Reddit Posts
A recipe for pump and why SOLORDI is not your regular PND MEME
Manta New Paradigm (confirmed) - I bridged, now what?
Is it logical to equate your bitcoin stack to a mining reward?
POV: Peter Schiff watching the Bitcoin chart since 2011. - “Ding Ding Ding.”
POV: you sell a stack one hour before a 100% pump
POV: You're the creator of an NFT or Crypto project and you post something on Twitter.
POV - I bought Bitcoin 13 years ago | My 13-Year Bitcoin Journey: "Investor to Crypto Success Story
POV: PeterSchiff watching the Bitcoin chart for 12 years now.
How I fumbled $500,000 last year at 22 years old.
Investing in crypto for me is generally just interesting
POV: Alex Machinsky, CEO of @CelsiusNetwork, in New York arrested. #UnbankYourself
Crypto is a playground for the rich and I have a feeling US Government is manipulating it....
POV: We're Stuck in an Eternal Bear Market
POV: We're stuck in an eternal bear market.
What’s to stop ETH from being the next AOL?
Mentions
I dont need to imagine, I read Nakamoto's paper like weeks after it was published. The barrier to entry was that you had to invest money in some kind of cold hardware wallet to store your bitcoin worth $0.00001 so few people wanted to do that. I didn't. I started considering it when it was $1-$10. Next time I checked it was $100 and I thought it was too late so again, I didnt. Really the thing is that back in 08 and 09 people were talking from a revolutionary POV. Crypto was this technology that would enable individuals to circumvent the state entirely and end the current economic system for good. I was all for that. But soon enough came the centralized exchanges, the laws and taxes, etc. and people went along with all of that because at the end of the day people wanted to get fiat rich from speculation, not to end the global economic system and bring all states to their knees. So, I didnt care much back then and I dont care much now. I'm getting profits from 5% increases and have been for years, I don't care beyond that. 5% returns on your capital several times a year, sometimes several times a month, is better than any other investment available to me. But still, I dont care to get fiat rich or to be the lucky idiot with the most money in a world of miserables. I'll care when we use the technologies we already have to create a new economic system.
POV: she just bought .0001 BTC
Can we please quit with the stupid "POV" shit this is not POV it's a meme and it adds nothing to the post anyway
I love this POV. That cycle taught me a lot, about the markets, my trading and patience. I’m watching for these new lows to come in and come back up and reject. Pretty sure we about to nuke.
>From a generic female viewpoint, women most often give up their career or put it on the shelf in order to care for the kids, so court helps them protect that aspect. With women rapidly (and much more equally) ascending in the workplace, that is a very 1950’s POV
POV: "what's the largest amount of people i can insult within one sentence"
honestly the FUD began 15 years ago and hasn't stopped, but I get your point, it will always be around. I don't support the whale theory, to me it makes no sense. If you have 10,000 bitcoin you bought at 20k, you honestly don't want to buy bitcoin at 72k, 60k, 50k, 40k etc... You want it to go to the moon now. You don't want to increase your average buy in price, you just want bitcoin to explode to the upside now. Think about it from blackrock or fidelity's clients POV, they want the price to 10x from here, not go down. GBTC's fees are very high, so they have many clients trying to get out of their ETF and possibly run to IBIT or FBTC. No one knows what those numbers look like but I'm guessing when they run out of selling that the price of BTC will spike. Time will tell, until then we are all just guessing here.
I think it's most realistic that the three names were combined as inspiration, which still puts us back to square one on the identity. Keeping his first name in his anon name seems a little too sloppy from an op-sec POV.
Interesting POV, thank you for entertaining my ideas.
>You "ventured into" a conversation with someone who just happens to be a professional published cryptographer who spent half his Ph.d dissertation researching the security of UTXO blockchains. Bullshit. I ventured into conversation with person who didn't understand text he quoted himself. If you have PhD , I'm Satoshi. >I didn't say "there aren't any differences", but that the differences are superficial from the anonimity POV in the sense that they both provide the same form of anonimity. That's a fact whether you like it or not, and childish name-calling is not going to change that. >Yes, they use some clever UTXO tricks to remove (to some degree) the ability of a trusted party to steal your funds. The anonimity, however, is exactly the same. >I'm ending this conversation now because you obviously can't be told you are wrong without exploding with diminutive rhetoric to overcompensate for your shallow understanding of transaction anonimity. Oh come on. You are obviously an ignorant and that's visible.
