POV

cryptomonein

POV: You're the drunk spider in my garage

tharakan12

Guys guys only way ur getting money on alts is when they are declining and then you enter before a quick pump before they decline again. POV u exited at the right time. :)

elidevious

Short version: under Biden (Jan 2021–Jan 2025), crypto didn’t just get “more regulated”; it was treated as a problem to be contained. You saw: • Aggressive securities enforcement (Gensler SEC) • Banking pressure (“Operation Choke Point 2.0” narrative) • Harsh rhetoric from the White House’s own economists • Sanctions/AML actions hitting privacy tools • Stablecoins treated as potential systemic risk • Mining and energy use put in the climate crosshairs • Heavier tax reporting rules I’ll break it down by front of attack / scrutiny so you can see the full picture. ⸻ 1. Legislation & tax: expanding the surveillance net 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) The big one: the infrastructure bill quietly rewrote parts of the tax code to rope in “digital assets.” Key pieces: • “Broker” definition massively expanded: 26 U.S.C. §6045 was amended so a “broker” includes any person responsible for “effectuating transfers of digital assets” for others. Industry lawyers immediately warned this could, on its face, include miners, validators, and hardware/software wallet providers.  • Mandatory 1099-B reporting for digital assets sold via “brokers,” including cost basis reporting.  • $10,000+ reporting (“digital assets = cash”): digital assets were added to existing rules that require businesses to report receipt of >$10k in “cash” to the IRS, with criminal penalties if you get it wrong.  Bottom line: this wasn’t banning crypto, but it did deliberately increase traceability and legal risk for anyone touching it, with definitions broad enough that the industry spent years fighting over how (or if) they can be applied without breaking the tech. ⸻ 2. White House strategy & rhetoric: “responsible development” and systemic risk Executive Order 14067 (March 2022) Biden’s EO 14067 – “Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets” ordered basically the whole financial/tech apparatus (Treasury, Fed, SEC, CFTC, etc.) to treat crypto as a coordinated national policy issue. Priorities included: • Consumer & investor protection • Financial stability • Illicit finance • U.S. leadership (but within a tightly controlled framework)  This EO directly led to multiple critical reports and recommendations (FSOC, OSTP, Treasury, etc.). FSOC: “crypto can threaten financial stability” In October 2022, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) released a report on “Digital Asset Financial Stability Risks and Regulation,” explicitly warning that: • Crypto-asset activities could pose risks to the stability of the U.S. financial system if they kept growing without stricter regulation. • It called out leverage, runs on stablecoins, and interconnectedness with TradFi. • It recommended closing regulatory gaps and empowering agencies (and Congress) to clamp down more.  Climate & energy: OSTP vs mining In September 2022, the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP) dropped a report on “Climate and Energy Implications of Crypto-Assets.” • It highlighted that global crypto electricity use surged >60% from mid-2021 to early 2022 and raised concerns about rapid growth in demand.  • OSTP recommended considering performance standards or limits for mining, tracking emissions, and even restricting high-emission operations if needed to meet climate goals.  This gave political cover to anyone who wanted to push “Bitcoin mining is bad for the planet” as a regulatory justification. Economic Report of the President: open hostility The 2023 Economic Report of the President, prepared by the Council of Economic Advisers, devoted a full section to digital assets and was… not friendly: • It described crypto assets as highly volatile, prone to fraud, and largely failing as money or investment.  That’s not a technical rule, but it’s a clear statement of hostile stance from the President’s own economists. ⸻ 3. SEC under Gary Gensler: “regulation by enforcement” Scale of enforcement From April 2021 to December 2024, the SEC initiated 125 crypto-related enforcement actions, extracting over $6 billion in penalties — nearly 4× what the prior administration did.  That included: • Cases against exchanges (Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Bittrex, etc.)  • Actions against lending / yield products (BlockFi, Gemini/Genesis Earn, etc.) • Token issuers and allegedly fraudulent schemes The SEC also had a record overall enforcement year in 2024, with 583 actions and $8.2B in remedies across markets, partly driven by crypto.  The Coinbase & Binance wars Two flagship examples: • SEC v. Binance (June 5, 2023) – 13 charges, including operating unregistered exchanges, broker-dealers and clearing agencies, plus allegations of commingling funds and deceptive practices.  • SEC v. Coinbase (June 6, 2023) – charged Coinbase with running an unregistered securities exchange, broker, and clearing agency, and with selling unregistered staking products.  The SEC’s theory was: most major tokens are securities, and nearly every major U.S. exchange is therefore illegal. When Coinbase formally petitioned the SEC in 2022 to write clear crypto rules, the SEC refused. A federal appeals court later called the SEC’s explanation “vacuous” and ordered it to justify its refusal more coherently — basically acknowledging that the agency had offered almost no real guidance while hitting the sector with lawsuits.  From the industry’s POV: that’s textbook “regulation by enforcement.” Bitcoin ETF: grudging yes The SEC did, in January 2024, approve multiple spot Bitcoin ETFs — but only after years of refusals and a court loss (Grayscale) that said the SEC’s reasoning was arbitrary.  So even the “win” came as a forced concession after extended resistance.

