>LN's own white paper admits that its claims of scaling up Bitcoin for global adoption only works on a fictional version of Bitcoin. One where Bitcoin's TPS is increased thousands of times first. The white paper was using a hypothetical whereby everyone in the world tried to open a lightning channel at the same time. Including every man, woman, and child in every country. This is unrealistic. Once a channel is opened, it can facilitate free and fast transactions forever. How many people live paycheck-to-paycheck in the world? In a totally Bitcoin world, they would receive their paycheck on their lightning channel, and then spend an equal amount out on the same channel each month to make their purchases and pay their bills. It's balanced for someone living this way. Running a LN node will be similar to running a WiFi router. You need it for internet, and your financial infrastructure will be built right into the router as well. A plug-and-play node for a household. Family plans with some privacy for family members can be built into such a node. In fact, Fedemint is working on exactly this. A 3rd layer to the system where family member, tribes, or cities can all be part of one Federation. Lighting channels are only necessary between household nodes, tribes, or cities. The members of the Federation might spend their entire life using the Federation for all their banking. It still uses Base chain and L2 Bitcoin, but they live on that 3rd layer for all small transactions. This is still 1000 times more decentralized and secure than traditional banking. People have optionality and freedom. They have privacy and security. It's not 100%, but everything's a tradeoff. It is a perfect balance. Also, look into the ARK protocol. If it gets support, it could completely replace LN. It may be too good to be true, though.... we'll see. Point is, development is happening. Don't dismiss Bitcoin simply because the technicalities look big right now. The internet looked the same way to people in the 90's.
You know, I know ARK has taken a bath over the last year, but I still like the *concept* of investment in disruptive, innovative companies. That said, while I really like genomics, I wouldn't touch battery cars with a bargepole (they might explode).
He gets it she doesn’t AT ALL. He’s smirking. Like you seriously think Blackrock, fidelity, & ARK are launching spot btc etfs to burn money? No they’re going to buy those central bank tokens, stack them & then exchange them for BITCOIN! You’ll own the actual coin! Unlike custodial exchanges that are all going down. Kraken is next on the SEC’s hit list. Need their people in so no rules are broken, we can’t turn btc into a BS paper trade.
>You need to ask yourself why is every company that applied for a EFTs based on crypto like Blackrock, FIdelity, ARK and so on also a top holder of Coinbase stocks. They're mostly all using coinbase for actually buying the BTC when their ETFs are approved, so coinbase is guaranteed a lot more revenue generated
This is not finished. Watch the last few seconds of this video. From 7:40 on. It shows you how the main stream media is shitting on crypto all over as an industry. Its a coordinated effort to bring prices down and put doubt on the crypto exchanges as safe or reliable option. That is why now the news of Kraken law suit and Binance settlement. The largest corporation in the world have no way of owning Kraken or Binance but they sure can own Coinbase. You need to ask yourself why is every company that applied for a EFTs based on crypto like Blackrock, FIdelity, ARK and so on also a top holder of Coinbase stocks. By the way Coinbase is the only crypto exchange that went public and makes its share available to the retail and institutional investors. The large financial institutions are making a play for control of the crypto market in US. They will control the main exchange Coinbase through shares ownership, by vilifying the rest of the exchanges accessible to US residents and control the rest of the retail crypto buyers through their EFTs offerings. That approach will kill two birds with one stone. IT will bring down the prices for them to scoop up the crypto needed to secure the ETFs and it will monopolize the space, giving them control of the price discovery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1El0KxphfU Did you see the DOJ theater today with top 5 government officials, putting on a show for the public that only BlackRock kind of money and influence can buy. The information could have been release by a freaken tweet or just one government official but no. You wanted large money to enter the space, well here it is. The price might be too much but we will see in the end. By the way I tried to post this a separate post and it got deleted right away.
This is not finished. Watch the last few seconds of this video. From 7:40 on. It shows you how the main stream media is shitting on crypto all over as an industry. Its a coordinated effort to bring prices down and put doubt on the crypto exchanges as safe or reliable option. That is why now the news of Kraken law suit and Binance settlement. The largest corporation in the world have no way of owning Kraken or Binance but they sure can own Coinbase. You need to ask yourself why is every company that applied for a EFTs based on crypto like Blackrock, FIdelity, ARK and so on also a top holder of Coinbase stocks. By the way Coinbase is the only crypto exchange that went public and makes its share available to the retail and institutional investors. The large financial institutions are making a play for control of the crypto market in US. They will control the main exchange Coinbase through shares ownership, by vilifying the rest of the exchanges accessible to US residents and control the rest of the retail crypto buyers through their EFTs offerings. That approach will kill two birds with one stone. IT will bring down the prices for them to scoop up the crypto needed to secure the ETFs and it will monopolize the space, giving them control of the price discovery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1El0KxphfU
Everyone thinks it will pump, so it won’t. It will pump on anticipation of the ETF’s and then dump when they get denied. The applications have been modified several times and ARK has been applying for months before the big boys. If it gets approved, it will still more than likely dip back to ~ $28k. Of course I have no clue, but this is my personal guess.