You "ventured into" a conversation with someone who just happens to be a professional published cryptographer who spent half his Ph.d dissertation researching the security of UTXO blockchains. I didn't say "there aren't any differences", but that the differences are superficial from the anonimity POV in the sense that they both provide the same form of anonimity. That's a fact whether you like it or not, and childish name-calling is not going to change that. Yes, they use some clever UTXO tricks to remove (to some degree) the ability of a trusted party to steal your funds. The anonimity, however, is exactly the same. I'm ending this conversation now because you obviously can't be told you are wrong without exploding with diminutive rhetoric to overcompensate for your shallow understanding of transaction anonimity.
And they are a centralized chain. Consider that ethereum is trying to solve these problems in a decentralized way. People who think eth is dead have no fucking clue the engineering marvel and behemoth that is eth. From a purely price action POV, I don't know. From a tech POV, it is the fucking GOAT.
POV: That one creepy guy at the party who can't shut up about reading classical literature. Now if only you ever actually got invited to parties...
It depends. Learning about bitcoin requires some computer science knowledge mostly cryptography. Requires an understanding of history of money and the financial system and economics just to get the basics really. Gotta understand the problem and the possible solutions. There’s also different schools of thought within economics since it’s not really a science. A lot of early bitcoin proponents where heavily into Austrian economics. You can spend hundreds of hours just on mathematics and cryptography and not fully understand it. Then you have game theory and how it applies to btc. Then you have the code itself and all the BIPs. Then there’s the history of btc itself and reading what Satoshi actually posted and then trying to figure out where he was spot on and where maybe he wasn’t quite right(mainly in the way btc would scale). How the block wars showed how bitcoin can’t simply be co-opted by people with special interests and is truly decentralised. How is money created and distributed according to the FED or whatever your equivalent is. You can get a good overview in about 10 hours by reading Lyn Aldens broken money. She was a skeptic but worked in the tech industry with a background in economics and puts forth a pretty decent case for bitcoin. I spent thousands of hours back in the day most likely. Haven’t done much in the last 10 years and lots of the specifics I learnt I couldn’t recite but I’m pretty cemented in the idea that btc is a good thing after many hours of study. The more you spend the higher degree of certainty You have it seems. There’s a lot to look into which is why large swathes of people prefer to fall back on the scam/ponzi/greater fool type comments. You won’t convince people to spend a hundred hours investigating something they’re sure is a scam just so they can MAYBE see that it isn’t. Bitcoins a paradigm shift and those are rarely clear from a POV that isn’t immersed in the subject for long periods of time. Once people see this though it becomes a bit of an obsession which is why it can seem like a bit of a cult from the outside. You’ll find arguments against deflationary currency which is rooted in conventional financial understanding which seem to make sense but really economics is far from a science and the main reason this is always brought up is because that’s just the way it’s always been so you need some amount of imagination and be able to think “does it have to be that way”. Bitcoins not even a once in a generation type of opportunity. It’s a once in history type of opportunity. We now have money that cannot be debased no matter what, providing the network stays decentralised which according to the game theory it should. It’s worth spending the time to DYOR and not listen to anyone else on Reddit or anywhere else. Read, watch YT and come to your own conclusions but don’t think you can fully understand it in a short amount of time unless you have a CS, maths, history and economics degrees. Not saying you need that level of understanding to believe but the topics cover those areas and probably more. You’ll spend hours trying to debunk everything to come to the truth. It’s quite a rabbit hole…
>You miss the point, passphrase is not about adding entropy. If it doesnt add entropy, it can do nothing. Of course it is added entropy, because without that they could not have any possible purpose whatsoever. I'm fully aware of what passphrases do, and trust me when I say they are a wart on the design that is purely from a cryptographic security POV. Passphrases are a bad design in bip39 and should not have been included.