cbaaannndddzzzzzzz

Why do you think its safer than stocks? Not here to argue, just want to understand your POV

watch-nerd

Tether transactions are P2P, but the monetary policy isn't, as you point out. It's centralized. And it's not censorship resistant, either. Tether (or Circle) could debank you. That being said, I use USDC for practical purposes, but it's just for convenience. From a monetary rights POV, it's no better than T-bills, and in some ways worse.

JanPB

Another interesting aspect of it might be that from the Trump White House POV Microstrategy has in some sense become "too big to fail" as they are probably going to become the rails along which the gov't Bitcoin purchases will operate in some way. The trick is to buy the coins without raising the price too much. So the whole thing is JPMorgan vs. Trump fighting over MSTR which (while nobody was looking) became the nexus of a financial mini-revolution. And JPMorgan are now finding themselves in the situation of being the manufacturer of best fax machines and pagers in the world. They won't give up too easily, hodl tight while the obligatory resulting nonsense lasts.

wdf_classic

So you'd need a handful of black swan events to occur in order for your scenario to play out. And then you'd need the right people and right circumstances taking advantage. And in your scenario, the entire Bitcoin community, the devs, the users, the institutions, and the miners, who all have invested multiple billions into the structure, need to never catch on to this seemingly perfectly timed subterfuge. I'll humour your cute incredibly improbable story though. It has a couple core assumptions. The whole conspiracy theory relies on your segemented internet black swan event while also assuming that nodes blindly trusts data recieved during that same event. If the internet does come back in segments like you said, then when the nodes come back online during any sort of blackout, it immediately tries to sync by finding the current longest proof-of-work chain it can. So this false information from your attackers need to be built during the outrage at a faster rate than the entire world combined. And let's say that it all magically happens according to your theory. Then how do the malicious agents mitigate a soft fork by just changing the mining algorithm to reject the attacker's magic specialized hardware? This risk is very real in an attacker POV and it would be an almost trivial counter attack from the the honest 49% nodes, relative to the resources and manufactured events that the attackers would need to coordinate, nullifying the potential short-term gains of the attack itself. And you know, if you go through the forums, the initial devs did think up scenarios similar to this, so it's not like it's a blindspot. It's actually designed against it. Interesting idea I guess, though historically and empirically trite.

chesbenLP

One of my close friends who I always considered to be pretty intelligent fell for the xrp scam hard. Tried for months to convince of his POV and sending all these xrp hype videos/posts of the false grand promises they all retort with. I straight up told him I will never watch/read anything about xrp that he sends me and I definitely no longer consider him intelligent lol.

sisygoboom

You know most of the world doesn’t celebrate thanksgiving or participate in Black Friday right? You come from an extremely USA retail POV

PhaseNo7294

Well, I see it this way: - I really hate the idea that the funds got into Bitcoin massive enough to move the price manipulatively using classic tricks. - I more hate the idea that people buy ETF from funds paying fees instead of buying sats in self custody. - I feel the same way about companies accumulating and people buying their stocks. - sooner or later some old whales with large amounts of btc will sell some, nobuddy need much cash. Where its going from here: - Votality beast will shake risky investors off, few will get profits and move forward, but most of them will badly loose, you can never time the marke. - thanks to Bitcoin communities spreading knowlage and get more people orange pills. - fiat will be printed .. sooner or later debt bubble will pop and the next market crash will hurt differently.. -Trust will be broken and more people will move verify their transaction and to self custody. That's only my POV. Meanwhile Enjoy votality. Bitcoin will always belongs to people.

No_Oil3233

I hear you and figured most people would reply with short term negativity but thought long term POV might be helpful for folks to see the big picture … I fully believe institutions would bake in a fake top … could totally still blast.  The problem is overall economic state is getting worse

Tyran7us

Peter Schiff POV

NotBillderz

Alright, genuine question then. Does that mean people who use apps like Robinhood or Sofi to buy stocks that they don't actually own any portion of those companies? It seems like people who say this about Bitcoin are talking about it from the anarchist POV. Yeah, if laws fall to the wayside and banks don't honor the laws they made, sure. But if that happens I am also not going to own anything whatsoever. On the flip side, if we get to that point, I honestly don't think the Bitcoin network will keep running, but who knows. My point is, saying this (to my understanding above) basically tells people not to get Bitcoin because in the event of an apocalypse they won't have access to it. But if you simply lose/forget your code you won't have access to it.

olduvai_man

No one knows what is going to happen next, so you can either prepare for the downside but getting out or just holding what you have or prepare for the upside by taking this opportunity to build a stronger position. My own personal POV is that this will be a distant memory in 3months outside of being a fantastic time to have bough, but I have zero idea. For all I know it's got 90% more room to the downside incoming.

watch-nerd

Everything you said is public information and already priced in. The challenge ETH has, from a pricing POV, is that L2s reduced the demand for ETH. Source: I used to work for one of largest L2s.