tldr; ARK Investment Management and 21Shares have updated their spot Bitcoin ETF application, with the next SEC deadline set for January 11, 2024. The updated filing includes various risk disclosures and sticks to in-kind creations and redemptions to minimize tax and spread issues. This indicates progress in the SEC conversations, and while ARK has been actively amending its application, some other filers have not yet amended their filings. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
>I just did the napkin math to show you that 1000 fold is not enough to make even L2 economical during high-activity sessions on the main net. And you just ignore it? I'll respond to the napkin math now. The statistics show that the average transaction fee during the last bull market was around $12: [https://ycharts.com/indicators/ethereum\_average\_transaction\_fee](https://ycharts.com/indicators/ethereum_average_transaction_fee) 1,000x lower means 1.2 cents. >Transaction fee does. If it is too expensive, then it is only worthwhile to transact on high-return activities, i.e. gambling. That doesn't invalidate my point. I was addressing your sub-point that network effects in speculative activity are different than network effects in economically productive activity. They are not. Now, network effects may be different when it comes to high-fee activity and low-fee activity, but that's not the same argument you made. >You obviously don't understand the tech. How can a ledger run by a centralized sequencer with admin keys be more secure than a decentralized and permissionless validator set? You're actually correct: the temporary admin keys do make it less secure. But once it jettisons that, and, in terms of extra-Ethereum-dependencies, relies only on a Data Availability Committee (DAC), it will mean that the chain is as secure as Ethereum if the assumption that at least one member of the DAC is honest holds true. The centralized sequencer meanwhile can be bypassed with an L1 transactions, so is not a severe security risk. Although eventually, the sequencing should be decentralized as well. >If you understand computer science, you will know why. The bottleneck is ETH runs like a single-threaded CPU on the main net, because its execution layer is serial, while other alt L1s have adopted sharding acting like multi-threaded CPUs. It is like using an Intel Pentium 4 CPU in 2023 when everyone else is using i3/i5/i7 series. Rollups take computation off-chain, or compress the computation in the form of zk-\[ST\]ARK proofs. The Rollups themselves still have to do the full computation, and they adopt a parallelization friendly transaction model, like Fuel Network is doing with its UTXO-model. >That is another factually false statement. When these L2 go interoperable, they have to transfer funds between their smart contract accounts on the main net. When they do, they have to ask ETH validators to get involved and get slapped with a main net fee - danksharding won't help. The interoperability comes from bridging transactions to Ethereum Mainnet and other layer 2s being autonomously enforced by the Ethereum Virtual Machine, with no reliance on trusted third parties.
When I say BTC isn't tech, I meant people buy it for its monetary properties, not for its transactional tech qualities. People buy BTC mostly for speculative reasons, not for use as money, which is as a store of value and medium of exchange. I say mostly and not totally because BTC and ETH at least have acquired a bit of a reputation as secure non-inflationary assets, so there is some demand for them for a store-of-value. But it is mostly speculative demand. >That is not even an argument. Every smart contract L1 is turing complete. But it doesn't mean a lot of them don't face high risk of obsolescence. Of course there are other Turing Complete L1s, just as there are other decentralized digital ledgers with finite money supplies competing with BTC, but both Turing Complete L1s and decentralized and credibly scarce monetary units exhibit powerful network effects. Ethereum, by acquiring powerful network effects in the smart contract L1 field, likely has the most secure market position of any asset in my opinion. Its dominance in the smart contract field along with massive adoption of blockchain based applications, could propel the value of ETH past that of BTC, in which case a lot of the brand recognition BTC now gets as a digital gold could very likely migrate over to ETH. But BTC will always be first amongst decentralized digital currencies, so even in the most optimistic scenario for Ethereum dominance, I believe BTC would behave like a digital precious metal, that is mostly transacted on Ethereum as an ERC20 token, while ETH becomes the first core asset and universal currency of the world. >>Being added to Ethereum as a layer 2 in the Aztec Network. >Privacy isn't a new thing. And it can longer be a feature that gives any alt-L1 a competitive advantage over the Ethereum techstrate. >>A blockchain made highly scalable using zk-S[NT]ARK cryptography? Being added to Ethereum as zk-Rollups like zkSync, StarkNet, Scroll, Polygon zkEVM, etc. >So far, early iterations of ZKs aren't showing the gas reduction over optimistic as everyone hoped. I was just giving an example of the extensibility and versatility of Ethereum. On the subject though, the progress being made on zk provers, along with the expected massive expansion of Ethereum Data Availability that comes with EIP-4844 and danksharding, along with extra-protocol innovations in data availability scaling like EigenLayer's ETH restaking technology which enables EigenDA, will increase zk-Rollup scalability by a factor of at least 1,000 times. >It is basically people "who only vibe with gains", as they like to call themselves. It is not representative of the total addressable market for crypto, unless it stays trapped as a mini digital Vegas forever. The utility of a fully programmable decentralized ledger and currency is practically unlimited. It just requires engineering and business development to realize that potential. Network effects all but ensure the development and adoption that does occur in this space will happen on Ethereum.