Your "separate" wallets that you are talking about are just sub wallets based on your original private key. Think of your fiat billfold, it has a front pocket, middle, pocket, back pocket and maybe a small change purse....but they are all part of the same wallet. If a thief steals your wallet it doesn't matter that you put the hundreds in the back pocket and the ones in the front. But from a privacy POV it does make sense on your Trezor. Perhaps you keep all your KYC Bitcoin in wallet one and all the Bitcoin you earn from selling golf balls in wallet 2 etc....this leads to better coin control and so better privacy
I’m sorry but this is a stupid take reflective of this sub and someone that’s been here for <2 years. Have you ever round tripped your bags on a 4 year cycle? No? Because if you do this time around, that’s a feeling of regret you’ll learn soon enough. Imagine actually being smart, selling on the way up or luckily selling even within 20% of the top and entering a 1.5-2.5 bear market cycle with loads of cash on hand to effectively buy X more Bitcoin when it finds a bottom. That’s how you play this game. The first sentence you wrote is factually the minority of users in this space. Learn from others, get off this sub and don’t pigeonhole yourself into a one POV mindset
Did I call anyone a crypto bro? No. I did not even call you a troll initially. I said it felt like trolling but i would give the benefit of the doubt. I have no issue with disagreeing with others. I welcome it. Its a great way to see things from a different point of view. What I dont like is when the person I disagree with does not engage with my argument from my POV but instead just insults me and repeats the same thing that was said the first time. It makes it hard to want to engage in a meaningful way where either party can come out of it feeling more educated. Mostly people just leave it feeling angry/mad.
You aren’t thinking about it from a technical POV. You are thinking about all this like a newbie who expects innovations to not happen. ETH has plenty of devs to make the UX seamless when using an L2 to the point where people won’t even know they are using an L2, we are just early in the game, so it’s expected for things to be a little rough on the edges
 POV: You’re a member of the The “Strong Community” of BLBY
mBTC makes more sense from a USD comparison POV. If 1 BTC = $65,000 1 mBTC = $65. Fill up a tank of gas with 0.8 mBTC. Meal for 1 at Taco Bell is 0.15 mBTC. Rent is 20 mBTC. Groceries for a family every other week costs 3 to 5 mBTC. And so on.... Common usage should be around 1 unit..... Not 0.001 units.
Actually From My POV I Would Say You Did Great , Because Money Should Be Simple And Easy , And Here Are Only Those Who Dont Know About BTC As You Have Bought BTC I Will Share a fact That Actually Most People or New HODDLER's know ! , You Never Sell Your BTC As The Maximum Supply Is 22M Your BTC Will Be Double in Price After Every Halving that Happens In Every Four Years And The Price is Adjusted In The Halving making It to be worth of 1$ in 2011 and now about 72K$ highest of BTC Volume As The Price Will Remain Pumping Until Your Single BTC Takes Over The World. That's How BTC Works Even ~ Satoshi Nakamoto Said You Never Sell Your BTC You Wait For Your BTC To Take Over The Fiat System That's Why They Started To Sell BTC ETF 😂 nvm you did a Great Decision
By that logic, In your POV fucking a girl in her pussy or ass amounts basically to same thing
POV:you bought at Ath and you’re in minus again. Hind: It‘s me
POV: You didn't buy Solana <$30 > 1 outage in the last year > Perp trading on the best DEX in all of crypto is on Solana > "Chain goes down too often"
You are looking at it from the POV of a number of "450" but you just need to think of it as the minor rewards are cut in half. It will be twice as hard to make what was made in BTC, just a day before. Because of this, there are also 160,000 less bitcoins available for the next 4 years. That's over half a million, which is like, 3% of the total supply. So think of this as something that more people want (thousands every year) that is now 3% less available. Hope that helps!
Same here. My DCA "strategy" is to simply double my gas purchase. I get a company card for gas, so my POV is that I already would've spent that money on gas, so I simply double the amount and use that figure to buy BTC. Takes emotion completely out of it, and makes me feel a bit better when gas prices are on the rise lol.
OFC. But "labeling" must serve some institutional purpose, typically one related with legal issues. What purpose could labeling BTC Txs as "KYC" serve? In a sense t's obvious and can be useful from the POV of the police or tax authorities for example. But if you look more into it, this is problematic because enforcing anything on noKYC Txs requires everyone globally to comply, which is far from obvious. Some states have become rich exactly by doing legal arbitrage. So you might give up the globality and be happy with forbidding noKYC BTC transactions between nationals. But would it be useful to anything? Or people would simply hide or use other tokens or operate from abroad like money laundering does since forever? So the problem isn't labeling. The problem is if it does make sense to implement a strict police state on crypto or if it's better let it be and focus only on large Txs and holders. Still the chain is public so anything "weird" isn't going to disappear in 10 years and authorities can always change their mind and lower the bar of "interest".