JediMasterDebater

I do think he is too deterministic about the opposite this time around. He was set on "lengthening cycle theory" in 2021, and got burned. So now that there is a legitimate possibility that the cycle takes longer (see Tech Dev's POV, etc.) due to liquidity and business cycles starting to move, I think he isn't open to that happening. I agree he is quite conservative during most market moves (even those where Alt opportunities exist), but as I said, he isn't even looking at the USD value of alts, or the individual value of an alt vs BTC for determining moves. He is looking at the broader alt market vs BTC. And again, that is because he isn't chasing 10x moves. Its because he wants to maintain his BTC stack. To that point, you should follow Ben for macro conservative approach, and follow others for alt moves and strategy. If you are following Ben specifically for Alt advice, of course you are going to feel that arent taking advantage of near / mid term alt opportunities. He literally tells people his channel is not for alts or near term trading.

CaptainRelevant

The consensus from my various prompts was that, strictly from a money making POV at this point in time, XRP had more upside until last November but now Link has more potential upside for the next bull run. But as a language model, I’m not certain that’s analysis. I believe it’s just the consensus of online information and opinion. The crowd is often wrong.

No-Perspective-8245

It’s a very niche and confusing group of people. I got banned from it a couple years ago because I said “Inflation is immoral” and explained why. They not only dislike Bitcoin but are VERY against precious metals like gold/silver/platinum etc. I have a very hard time understanding their POV. I think they are “traditional finance” people who see “non-traditional finance” people as investors trying to take a shortcut to wealth. They LOVE index funds and the power of compound interest.

Sensitive_Contract_3

There's nothing alarming here, since English is not my first language so yeah i fumble and here i post my POV on $SOL nothing else

Unusual-Piece-93

Looking at hashrate alone says it’s a likely a losing game, but transaction costs paid to miners also matter. If mania returns rewards could go up. From KYC POV, being hosted is also KYC free to a new cold wallet. Converting to fiat at a later date without KYC becomes the issue.IMO better to stay within laws from the start and not lose ALL gains to paying fines trying to evade tax. I’ve probably paid too much for miners, but I’m still interested in feedback from miners. I’m not all in on mining. At worst I expect I will get the fiat equivalent of my miner purchase price back in sats.Plus a profit, who knows. In the end, BTC is a gamble, mining just changes the odds. My hosting site charges US 5.9c per kWh, so much cheaper than home mining for most people. Scam, who knows? I’ve received 2 monthly payments. They’ve been operating 5 years. Time will tell.

F0rtysxity

Straight shooting - not bad. I personally would take BTC to 60% ETH to 20% SOL 10% and then all the rest 10%. But I see you are a punter and I respect that you resisted the urge to full send. I'm not equipped to evaluate the remaining projects. I personally once heard the guys at [Multicoin Capital](https://multicoin.capital/portfolio/) talking in length about how many cryptocurrencies do not actually become more scarce with use. Which would not lead to an increase in value. Based on that I have cross referenced holdings they have and what is available on Coinbase (and what is involved in DeFi and stablecoins) I added small amounts of Aptos, Cardano, Sei, and Lido DAO. I recognize RNDR from Multicoin as well. But honestly, feel like your list for alternative holdings is as good as any other. You didn't bite the poison apple of DOGE or PEPE or whatever. Which are from my POV zero sum gambling games desperate young men play with one another, pooling their resources so 1 out of 100000 can get rich. Actually DOGE not that bad. But other meme coins. So with your selection you have two ways to win: community spirit and adoption. Not just community. Good luck to us.