>They're both technologies When I say BTC isn't tech, I meant people buy it for its monetary properties, not for its transactional tech qualities. > I would argue that ETH faces the lowest risk of obsolescence, because its Turning Completeness allows it to incorporate almost any conceivable feature. That is not even an argument. Every smart contract L1 is turing complete. But it doesn't mean a lot of them don't face high risk of obsolescence. The key is, do you have credible competitors? For ETH's smart contract functionality, yes, there are plenty of strong competitors - they may need to take one or more cycles or so for regulatory clarity to be in place and allow high frequency trading of RWAs to show case their strengths. >Being added to Ethereum as a layer 2 in the Aztec Network. Privacy isn't a new thing. >A blockchain made highly scalable using zk-S\[NT\]ARK cryptography? Being added to Ethereum as zk-Rollups like zkSync, StarkNet, Scroll, Polygon zkEVM, etc. So far, early iterations of ZKs aren't showing the gas reduction over optimistic as everyone hoped. Right now, L2s aren't economical when main net gas blows up. >So I would argue ETH is fundamentally the hardest asset in the world: harder than the largest fiat currencies, and harder than even gold. The "ultrasound" meme requires usage. ETH is just too expensive to use. Right now, gas are blowing up because degens shorts/longs are getting liquidated on main net. When there is no price movement to liquidate leverage, the chain is silent and run into inflationary, as we have seen in the couple of months before. >There is only one public consensus with network effects — Ethereum — and only 120 million native currency units that can be used on it. It is a network effect of degen traders and shitcoiners. It is basically people "who only vibe with gains", as they like to call themselves. It is not representative of the total addressable market for crypto, unless it stays trapped as a mini digital Vegas forever.
They're both technologies, and both have native digital asset.. Beyond technology, there \*is\* something called branding, but branding can change as a result of technologically-fueled adoption of the subject or subject's competitors. I would argue that ETH faces the lowest risk of obscolence, because its Turning Completeness allows it to incorporate almost any conceivable feature. A privacy blockchain? Being added to Ethereum as a layer 2 in the Aztec Network. A UTXO blockchain to facilitate parallel validation? Being added to Ethereum as a layer 2 in the Fuel Network, which has the added feature of enabling UTXO-based Turing-Completeness. A blockchain made highly scalable using zk-S\[NT\]ARK cryptography? Being added to Ethereum as zk-Rollups like zkSync, StarkNet, Scroll, Polygon zkEVM, etc. So I would argue ETH is fundamentally hardest asset in the world: harder than the largest fiat currencies, and harder than even gold. There is a considerable amount of gold in the universe, and a growing proportion of it will become accessible with technological advancements. There is only one public consensus with network effects — Ethereum — and only 120 million native currency units that can be used on it.
In the next few days, the crypto market may see a significant event as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) considers approving spot bitcoin ETFs. Starting November 9, there is an eight-day window for the SEC to potentially approve 12 U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF applications. Although approval could still be pending beyond this month, experts from Bloomberg, James Seyffart and Eric Balchunas, estimate a 90% chance of approval by January 10. The spotlight is on Grayscale's GBTC. This decision is critical as a spot bitcoin ETF would allow direct investment in BTC, offering institutional investors a more favorable way to engage with the cryptocurrency. The possibility of BlackRock's ETF being approved is particularly exciting, as it could inject billions into Bitcoin and dramatically raise the price. Other financial giants like Fidelity and ARK Invest are also in the running. The SEC's continued delay or rejection of applications could lead to legal challenges, given the pressure from financial institutions and policy experts who criticize the SEC's hesitation as a breach of its authority.
