with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Posted
5 hours ago, Dave86ch said:

Cantor Fitzgerald is one of the 24 primary dealers authorized to trade U.S. government securities directly with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

 

Yes I am well aware.

Posted (edited)

ETH ...

 

The reality is that ETH is obsolete from the business POV. It is the old world give me development cash for a functional token (running on an ERC code) that does something ... vs the new world of bypass the token entirely and pay only for the demonstrated functionality as/when needed with CBDC. No developer risk, no inventory of non-liquid token with minimal cash value, don't pay if it can't do. Startup developers nightmare.

 

ETH is obsolete processing. It is far cheaper to simply buy capacity on someone else's high capacity private ledger that includes smart contract capability; no different to the everyday make vs buy decision that all businesses do every week. However it will not takeoff until a MicroSoft offers this to the masses the same way that it offers Excel, Word, Access, etc. Not tomorrow ...but the fuse is clearly burning.

 

Marketing wise, ETH is a failure because there is no mass product (ie: MS Office). Functionally, it's purely a startup development tool within the tech community, a step up from a Go Fund Me campaign; serves a purpose, but it's never going to be mass market.

 

It is also questionable whether ETH or CBDC/T-Bills better diversify a crypto portfolio. Do your own back tests before forming an opinion ... 

 

Tech has little choice but to sing praises to ETH as it is a development funding tool. However, everyone else doesn't have to swallow the Kool-Aid.  

 

SD

 

 

     

Edited by SharperDingaan
Posted
17 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

ETH ...

 

The reality is that ETH is obsolete from the business POV. It is the old world give me development cash for a functional token (running on an ERC code) that does something ... vs the new world of bypass the token entirely and pay only for the demonstrated functionality as/when needed with CBDC. No developer risk, no inventory of non-liquid token with minimal cash value, don't pay if it can't do. Startup developers nightmare.

 

ETH is obsolete processing. It is far cheaper to simply buy capacity on someone else's high capacity private ledger that includes smart contract capability; no different to the everyday make vs buy decision that all businesses do every week. However it will not takeoff until a MicroSoft offers this to the masses the same way that it offers Excel, Word, Access, etc. Not tomorrow ...but the fuse is clearly burning.

 

Marketing wise, ETH is a failure because there is no mass product (ie: MS Office). Functionally, it's purely a startup development tool within the tech community, a step up from a Go Fund Me campaign; serves a purpose, but it's never going to be mass market.

 

It is also questionable whether ETH or CBDC/T-Bills better diversify a crypto portfolio. Do you own back tests before forming an opinion ... 

 

Tech has little choice but to sing praises to ETH as it is a development funding tool. However, everyone else doesn't have to swallow the Kool-Aid.  

 

SD

 

 

     

I'm not a fan of PoS, but still, the market for stablecoins is growing fast.

Posted

Sam Bankman-Fried, a personal verdict

 

His crime was of a piece with his character. The character wasn’t the character of a thief. It was the character of a person numb to risk. Unable to feel risk himself, he can’t really imagine other people feeling much at all about the risk he has subjected them to.

 

It’s this absence in him that leads him, when cast in a certain light, to seem vulnerable. Easy to kidnap, easy to steal from. It’s this absence that, cast in a different light, makes him seem like a danger to society.

 

I could be wrong: Mine is just one more theory of a case complicated enough to support many theories. And even if I’m right, it’s no excuse. In the end, some coins should never be flipped.

 

https://archive.is/Lj2bI#selection-413.144-413.157

Posted
13 hours ago, Dave86ch said:

I'm not a fan of PoS, but still, the market for stablecoins is growing fast.

 

Why not run stablecoins on BTC/LN or similar L2 setup? 

Posted (edited)

If these NFTs don't get the last of you intellectual stragglers on board for the future I don't know what will!

 

image.thumb.png.ac88cec756e6cc2e29f93132c7996123.png

 

Now get your dough over to World Liberty Financial before its too late!

https://x.com/worldlibertyfi?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1829141447087648796|twgr^b5d1068ca5352a591e14fff3944e33add3de5045|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bloomberg.com%2Fnews%2Farticles%2F2024-08-29%2Ftrump-says-he-ll-announce-a-plan-to-make-us-the-crypto-capital-of-the-planet

 

"Beware of Scams" says the bio

Edited by gfp
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 8/25/2024 at 2:15 PM, james22 said:

Sam Bankman-Fried, a personal verdict

 

His crime was of a piece with his character. The character wasn’t the character of a thief. It was the character of a person numb to risk. Unable to feel risk himself, he can’t really imagine other people feeling much at all about the risk he has subjected them to.

 

It’s this absence in him that leads him, when cast in a certain light, to seem vulnerable. Easy to kidnap, easy to steal from. It’s this absence that, cast in a different light, makes him seem like a danger to society.