stanley_fatmax

The first question is a legal one, I'm sure it differs based on jurisdiction, either way I don't know the answer. I guess it's a mix. In some places (thinking Germany specifically), the assets could technically be claimed by the state, so even if someone took possession, the state would have a claim to them, and the person would have to then make their claim to the state that it is actually theirs that they have a right to. The state would likely never make a claim to a wad of cash on the ground (assuming it's insignificant), but when millions or billions are involved they may have an interest. This is most commonly seen where estates have no clear heir, the state takes possession by default, and potential heirs are required to prove their stake, rather than having the benefit of the doubt. Then of course there would be tax implications, as even on the wad of cash picked up from the ground, tax is due to most tax authorities.. For your second point, in reality people (especially taxing authorities) are always watching now, and the history of the blockchain always exists, but KYC records from back in those early days are not going to exist, so some of these whale wallets are certainly anonymous from the public and even private/government POV, even if they're moving coins today. But of course once they touch a modern exchange, they become known, assuming that exchange participates in a KYC (or KYC adjacent) system, which most do to be able to participate in the global banking environment. You could always sell through P2P means to avoid KYC, but that's particularly difficult (nearly impossible) to do anonymously with billions of dollars. Even the largest mixers cannot completely obscure the destination of these large amounts in question. If the whale wants to sell at some point, either privately or publicly (like through an exchange), they'll effectively need to participate in KYC, which leads to my next point.. If you want my speculation or opinion, it is that a lot of the whale movement we see doing odd things or things that seem pointless, are probably being done to establish financial basis for legal or tax purposes at the request of lawyers or accountants on behalf of the original owner, as many of these whale wallets would not have basis or record of their existence aside from on the blockchain when they were originally created. Most whales in these situations and at this point in the history of Bitcoin are likely to be playing by the rules, and certainly have financial incentive to play by the rules, as well as financial backing to hire competent lawyers and accountants.

Head-End-5909

Set your DCA for an amount you can afford. Don’t worry about price variabilities. When you start accumulating significant amounts, from your POV, move the assets to a cold wallet.

No_Material3956

Hi and welcome to the club - have you read the ‘about’ section of this sub? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/s/BRAxuRBpLZ It’s a good starting point- lots of good resources…not to mention there are already tons of posts just like yours that have plenty of guidance, opinions, and POV’s… Good luck enjoy the ride and remember to HODL. 😅

No_Material3956

Hi and welcome to the club - in your travels of research have you read the ‘about’ section of this sub? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/s/BRAxuRBpLZ It’s a good starting point- not to mention there are already tons of posts just like yours that have plenty of guidance, opinions, and POV’s… Good luck enjoy the ride and remember to HODL. 😅

Major-Rabbit1252

Man I agree with you and your POV. All I said was that it reached ATH. That’s a fact. BTC is currently $115k. If it climbs to $130k tomorrow, will people be wrong to say “this is a new ATH”?

egruper

Sure, that's the normals POV. But life happens, and losing access is still very real. This is the gap we are trying to close with pre signed, timelocked transactions to a fixed destination. The feature is already live and open source on Electrum.

HARCYB-throwaway

But do you think a currency can be successful without the acceptance of those who hold the bulk of the money? You completely do not understand currency, power, and the dark side of humanity that uses cash. Idk what to say. You are seeing currency from your point of view. Not a global POV.

Major-Rabbit1252

In what way can you actually tell how upset I am? You aren’t seeing me in person to gauge my body language or hear the tone of my voice. Im confused about why people are upset at the red, when I am of the belief that red days are good opportunities to buy It’s more of a “I don’t get it” than “I’m so mad” I don’t have to convince you of anything but I can assume you that I’m not “mad”. I do think it’s odd and annoying though, which isn’t an egregious POV in my opinion

Major-Rabbit1252

“Discounts” are subjective If I bought in at ATH at 124k, then 115k is a discount Additionally, if I have the belief that BTC will rise over time, then even $124k is a discount. It’s all about perspective Do you think BTC will go completely stagnant and not rise again? I’m trying to understand your POV. No offense but when you bought isn’t really relevant. It’s not a competition. For YOU, no, these prices aren’t lowering your cost basis For someone who’s average buy price is $119k, then it is That’s all there is to it

Investing-1120

Nice POV, never thought about that.

minimaslim

I've learned it the hard way Nowadays i send money, buy & transfer it to my ledger instantly Thank you for your POV :)

minimaslim

Trading and Alts are no option for me, bit thanks for your POV

minimaslim

Thank you for your POV :) No, mining isnt a point for me. It's not worth the investment into some rigs etc. I just want to buy BTC but have some issues with myself after the whole FTX stuff and now been trying to talk / write with OGs to find back to me and my plan from back then

Alternative_Week3023

This 👆. Concur with this POV.

SaltyTruthTeller1

It's fun to watch America decline from a Canadian POV. Nothing is going to stop the great train wreck of USA. Definitely not the way you organize yourselves. It's a good thing Trump showed us the US cards so we're prepared for your attempts at theft as you scramble in the midst of decline. And now your allies have zero trust in you. You're doing great, keep it up.

global_hodl

My POV - it’s inevitable and will happen with next 5 years.

manyQuestionMarks

Usually slashing is reserved for deliberate malicious activity. On Ethereum for example: From their POV, they couldn’t get the other nodes to attest so they were unable to finalize. From everyone else’s POV they were effectively inactive and leaking. Once their nodes reorganized, their TXs went back into the mempool and were placed on their rightful block

Ecstatic-Oil-Change

Yup, and most of those Facebook videos that are: “POV: You bought Bitcoin back in 2012” are nothing more than imaginations. I can tell you only a handful of people have held since 2012 and didn’t stop.

sisyphus0104

Not trolling. Just giving my POV. I'd love say I was wrong calling top for this cycle, and if I am wrong, I'll be the first to say it.

sisyphus0104

Starting to think we may have topped for this cycle. Hope I'm wrong, but from a TA POV, think this cycle may have peeked.