I personally feel the experts who advice this are talking BS. Who the hell knows how much a Sat will be worth 10-20 years from now. even 500,000 sats might be too much from a privacy POV. Then they'll start saying -- small UTXOs were better after all. Its better to have a various range of UTXOs rather than all of them being the same amount.
A good resource is the interviews and books of great thinkers on the economy like Jeff Booth, Lyn Alden, Michael Saylor, Caitlyn Wood, Lawrence Lepard, Saifedean Ammous. Saifedean Ammous' book The Bitcoin Standard is often recommended for this purpose and a reading often creates Bitcoiners. Lyn Alden's new book Broken Money has been described as a "Guns, Germs, and Steel" of money and builds up a case for Bitcoin. The What is Money podcast and Preston Pysh's podcast have many interviews with knowledgeable people thinking about Bitcoin. Michael Saylor has an 18 hour long interview on the What is Money podcast.. that's essentially a great audiobook worth of insight on Bitcoins significance. Now what is that significance from my POV? I have written a lot about it on this subreddit now and tend to be long winded. To be succinct, it's significance is that we are looking at the future monetary layer of the majority of global wealth and productivity.
Great point. What is the macroeconomic significance of btc from your POV? What resource can one use to learn this?
Centralized from the POV that there are major ETF’s and they have some power to control the price action.
Centralized from the POV that there are major ETF’s and they have some power to control the price action.
I think she conceptually nails where innovation is going. I remember buying into Tesla because of her thesis and I think it still holds true today, even though it's in a current slump. She seems to rationalize her POV on these assets very well. I think a lot of people look at her as a hype machine to fuel her funds and maybe there is some truth to that, but I also dont disagree on her individual thesis for ARK's picks.
You're gonna be overjoyed when churches, synagogues, temples, and the Vatican, to say nothing of Saudi sovereign wealth funds, start buying in. lol I understand your POV, but religion and crypto will never be totally separate. And none of us get to dictate who get involved and how much. That's part of the magic.
POV: "My dog just ran away and I had my passkey in his collar"
Source? (Not arguing I like this POV)
This is a nice insight into a different POV. Uncertainty is a factor only when you react to price movements but for mining companies, it is just business as usual.
Once they deal with the POV tokens it'll at least do a x10. If it was around 5 cents when they did it that'd bring it close to 50. Only time will tell though.
When is the pullback happening? Genuine curious from a TA POV
Point of maximum crisis and tension, from whatever POV you want to consider it (social, financial, economical, etc).
Inflation on it's own is rats' nest; people argue over what it means all the time. Some use it to refer to what I would call actual inflation or monetary debasement and some use CPI. These two groups do not seem to be able to come to an agreement at all, even though they're both technically correct. Just mentioning inflation as monetary debasement in some subs is a cardinal sin next to murder. IMO, it's just basic misunderstanding and a lot of that is super basic semantics. The widest divide is between the Keynesians and the Austrians. Keynesians scoff when you point out how their economic philosophy has effectively eliminated the ability to save. They'll respond that one should invest, and often describe actual saving as "hoarding". And they don't see this POV as problematic in any way. They honestly believe monetary debasement is necessary for a healthy economy and many seem to believe nigh infinite money printing isn't going to cause any longterm problems. Hope this helps, hardly exhaustive, but some quick observations I've made in this space.
IMO this is such a wrong POV. People change with life and circumstances. The person you fall in love with and decide to get married to doesn’t have to stay as the same person throughout a marriage.
I’m diversified @ 75% BTC, 10% MSTR and 15% cash. From my POV, that IS investing wisely. Up 58% this year, while my old 401k didn’t see 19% in 8 years. I just can’t see my portfolio as anything but a short term win and a long term solution to wealth.
Well, it depends. Deflation caused by increased productivity tends to be good. It’s what has been happening during the last 100 years, but you couldn't perceive it due to the inflation of FIAT money (3% per annum). Sound money would enable society to enjoy this; buy more and better products and services with the same money. What you pay 1 dollar today you would pay 50 cents in a couple of years, instead of 1.10 dollars, 1.20, 1.30, etc. Then you have deflation caused by aggregate demand shocks, what’s happening in China. Rothbard’s POV on this: deflation is a secondary development that comes after initial malinvestments crises and is an effect, not cause, of the downturn. In short, this type of deflation is caused by state intervention. In an open economy, the accumulation of malinvestment and its correction wouldn't occur in the form of a shock.
