Cryptocurrencies

[james22]

44 minutes ago, Sweet said:

The community is eating its own thesis.

 

Not even wrong.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

15 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

If they are smart they developed a digital blockchain based USD or treasuries with functionally like the ability taxes, earn interest. Why hop on Bitcoin train if you can issue your own?

 

So a CBDC? There are plenty of reasons to do this if you're a government that needs to control its citizens - there are plenty of reasons to avoid its use as a citizen. Is my understanding that the executive order effectively prohibits this as well. 

 

50 minutes ago, Sweet said:

It’s kind of funny how Bitcoin, the tool used to exchange money without a bank, is now being cheered because banks can take it.  The community is eating its own thesis.

There are different functions and use cases to BTC. The ability to spend/send without intermediaries is but one of them. Another is a store of value asset. For banks that are forced to buy diminishing paper by regulators, it makes sense that they might want some sort of hard-asset/long-term store of value/inflation hedge in the portfolio.

 

Just consider, we only had ~18 months of elevated inflation and watched most of Bank of America's tangible equity disappear. 

 

This really isn't anything separate from the additional adoption/institutional adoption thesis - its just now banks can be a part of that. 

Edited January 24 by TwoCitiesCapital

[Fly]

46 minutes ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

 

So a CBDC? There are plenty of reasons to do this if you're a government that needs to control its citizens - there are plenty of reasons to avoid its use as a citizen. Is my understanding that the executive order effectively prohibits this as well. 

 

 

Are stablecoins that different from CBDCs in the eyes of the US govt? Yes, they dont have direct control but can call up Tether and freeze accounts at will. 

[james22]

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

18 hours ago, james22 said:

 

 

It means "authorized participants" can elect to swap Bitcoin in-kind. Not 'investors' as the tweet claims. 

[wachtwoord]

On 1/24/2025 at 4:52 PM, Sweet said:

It’s kind of funny how Bitcoin, the tool used to exchange money without a bank, is now being cheered because banks can take it.  The community is eating its own thesis.

 

The difference between can and must.

[james22]

1 hour ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

It means "authorized participants" can elect to swap Bitcoin in-kind. Not 'investors' as the tweet claims. 

 

Thanks for the correction.

[Dave86ch]

Here's what scares me.

 

 

 

[KFRCanuk]

Why does the Trump coin follow BTC ?https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/official-trump

 

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

They all do. BTC is the "risk free" benchmark in the crypto space. 

 

Below are the top 5 crypto tokens by marketcap (lines) and they're all highly correlated with BTCs movements (candles). Basically the entire industry moves up or down together - the question is by how much and is it growing when denominated in BTC or not

 

 

Edited Monday at 06:55 PM by TwoCitiesCapital

[Fly]

11 hours ago, Dave86ch said:

Here's what scares me.

 

 

 

 

Very concerning...

[Paarslaars]

Anyone want to explain that in layman's term? 

[rkbabang]

31 minutes ago, Paarslaars said:

Anyone want to explain that in layman's term? 

 

Basically because of regulations and KYC miners are starting to care more about compliance than profits and it has the potential to concentrate mining power in one mining pool (Foundry). When any miner or pool of miners has more than 50% hashrate they can do bad things (like double spend coins, or censor addresses from using Bitcoin, etc)

[Fly]

5 hours ago, rkbabang said:

 

Basically because of regulations and KYC miners are starting to care more about compliance than profits and it has the potential to concentrate mining power in one mining pool (Foundry). When any miner or pool of miners has more than 50% hashrate they can do bad things (like double spend coins, or censor addresses from using Bitcoin, etc)

even without a 51% attack Foundry could make it very difficult to get transactions included in blocks if they chose to do so since they have such a large share of hashrate

 

https://hashrateindex.com/hashrate/pools

[Paarslaars]

But that would kill the use case for BTC and therefor their own incentive to do this?

[Dave86ch]

2 hours ago, Paarslaars said:

But that would kill the use case for BTC and therefor their own incentive to do this?

Some mining pools are already working on permissions that allow clients to use different templates, giving hope for reduced centralization

[rkbabang]

9 hours ago, Paarslaars said:

But that would kill the use case for BTC and therefor their own incentive to do this?

 

I think that is how miners are justifying it to themselves.  And even if they are correct in that no one would ever abuse that power, what they are missing is that the fact that some entity has the power to kill the use case for BTC, whether or not they ever use it, would kill the trust in BTC. 

[Milu]

1 hour ago, rkbabang said:

 

I think that is how miners are justifying it to themselves.  And even if they are correct in that no one would ever abuse that power, what they are missing is that the fact that some entity has the power to kill the use case for BTC, whether or not they ever use it, would kill the trust in BTC. 

So the question is, would this impact your position size or confidence in continuing to hold your bitcoin?

[rkbabang]

1 hour ago, Milu said:

So the question is, would this impact your position size or confidence in continuing to hold your bitcoin?

 

 

I don't know, is the honest answer.  I'd feel better if the mining community didn't let this happen.  It sounds like some people are raising the alarms now and maybe this will be avoided.

[james22]

Fidelity Digital Assets® 2025 Look Ahead

 

The question on many people’s minds is now, “Am I too late?”

 

To answer this, we are reminded of a book the team read and discussed at length, Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital, by economist Carlota Perez.

 

One of Perez’s core theses is that true technological revolutions do not just affect one industry. Instead, they are so large they disrupt multiple fields and overhaul entire economic landscapes.

 

Perez uses railroads and oil as examples—breakthroughs that reshape not only entire industries but the structure of production and communication too.

Bitcoin and digital assets could fit this theory. We are potentially past what Perez describes as an early speculative period accompanied by financial boom and busts and are now possibly entering the phase of further adoption.

 

Researcher Jeffrey Ding also echoes this idea as he says it is not the discovery of a new technology that has the greatest effect on society and nations. Instead, it is the diffusion that happens in the decades that follow.

We believe we are beginning to see early signs of mass diffusion and adoption, many of which are detailed in this report. Although this process will likely take decades, 2025 has the potential to be the year that is looked back on as the pivotal time where the “chasm was crossed” as digital assets begin to take root and embed themselves into multiple fields and industries.

 

For example, in the past year we have already seen discussions around nation-state adoption and increased corporate balance sheet adoption.

 

Therefore, it may be too late for the speculators that want another frenzy. However, we believe we are still incredibly early in terms of this new era of sustainable adoption, diffusion, and integration.

 

https://fwc.widen.net/s/zrvf5hfjfs/fda-2025-look-ahead-report---final

[SharperDingaan]

Adoption just moved a little further up the S curve ... https://www.reuters.com/technology/czech-central-bank-governor-present-plan-hold-reserves-bitcoin-ft-reports-2025-01-29/

 

7B Euro to flow into BTC from one SMALLER central bank should they decide to go ahead. Should Poland and Hungary (facing similar Ukraine related uncertainties) follow, Germany will be soon after. 

 

BTC (unlike gold) was designed so that it could never be seized without the key, and was accessible anywhere. When even central bankers explicitly recognise the benefit, the proof is pretty solid.

 

The more whales there are, and the more stable there are, the more secure the entire thing becomes. Exactly as Satoshi designed it 

 

SD

  

Edited Wednesday at 10:48 PM by SharperDingaan

[james22]

 

[james22]

 

 

 

[Dave86ch]

 

 

[Fly]

7 hours ago, Dave86ch said:

 

 

 

Making is a partisan issue is dangerous. Democrats need to understand their missteps in the past regarding bitcoin and seek to fix it in the future. 

Edited 12 hours ago by Fly