Help_An_Irishman

No one seems to know what POV means.

4myPennys

Why is the butter staring at someone working fast food? What's his POV got to do with it?

Tundra14

I wasn't, just pointing out the poor use of the POV.

Get_the_nak

That’s not what POV means

Tundra14

Why are we staring at a person down on their luck? POV.

Bred_Slippy

Don't forget your company is a separate entity to you. In order to change the ownership of your personal BTC to your company, the transfer would be considered a taxable event (for CGT). Also, bear in mind the BTC within the company will be classed as an intangible asset and any profits will be subject to corporation tax. From a tax POV, it would likely be better to hold a spot ETF within an ISA or SIPP, than putting it in the company. 

0x456

Hi! Thanks for coming by to share your experience. What helps you make these extremely risky trades? TA? I mean, how can one spot a future gem so early? Please, explain your POV for your BONK play - what caught your attention and made you believe the risk is worth it.

Dellis251984

Sounds good until you realize that in the future, it will most likely be a world where Bitcoin is accepted more by actual people, and there are no taxes when you buy a car off someone with Bitcoin. A Bitcoin ETF is probably a pretty stupid idea from the investors' POV. There will be lots of people who, 10 years from now, will have wished they just bought Bitcoin. You can sound smart and throw around highly intelligent terms all you want, but common sense reigns supreme here. Let me see you board a plane and take your Bitcoin ETF with you across the world. A Bitcoin ETF completely ignores the while point of Bitcoin and the creator is laughing at you

stanley_fatmax

What's the fundamental difference? I don't see it. They've branded it and that invalidates it? From my POV, they're contributing 1 Bitcoin daily to this "cause" or whatever you want to call it. Until they start double counting or just flat out lying, I'd say they're doing good.  Similar things happen everywhere. Money is allocated in bulk but actually distributed at smaller denominations more frequently. For example, this is common in education, research, or government. $100 million granted, but it's actually distributed weekly. The movement is all internal to the government, but the money being in the end account is what matters, because that's where it's useful.

SjbPsych

I have to add that BTC, and realistically, all financialized markets, from the Fed's POV, are convenient sinks for excess liquidity. They saw BTC as a threat early on, but realized that it helps reduce or forestall inflation in the currency. I think that this is the idea behind the concept of a 'Crack-up boom': excess money printing inflates prices, but eventually, people want to use assets that are only representational. If too many people decide its time to realize their gains... pop.

siasl_kopika

>For me the fact that a highly leveraged purely speculative venture might hold 3% of the asset that is supposed to usher humanity into the future is reason enough to lose all hopes in BTC. Sounds like you dont understand what fiat leverage is or what bitcoin's purpose is anyway, so I'm not too worried about your loss of faith in whatever you thought bitcoin is. From a sound money POV, we have long expected BTC bought with fiat leverage, and hope to see a whole lot more of it. We need to drive the dollar to zero, and this is the way.

SnorlaxSnackTime0

Whats the expected Ath for btc in your POV? is there any chances it will go more up in this cycle>?

Excellent_Maize_3573

Yeah dude, rules are kind of just thrown around every so often. Can be a little frightening from an investor POV

Organic_Sense8105

Rent is just not good enough in my opinion. Considering the hassle that comes with it. I understand your POV though. I Will be investing in real estate via a company where I’ll be funding so I’m still diversified in some way.

Be_Me_Anon_irl

How dare you use POV accurately.

Aromatic-Clerk134

From my POV, on my situation it is. You alone can say so or not

No-Journalist4381

I understand your POV, but looking at BTCs performance vs. the S&P 500 makes it hard to justify 80% investment IMO. Also, ~3% of the stocks carry the S&P 500, the rest basically lose money. I think it would be better for OP to do research on which stocks those are and consider investing in those for bigger gains.

Fun_Hornet_9129

Never, ever advise others. My sister wants investing advice from time to time. I always give the same answer. She then suggests getting together to info-share. I’ll be doing the info sharing, I’m not interested because if something goes down, it’s my fault. She says it won’t be, it will. Don’t give advice. Tell the others an interesting POV but tell them to do their own diligence, don’t take the POV as advice. Otherwise they will ask about the investment as it goes down and when you say “I sold weeks ago”, they’ll be pissed you didn’t inform them. If they need a financial advisor, tell them to go get one.

tangledDream

If you plan on retiring at a reasonable age i'd say you should have at least $10k in the market by mid 20s and close to 6 figures by 30. (This is from an American POV) Especially with how inflation is moving, if you don't have a significant amount invested by the end of your 20s to take advantage of compounding interest, you may struggle to retire when you want.