This is the wrong way to think about it. It's not that the ETF's will vacuum all bitcoin known to man up into themselves, but rather that they are just one more vehicle putting pressure on the market. Also - As price rises, the same amount of USD buys less BTC so if the same amount of interest in the ETFs continues (from a USD POV) the reduced purchasing power will result in less and less BTC bought per day. There are many things that create scarcity in the liquidity market and ETFs are one of them. For now.
Like I said on the above post. Lmk your POV. Im not an authoritarian, and I’m open to diverse schools of thought. Let’s start here: has you life improved under Brandon’s leadership. If so, what measurements can we use to quantify your POV?
Are suggesting that Brandon has made our lives better under his leadership? I’m open to hearing your POV. I’m not an authoritarian masquerading around like I’m open to diverse opinions.
I respect your POV. I would like to respectably ask you this: Would there be an economic issue for the U.S. if China began decreasing bitcoin circulation by 1M bitcoin per year? This is under the assumption bitcoin became dominant in the U.S. for transactions.
Explain what would be the downside of this? Trying your get different POV’s
it’s so slept on in this chat. POV token migration second quarter is going to get this thing hyped. Under 80mil market cap and half the circulating supply as last bull… see you on top
I think I might know why… but I’d love to hear your POV here.
Job creation is a symptom. The point is that it incentivizes investment, which leads to improvements in productivity and efficiency which then should lead to increased wealth (usually in very unbalanced ways) across the economy and so on. If I’m hoarding all my money because I can buy more with it next year than I can now, I don’t invest the excess in the market, which leads to less (or no, in cases of bad deflation) money available to entrepreneurs or businesses with good ideas to improve things. The massive increase in quality of life across the 20th century is largely attributable to this sort of thing. It’s basically the core of capitalism as a system. That’s not to say there aren’t deep critiques of capitalism that folks should pay attention to, but I don’t think one can support free market capitalism from the POV of it improving quality of life across an economy without also wanting to incentivize investment. Deflation inherently discourages investment, and most of its proponents use pseudo-moral arguments about consumerism being bad and saving being good without addressing the bigger picture implications of the incentives changing.
KYC v NonKYC isn't nearly as important as HODLing and managing your UTXOs. So long as you do not sell, you are under no obligation to report on the fact that you own bitcoin at all. (In the US) As someone else mentioned, def don't mix them. KYC isn't inherently worse than non-KYC from a practical POV.
There's no global price for BTC All an exchange is is a list of people wanting to buy at a certain price and another list of people wanting to sell at. certain price, the order book From a simplistic POV, when the two numbers match, the deal is done So there will be variance from exchange to exchange as their order books will have different buy and sell prices So therefore the market price at each exchange will differ
🤭 the telegraph is also working from the technological POV but most people don't want to use it anymore.
a horse drawn carriage is also working from the technological POV bit most people don't want to drive around with them daily.
Under these prices I think not. Bitcoin right now, with the recent ETF approval and upcoming halving, is like buying it for 20k instead of 40k. From a risk-reward POV it is a very promising investment.
"gambling on shit coins" Ive had BTC since 2012, still hold a lot of it, since 2017 I have invested in Alt coins, because the returns are MUCH better. I am a developer who works in this space, you are not. Knowing how tech works is pretty good when making investment choices, just because a coin isn't BTC, doesn't mean it is shit. Trias for example is faster, cheaper, and heavily focused on securing networks, the tech is one of the best in the space... Last bull run I told people here about QNT and VXV, again 2 coins with fantastic tech, VXV is working with Space X for example, you don't get "shitcoins" or poor tech there. I got my friend into crypto in 2019, by 2021 he bought a house with cash... If you are still working for someone and been in crypto this long, then I am sorry, the only person who has bought shitcoins is you. I will come back to this... Watch how daft you look, dont make a comment on projects, when you have absolutely 0 idea what they do or what they are achieving. Calling Trias a "shitcoin" whilst advocating for BTC from a developers POV is absolutely wild, BTC has first mover advantage and that is it. It has failed in its task to be a currency and Ive seen your other comments referring to it as a store of value, which again, goes to show, you are absolutely clueless and well behind the times, enjoy going to your 9-5 today.