Back in 2017 my portfolio was. 55% BTC 25% NEO 10% ETH 3% ARK 2% XMR 2% ADA 2% LTC 1% others I haven’t bought or sold since. And as of typing this my portfolio is 86% BTC 7.2% ETH 1.4% NEO 0.8% ARK 0.7% XMR 0.7% BAT 0.3% LTC Etc Conclusion: Crypto is for trading. Bitcoin is for Holding. Wish I would have put 100% in BTC.
Thank you! Here's what Reuters says: "Cathie Wood's ARK Invest application is at the front of the line. The 240-day SEC comment period for that application expires on Jan. 10, 2024; regulators must either reject or approve it by that date."
On that, this morning I got up and checked the market out, and something (can't recall what, now) was up 2550% on the 24hr gains. I didn't buy in though, figuring it was about to collapse as everyone cashed out that gain. I've got ARK and STG going at the moment and have a nice 27% gain on 24hrs.
TL;dr: BlackRock forced the SEC’s hand by filing a spot Bitcoin ETF application. This is not a drill. There’s two currents going on here. The first is legal pressure. Multiple federal courts have ruled against the SEC in cases involving crypto assets. People talk about Lina Khan being ineffective at the FTC but Gary Gensler has an equally bad if not worse track record on this stuff. For example, the SEC was ordered to review Grayscale’s application to turn their Bitcoin and Ethereum trusts into spot ETFs. In another example, it appears highly likely that the SEC will lose its lawsuit against Coinbase; not to mention they just had to drop securities fraud charges against the heads of Gemini after a federal judge reprimanded SEC lawyers for experimenting with “new legal authority” in his courtroom. The second is institutional pressure. The SEC’s argument against spot ETFs from companies like Grayscale, VanEck, and ARK is that they’re too small and young to protect consumers from the risks / volatility of crypto assets. There actually is a bit of truth to this. But there’s nothing prima facie wrong with their applications, at least nothing so defective that couldn’t be fixed in the normal comment and revision period. BlackRock, on the other hand, is the largest asset management firm in the world. If there is an Illuminati, Larry Fink is probably the Chairman. They’ve never filed an ETF application that didn’t get approved. Their presence in crypto-markets will bring legitimacy and, frankly, a whole lot of price stability. An important note here is that the SEC is implicitly required by statute to treat ETF application has presumptively valid. That’s why people are giving such near term predictions. It’s not them divining the future, the SEC is required to respond within a certain timeframe. I forget the dates right now but I think the last possible date they can hold BlackRock’s application is January 4, 2024. So the SEC has two options: 1. They can approve the BlackRock application and let their ETF go to market. But their application is basically the same as all the others, so approving theirs cuts off any legitimate legal argument they’d make against the others. So the SEC would have to approve them all! 2. They can reject the BlackRock application. Who knows what exactly would happen here but the likely scenario is that BlackRock would sue the SEC in federal court, and they would win. The only thing the SEC would get in taking this option is more time… for Congress to pass a law explicitly declaring their oversight of crypto assets? I don’t even know. In any case, losing to BlackRock means you’d also be forced to approve all the other applications.
They are basing it off the timeline the SEC has to approve / deny an ETF. They have a certain amount of extensions I believe for a total of 240 days max. Jan 10 is the deadline for one of the ETFs filed by ARK to get an answer. Many people speculate that the SEC will approve all at once as to not show favoritism. Or even if they didn’t it ARK gets the green light first then we can safely assume the other will as well even if it’s a month or two later.
Not the most liquid. Bitfinex consistently has more +/- 2% depth for [BTC](https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/bitcoin#markets), [ETH](https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/ethereum#markets), and [USDT](https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/tether#markets) than Binance. >who else should be a top-1 exchange in your opinion? Exchanges that don't heavily print wash trades are top tier exchanges. Coinbase, Bitstamp, and Gemini were found to have basically no wash trading in this analysis: https://www.nber.org/papers/w30783. Bitfinex was < 2% of volume was perhaps wash trades. Binance and others > 50% and that's just for BTC, ETH, LTC, and XRP. You can look at other Binance markets like ARK, Tellor Tributes, Polymesh, etc. that have very little liquidity and still claim $50M+ in daily volume. That is almost certainly all fake.