GreedVault

from his POV, a great deal is only great if he benefits the most from it, everything else doesn’t matter.

penty

Think of from the POV of 2 people. One thinking there aren't gpo gto be those 4 year swings anymore.. they're going to get rekt of the cycle does repeat because odds are they are trading or paperhands. The other assumes there will be a big down cycle but then when they are wrong they are just pleasantly surprised. (Or.ledt behind waiting for the dip that never comes I guess) Take care.

Ok-Sympathy9768

Did you get banned for saying what you just said? Nope.. I actually value your POV and opinion because I am open to what you have to contribute to the conversation .. I am an investor and I don’t make decisions without input from both sides but f the trade

sorthawk

Outside of US most global powers have already banned it or disincentivized it to a certain extent. So if all the major economies become hostile, Bitcoin will still exist, and even if retail holds on because all their life savings are in it, institutions and sovereign wealth funds will exit. Recent rise from $75k to $100k+ can be attributed to an extent to Spot ETFs. So while I agree with your point too, I consider it an optimistic POV. I however like to keep the risks in mind to keep myself in check and not putting all my eggs in this basket. All eggs in one basket: Chance of +2000% gains over 10 years and -50% over ten years. Some diversification: Chance of +2000% gains over 10 years and +8% over ten years.

Character-Resist-925

POV: Du hast deinen Entry verpasst

MichaelAischmann

Just trying to understand your POV. You say you lose trust in BTC if only few people hold it. Is that because you fear price reactions or because you think it influences the network? I trust that I am able to create a transaction offline, broadcast it on a best effort basis & have it gets processed without censorship. That is what I trust in. And that ablility isn't compromised by large holders but it might get compromised by miner centralization.

EilfelSnow

From an investor POV, Coin or Token does matter… PEPE is piggybacking ETH, a blockchain known for expensive fees. Imagine taking profits, only for a huge chunk to be deducted… As a token, the original owners can mint new tokens anytime they want for themselves…which are basically rug pulls. Having a Layer 1 blockchain coin that requires mining prevents this. Not to mention the existing creators of PEPE are anonymous and can also come back just to mint new PEPE for themselves, which pollutes the token pool, making PEPE a high risk long term investment. This is why “BTC is king” for investors. Layer 1s are a good foundation for long term investments.

LolWhereAreWe

I am getting hung up on risk free, I don’t see what makes this risk free from the POV of the lender. It just sounds like a loan secured by a historically extremely volatile asset class. If the price of a token craters does that not therefore crater the value of the underlying security the loan? Sounds like pretty significant risk.

BadgerFamous6204

What's their website? PS. I can google, but because of phishing, I prefer to start my due diligence from your POV

Give_Life_Meaning

Satoshi POV storyline of how and why he travelled back in time.

CipherScarlatti

They could move to POV - Proof of Vitalik. He can just wave to everybody on occasion at random times. If he is ok, then Eth is ok.

sorthawk

Another POV: It’s a buying opportunity and a character building practice.

Ok_Rent_2937

Unpopular POV: Newbs are late. With BTC now firmly over $100k, most newbs cannot become whole coiners. That ship has sailed …

Violentgrip

I’m very interested from an experimental POV.

tommybullish

POV Bitcoin hits 1 Million and your wife is filing for divorce to live of half of your wealth with your boyfriend

SwimOld5053

You want my answe? I'll give a few. My bags POV: Yes, it will moon forever steadily. The institution money changed the game this time, really. Me caring about yoy POV: No, believe in cycle theory until proven false. The truth POV: No one knows s about f.