\> It may be humorous but it's not at all a good explanation. why not? Seem pretty apt. She obviously knows what money is, and has at least a vague notion of central banking as a concept (big banks) Pitting bitcoin as the good guy who has a longshot quest to defeat/destroy the bad guy (central banking) puts it in perfect perspective. It also shows that the bad guy, central banking, is pretty desperate to kill or control the hero. ​ And both facts are pretty much the most important thing about bitcoin from the big picture POV. Ending the Fed precisely what our goal is: we want the dollar and all fiat to cease to exist, and to stop exploiting people, to end their reign of evil. If you think bitcoin has any other purpose maybe you missed the memo satoshi posted in the genesis block.
> Why would anyone want control over the security of their funds, want 24/7 and worldwide access without someone in between, want transparency, want guarantee of ownership of their money? Having my money disappear irrevocably if I make almost any basic mistake is not "security" from my POV. Traditional finance in the US has a far better track record than basically anything in cryptocurrency if you're a normal person. You still have someone in between for anything international, because you have to exchange into cryptocurrency, and then exchange back out of it on the other end if you want to actually spend it almost anywhere. What you call transparency I call a total lack of any privacy. Monero is practically the only serious exception. If I wanted "ownership" of money in an abstract sense that isn't particularly useful in most scenarios, I can already stuff cash in a vault or buy high value commodities like gold. And gold doesn't disappear into thin air if you make a minor mistake.
Then, it gets widely adopted on higher layers, off-chain settlements like ETFs, rollups, sidechains, and so on. The security budget of Bitcoin ensures that institutional capital always chooses Bitcoin in a game-theory POV. Having something that you know will continue to exist for 30-50 years and appreciate massively is an amazing thing.
Nobody knows what POV means do they?
Just DCA what you can afford - say 5-10% of your investable income every month into BTC. You won’t regret it in the long term. I give this advice to everyone who asks and have done for the last 7 years. It’s been bad advice (from a short term POV) for about 14 months of that time and good advice for the rest and remains so. Send me your moons! 🤣
It's already been 2024 where I am. Instead of alts dumping EOY, they're dumping first thing at the start of the new year in my POV 😂
Zoom out (but only just far enough to validate my POV)
Sorry for this long response BTW, but I am trying to be clear and help, I am not trying to be an asshole or argue for no reason. ​ Maybe Cowen did, but you can tell literally anyone here has no clue what they are talking about, I dont even know why I bother. You can't "drop" it, because the scenario is still playing out, until it is invalidated it can not be ruled out. I remember "last" cycle, I was posting here to tell people to start selling off around 65k, because of BCB and Credibull crypto who were the only 2 saying 100k is no chance and 70k max would be tops. Just like my comment above, everyone downvoted me and laughed, I made 7 figures, other people either held the bag or sold on the way down. Data has been provided in abundance from BCB and Credibull... If this is a "new" cycle, that means last cycle we had the exact same length of a run as we did the cycle before, (never happened before in crypto or stock market) We also never had our Elliott wave 5 (first time ever again in crypto) yet ironically in this "new" cycle, its performing the same as a 5th wave would from previous cycle.. Funny that.. There is so much more, my personal POV is that we are in a new cycle and just like other years, we will pump up to the halving, dip and then rip after the halving. But I also can not ignore data, data doesn't have an agenda, it doesn't care if we want a bull run or not, and at the moment, its playing out EXACTLY how Credibull called it back in 2019... I dont watch Ben Cowen, I said that in the original comment, my point was brining up the lengthening cycles, we literally have proof that every cycle has been longer..... Except this one, this one for some reason was perfectly the same amount of time as the last... It simply can not be ruled out, until it is invalidated... Lets see how the next few months has played out. Even if you 100% think its wrong, I am telling you now, just for education purposes (especially when it comes to money) its well worth watching Credibull Crypto videos on twitter, the guy has been on the money for 7 years straight, do you know how hard that is? I simply can not rule it out because he said this would happen in 2019, and it is happening, he called a 70k local top for 2021 and then a big top at the end of 2023 early 2024... and he did that in 2019....