 

I could be wrong: Mine is just one more theory of a case complicated enough to support many theories. And even if I’m right, it’s no excuse. In the end, some coins should never be flipped.

 

https://archive.is/Lj2bI#selection-413.144-413.157

 

Thanks that was actually a decent article (I didn't expect that!) short of 2 things:

 

1. FTX creditors were not made whole. They were made whole based on an extremely depressed Bitcoin valuation on the petition date (while they were owed Bitcoin, not USD). After Bitcoin skyrocketed it was easy to repay creditors (and, except for some low amount of interest, the rest was robbed by lawyers and the IRS).

 

2. "young person with an intellectually defensible but socially unacceptable moral code" is very wrong. His moral code isn't intellectually defensible. Because 1. He fully discounts the cost of risk and the premium this should warrant, willing to take any arbitrarily small EV edge for any amount of risk. That is simply an illogical stance. 2. He's willing to take that risk for others (while he pockets the positive EV) which isn't merely socially but also morally unacceptable.

Posted
2 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

 2. He's willing to take that risk for others (while he pockets the positive EV) which isn't merely socially but also morally unacceptable.

 

This is what bothered me about him even before he imploded.  People like this usually end up really rich or in jail, with not a lot of them in the middle.  I think he's one of the few who ended up in both ends of the tail distribution, so kudos to him for that.  Russian roulette has a positive expected value too, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to play it, no matter the expected value is.  And it's morally repugnant to get other people to play it on your behalf while you profit off the results without suffering any of the harm that you are causing others to endure. 

Posted (edited)

High ego sociopathic savant. 
I think this country dodged a bullet. He had wanted to buy CME, Goldman Sachs etc. 
His goal was to control the entire financial system. 

Edited by Vish_ram
Posted

There has seemingly been a lot of buyers of bitcoins, between those who offer etfs, and even govenments.  So why isn't price ripping?

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Sweet said:

There has seemingly been a lot of buyers of bitcoins, between those who offer etfs, and even govenments.  So why isn't price ripping?

 

Miner capitulation forcing holders of BTC to sell. You can see that in the hashrate dip following the halving (and has happened every halving) which is why price typically takes a few months to rip post-halving. 

 

Additionally, the German government sold 10,000+ BTC it confiscated back in July. 

 

People think a recession is coming so buying is probably a hair more muted and there is liquidity at ~60-70k that gets sold when we hit it from people concerned about the medium term outlook. 

 

Also, this was the first time BTC ever hit a new ATH BEFORE the halving of the supply so perhaps a few additional months of consolidation are in order. 

 

Those are a few thoughts - but I expect it'll be higher by year end and significantly higher ~6-months from now. I'd generally say the trend in demand growth/ETF flows/etc probably supports ~100k by early 2025. 

Edited by TwoCitiesCapital
Posted

Bitcoin: A Unique Diversifier

 

Why bitcoin's appeal  to investors lies in its detachment from traditional  risk and return drivers

 

KEY TAKEAWAYS

 

- Investors considering allocating to bitcoin are grappling with how to analyze it relative to traditional financial assets, given bitcoin’s unique properties and limited history.

 

- Bitcoin, with its high volatility, is obviously a “risky” asset on a standalone basis. However, most of the risk and potential return drivers bitcoin faces are fundamentally different from traditional “risky” assets, making it unfitting for most traditional finance frameworks – including the “risk on” vs. “risk off” framework employed by some macro commentators. 

 

- Bitcoin’s nature as a scarce, non-sovereign, decentralized global asset has caused some investors to consider it as a flight to safety option in times of fear and around certain geopolitically disruptive events.

 

- Over the long term, bitcoin’s adoption trajectory is likely to be driven by the intensity of concerns over global monetary stability, geopolitical stability, U.S. fiscal sustainability, and U.S. political stability. This is the inverse of the relationship that is generally attributed to traditional “risk assets” with respect to such forces.

 

https://www.blackrock.com/us/financial-professionals/insights/bitcoin-unique-diversifier

 

https://www.blackrock.com/us/financial-professionals/literature/whitepaper/bitcoin-a-unique-diversifier.pdf

Posted (edited)

BTC diversification is attractive because of BTCs low correlation to traditional assets. Whereas the problem is two fold; (1) BTC cannot be objectively valued based on cash flow, and (2) the correlations are wildly unstable, hence it's hard to optimise a portfolio when BTC is one of the assets. However, while a BTC valuation based on 'feel' is a hard sell, that BTC volatility can eliminate a lot of cash drag. Employment risk for the outlier.

 

The reality is that BTC's investment use is an evolving process, and will remain so for quite some time. Most would expect that as usage becomes more mainstream, the outlier risk will decline, resulting in a greater BTC capital allocation; raising the value of BTC.

 

Of course in the meantime, if you can act like a PM, and don't have these constraints; good for you 😄

 

SD

Edited by SharperDingaan

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...