achow101

> That’s the slowdown I mean—spam pushes out normal transactions. Ok, that's not the definition of "slowdown" that the developers think of. Instead, we consider "slowdown" to be actual impact on CPU and memory usage that exceeds the average usage of a typical transaction. What you're describing is that the "spam" causes a high fee market, and that's definitely a concern. However, high fee markets, as we have seen with ordinals and many many times long past, resolve themselves eventually when those "spammers" run out of money. Furthermore, if those people want to make their transactions, they can and do directly submit their transcations to miners, bypassing mempools. This is trivially easy to do with things like MARA's Slipstream. When they do this, it actually makes it worse for everyone since direct submission removes information from fee estimation algorithms. Now, instead of being able to see the mempool and see that feerates are high, what you end up doing is making a transaction with a fee that you think is enough, and then finding out when a block is found that it actually wasn't. Lastly, Bitcoin is going to need a fee market eventually. Eventually, the block subsidy is going to be negligible, and miners will have to be sustained by fees. Any way you slice it, there has to be some point in time where the mempool is consistently full and fees generally increase as otherwise mining will stop being profitable and the security of the network goes down. > Without the OP_RETURN limit, a bad actor (say the CIA or someone with money to burn) could put illegal stuff, like child pornography, into the blockchain Even with the OP_RETURN limit, a bad actor can already do this. They can already do this with the inscriptions script construction, and that allows putting up to 4 MB into the blockchain whereas OP_RETURN would be limited to 1 MB. Furthermore, even without inscriptions, it's still possible to do it by creating outputs with fake hashes or fake pubkeys that actually encode the data. > They’re ignoring people who disagree (Samson Mow said there’s “no consensus”) Can you clarify what has actually been done that you think is "ignoring people who disagree"? Having read through the entire mailing list discussion and all of the comments on both PRs, I really don't think that's the case. Certainly there is no consensus, but there's been lively debate and discussion, and no action has actually been taken. Furthermore, several comments stated that they think the options should be preserved, and another PR was opened that does exactly that. That does not seem like ignoring people who disagree. > silencing critics Some of the biggest critics are wizkid057 and luke-jr. Their comments are still visible and readable, and in fact, many people have (tried to) engage them in discussion. And not just them, there's tons of comments in both PRs with debate going back and forth, each side trying to refute the other. I would not say that this is silencing critics. While several comments in the PR were hidden, these were hidden because they do not add to the converstion. Many of these are simply "Concept ACK" or "Concept NACK", which ultimately is not all that useful to the discussion and mainly ends up making it harder to read. Several comments were also hidden because they are off topic or abusive. However, I do not think any comments which left novel criticisms of the PR were actually hidden. > (Giacomo Zucco’s comments got deleted) There have not been many deleted comments. I count 4 deleted comments, and none of them appear to be from him. While I don't have a record of what the comments were, 3 of the comments were from accounts that look like spammers. 1 of the comments was actually from a regular contributor. None of the accounts look like Giacomo's. In fact, I don't think he has participated in the PR discussions at all, unless his Github name is not giacomozucco. > some devs have financial ties to projects with conflicts of interests. Can you cite any evidence for that? AFAIK, this claim seems to stem from the fact that Jameson Lopp is an investor in Citrea, a company that would benefit from this change, but are already planning on deploying their product without it. Jameson commented on the PR, but he is neither the person who opened it, nor the person who started the discussion. He's not even a Core Dev as he doesn't regularly participate in code review or submit PRs. From the perspective of the project, he's just another rando coming by to give their opinion. > They downplay risks (like past spam from Veriblock) I don't recall anyone referring to Veriblock or anyone citing risks from past spam. > and take away our choices (they removed a setting to force us to accept this) You write this as if a decision has been made and the PR merged. But no PR related to OP_RETURN has been merged. Neither Peter Todd's original PR that removes the option, nor Greg Sanders' alternate PR that leaves the option have been merged. In fact, of these 2 PRs, I think the one that's more likely to be merged is the second which leaves the option in, but of course no such merge decision has been made yet. > That's my POV. Tthe main point here is *how* this change is being implemented when it's deeply controversial. My POV is that this has been severely overblown and there's a ton of misinformation going around about what's actually happened. It seems like there's a bunch of influencers going around screaming as if the world is ending who also are getting their information second or third-hand rather than having actually participated in the discussions and reporting what they observed.

DorkyDorkington

You are right, it would serve them well to do that. But many there have completely locked their POV and unfortunately it is not based on reality or facts alone, but rather emotions.

mindcandy

People talk about how Bitcoin is too slow and the fees are too high to use as money while happily using credit cards with * [Fees of 2.5 to 3.5% + 10 to 30 cents.](https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/small-business/credit-card-processing-fees) * [Settlement times of 1 to 3 days](https://www.fool.com/money/research/average-credit-card-processing-fees-costs-america/) The difference is that merchants have had 50 years to get used to hiding these problems from you. Besides little things like "universal adoption", the main thing Bitcoin is missing from a consumer POV is a service for chargebacks and fraud protection. Most problems in crypto are technically solvable with escrow. The real barrier is the social inertia. *Meanwhile...* what I'd love to see would be a Kaspa-based stablecoin pegged to the US Dollar circa March 31, 1999 and debasement-adjusted from there. So, as the US Dollar printer runs, the Matrix Dollar goes up to keep the real value stable. So, one Matrix Dollar would be worth about [$5 today.](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MABMM301USM189S)

Sothisismylifehuh

POV: You are released from jail after 7 years. DIAMOND HANDS 💎 You check your portfolio. *Straight back to jail*

Rey_Mezcalero

Thank you for a realistic POV

inaem

POV:

Right-Avocado3870

It's probably because the second point threatens your POV. Both points are equally correct.