Take a look at [ARK's 2023 Big Ideas](https://ark-invest.com/big-ideas-2023/bitcoin/) report. Their 2030 price targets are between $250k to $1.5M per coin depending on a few factors of adoption. The price per coin is a simple calculation of total capital invested divided by the total supply. The bear, base, and bull cases estimate 20%, 40%, or 50% of investment in gold moving to bitcoin, institutional investment (pensions, hedge funds, etc,) at 1%, 2.5%, or 6.5% of holdings, and other smaller factors.
I wonder what the difference is between the two. They're listed the exact same way except the ticker is different. I'm also curious about the ARKC. It has EA SER TR ARK 21SHARES ACTIVE ON-CHA next to it. I know that says on chain but I wonder if that's bitcoin related or something else altogether.
Halving is in April I think and we will get a decision in January is my belief. The ARK ETC final deadline is early Jan. If that doesn’t get approved then we will see some struggles because they all more or less follow the same guidelines at this point.
tldr; Bitcoin is in high demand from institutional investors, but a spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) approval is needed to trigger a buying rally, according to Ernst & Young's global blockchain leader, Paul Brody. He believes that there is a lot of pent-up demand from institutions waiting to enter Bitcoin once an ETF is approved. However, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has not approved a single spot Bitcoin ETF so far. Several companies, including Grayscale Investments, ARK Investment, BlackRock, and Fidelity, have filed for Bitcoin ETF products and are awaiting a regulatory response. The recent amendment to the spot Bitcoin ETF by ARK Invest and 21Shares is seen as a positive sign of progress and impending approvals. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.
She is just saying this to build up momentum for that thought to influence the SEC to actually do approve all at once. This is just signalling. She doesnt know because the SEC keeps their approval process highly private. I think they will decline ARK but approve Blackrock.
It was already delayed by the SEC. The SEC has been making decisions on all BTC ETFs using the ARK ETF decision dates. When ARKs deadlines come up they just do wide statements on all BTC ETFs. Next date is Nov 11. This doesn’t include Grayscale though which has been treated differently so far. Unsure if theres important decision dates sooner with Grayscale
I thought the ETF news were somewhat priced in but the whole fluke yesterday took us to 30k in such a Short time so I think the market is hungry for positive news in Bitcoin. That price action was a little taste of what might happen when these ETFs do get approved, if they do. The first spot ETF deadline is 1Oth January for ARK. Tick tock !
All ETFs will be approved by Jan 10, 2025, possibly sooner. It's ARK's final deadline with the SEC. Bloomberg analysts say it's 90% chance, and I'm assuming they did more research than anyone else hanging out in the daily.
My best guess for an ETF approval is early January, 2024 before the ARK 21 Shares final deadline. Approving multiple applications at once would deflect any potential favoritism towards one entity. The SEC could also reject ARK 21 Shares as well. ​ Either way, I'm adding to my Statoshi pile and enjoying the ride.
Yeah, i dont know - ARK is first; but would they really just announce one knowing it's going to drive the buyers to that, making it the first and biggest by volume AND THEN approve blackrock LATER? if they approve it - remember they can still reject it with new and updated language that the HF's are already positioning to avoid - i think they'll approve everyone at the same time. if that happens.... watch out. - could also yeild a 'buy the rumor sell the news event' but if nothing else, it'll be something to entertain us for some time.
Here are the top news in Crypto from yesterday: 🌕 MetaMask crypto wallet was temporarily removed from the Apple App Store due to an internal error; it was restored within hours. 🌕 Ferrari now accepts Bitcoin, Ethereum, and USDC for car purchases in the U.S., with plans to expand crypto payments to Europe. 🌕 Invesco Galaxy updates spot Bitcoin ETF S-1 after ARK, responding to SEC comments, with more firms expected to follow suit soon. 🌕 ProShares to launch Short Ether Strategy ETF, aiming to capitalize on ETH price dips by inversely tracking the S&P CME Ether Futures Index. 🌕 FTX estate stakes 5.5M SOL coins, worth $122M, with staking validator firm Figment, despite ongoing legal and financial issues at FTX. 🌕 U.S. officials monitor Chinese Bitcoin mines near military bases and a Microsoft data center tied to Pentagon, citing national security concerns. 🌕 SlowMist's Yu Xian warns of a malicious script targeting friend tech users, stealing passwords and tokens by tricking them into using a malicious bookmark. 🌕 CA Governor signs bill to regulate the state's crypto industry, aiming for a foundational regulatory framework. 🌕 Coinbase insists on SEC action for its crypto rulemaking petition, seeking a mandamus to compel a clear response within 30 days. 🌕 Sui Foundation adds 40M SUI to previously allocated 117M, focusing on enhancing ecosystem and community development efforts.