ConfuciusYorkZi

Very clear and well said, I love you POV

ohmynards85

My POV : YOU don't know what a nazi is.

aTomatoFarmer

POV: You don’t know what a Nazi is.

makesagoodpoint

POV: you believe Elon Musk

Impossible_Cold_7295

Op doesn't understand POV.

ForeverShiny

It's a very American POV since they're basically used to equate consumer protection with an awkward smile and a shrug emoji

Kohitsujitoshi

POV: You forget you had short

IYoloStocks

POV: legs in the air, the sun 🌞

PandorasBucket

Yes going from logarithmic to linear growth is what I'm talking about. It's just considerably less interesting from a speculative POV.

PirateBrail

If you want them to hodl and really learn the way of bitcoin, that's a good idea. A paper wallet would suffice, tho. Since this person is not close to me, and I just want them to get a glimpse of a new POV (the one we all know), but I don't want to go through the trouble of teaching them, their coins will be in an exchange. They can take it from there. But if it was for my family, that's exactly what I'd do.

Pavickling

If you look at their trend for 1) Additional paid-in capital 2) Total Liabilities 3) Outstanding shares 500K BTC is much less appealing from a stockholder POV. In 10 years a BTC holder will be far better off than a MSTR holder.

MVazovski

POV: You're in a "how to lose all of your money as soon as possible" competition and your opponent is this guy.

Warrior_Truth

POV: Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U.. Thank U.. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U Thank U Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U... Thank U.. Thank U for the Trump Coin.. Thank U Thank Thank U.. Thank U for the tariffs.. Thank U for the sunday insider trade.. Thank U .. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U for the Zelenskyy Clown show in ur office.... Thank U for the Psyop... Thank U ..Thank Thank U.. Thank U MAGA CULT! Thank U for ur tweet in July 2019, what u really think about crypto. This will backfire! Karma speaks for itself... only 3 Years and 11 month left... year of the snake.. try to leave 2025 with more profits then losses.. good luck! Thank U for reading!

Warrior_Truth

POV: Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U.. Thank U.. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U Thank U Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U... Thank U.. Thank U for the Trump Coin.. Thank U Thank Thank U.. Thank U for the tariffs.. Thank U for the sunday insider trade.. Thank U .. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U for the Zelenskyy Clown show in ur office.... Thank U for the Psyop... Thank U ..Thank Thank U.. Thank U MAGA CULT! Thank U for ur tweet in July 2019, what u really think about crypto. This will backfire! Karma speaks for itself... only 3 Years and 11 month left... year of the snake.. try to leave 2025 with more profits then losses.. good luck! Thank U for reading!

Warrior_Truth

POV: Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U.. Thank U.. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U Thank U Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U... Thank U.. Thank U for the Trump Coin.. Thank U Thank Thank U.. Thank U for the tariffs.. Thank U for the sunday insider trade.. Thank U .. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U for the Zelenskyy Clown show in ur office.... Thank U for the Psyop... Thank U ..Thank Thank U.. Thank U MAGA CULT! Thank U for ur tweet in July 2019, what u really think about crypto. This will backfire! Karma speaks for itself... only 3 Years and 11 month left... year of the snake.. try to leave 2025 with more profits then losses.. good luck!

Warrior_Truth

POV: Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U.. Thank U.. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U Thank U Thank U Mr. Trump Thank U... Thank U.. Thank U for the Trump Coin.. Thank U Thank Thank U.. Thank U for the tariffs.. Thank U for the sunday insider trade.. Thank U .. Thank U Mr. Trump.. Thank U for the Zelenskyy Clown show.. Thank U for the Psyop... Thank U Thank Thank U.. Thank U MAGA CULT! This will backfire!! Karma speaks for itself... only 3 Years and 11 month left... year of the snake.. try to leave 2025 with more profits then losses.. good luck!

AffectionateDuty6062

Tbh I think from a government perspective it’s a brilliant move. Give some more breadcrumbs with pretty fluffy language so that crypto People who voted for trump can interpret how they wish and retain hopium. Saylor claims to have lots of creative ideas for budget neutral strategies. Also everyone claiming more countries will follow, but I don’t know am I buying that. Besides USA, which didn’t deliver in my POV, you have a handful of other countries talking about it, like Bhutan, which is my ignorance, but I haven’t even heard of it. 😅 also some scandal coming out from El Salvador in the last couple of days. I don’t claim to know anything but from a personal standpoint I think this bull run for BTC is coming to an end. It’s going to be a tough year for markets by the looks of things and this was the next hype piece BTC had going for it. Also even people into crypto are starting to get annoyed with the trump grift. Last weeks inside trading tweet, sacks today gaslighting people saying that outside of BTC the other coins mentioned on the tweet were never going to be included.