Im not saying hes right, Im just saying from my POV, that the lenghting cycle isnt a dead theory at all, it cant be, because things are playing out like Blockchain Backer and Credibull crypto are saying, Credibull called exactly what is happening now in 2020... BTC would be around 50k end of 2023 going to new ATH before halving, that was in 2020, his patterns has played out exactly the same, he has all evidence from previous cycles etc. Im not saying its correct, or that I even believe it, but it cant be dead until it is dead.... Sorry just went to his twitter and 2019 he called it, heres a tweet from July and in that tweet he links the tweet and video from 2019 [https://x.com/CredibleCrypto/status/1675282031507554311?s=20](https://x.com/CredibleCrypto/status/1675282031507554311?s=20) ​ His recent videos are also worth a watch, he literally called 66k as top and 16k as bottom for this "new" cycle, hes been absolutely on the money for 4 years straight, its really hard to discredit his theory when it is playing out... The fact blockchain backer is also having the same thoughts with completely different TA is strong for me. BCB was also another who said no chance to 100k BTC and it wouldnt go past 70k.. He also said BTC would bottom at 15k... ​ So until this scenario doesn't play out, then the longer cycles can not be ruled out... Especially seeing as "last cycle" we did not complete 5 elliott waves, which would be the first time ever in the cycle, yet this "new" cycle is playing out like wave 5 of previous cycle... Its well worth watching his videos, just to see his POV, again, he could be completely wrong, no one can predict a thing and be 100% correct.
InvestAnswers and CTO Larsson are two I keep returning to hear their POV.
Try tackling it from an economics POV and not an engineering one. Explain scarcity, free market dynamics and stock to flow. If that doesn’t work, wish him good luck staying poor.
Multisig helps but it's something of a bandaid on a gaping chest wound. The overall security model is still catastrophically error-prone from the POV of most users (and not even just laypeople).
I think you're thinking of it more from a technical POV and I'm more thinking about market psychology. The blockchain would still be secure of course, it wouldn't become any more vulnerable to a 51% attack. Price does matter though in so far as price equals value and bitcoin's main feature is as a store of value. If there's a chance a single entity could impact the price in a big way it loses some of its appeal.
The security is only good from a very narrow POV. Holistically the security model is catastrophically error-prone for most people, requiring a level of op-sec even experts sometimes screw up with irrevocable catastrophic loss if you make any mistakes.
Thanks for sharing this, I always really appreciate redditor's like yourself who are willing to share knowledge and their POV.
Well I can dismiss some of these claims from my POV . Firstly as far as what they have done apart from just being a scalable blovkchain with high TPS, and extremely custom validator capabilities( making it very friendly for us folks to ensure the nodes validating their submet/chain can have strict parameters in not from Russia and such) Ad far as what they have brought to the table idk if you just aren't versed but they have brought put modular easily rolled out and deployable inter connected blockchains called SUBNETS these essentially allow anyone to build customizable blockchains and privatize if they so wish, or ibc them for other purposes. Regardless it has the ability to truly become a omnichain solution which is something I heavily believe should take place. 1 million l2s is just fracturing liquidity in the market of defi and we need an interoperable solution where people can build what they want and have liquidity demands met. This allows for the same security avax has, while lending to a subset of gamefi, which is already prevalent many mmos and first person shooters that are triple a games are already launched. Institutions and RWA tokenization already happening with JP Morgan and the Evergreen subnet allowing for them to go vertical in web 3 solutions and security while being privatized in their data and being picky on who can validate that subnet. As far as regulators, Emin the founder of avalabs is currently on the CFTC board being diligent in helping a regulatory process AND abiding by the current Grey areas presented. Theres a reason it wasn't listed on that security list gentler put out. So while I get some people don't like some coins for whatever reason Avalanche is a bleeding blockchain company pursuing real solutions in moving us into a web3 world while also pushing for a better future on regulations. I can assure you most l1s are not this proactive or making steps towards anything close to this. Doesn't mean the token will moon but it does mean I support building on the tech.
25x is impossible from a market cap POV. Compare it to gold.
I tried to explain it to my grandfather (70 y/o) and my aunt (45 y/o), my grandfather being an inventor and my aunt being an insurance advisor. It all started very lightly, just touching the subject, simply explaining the investment I have done and my view on it. Then, their POV why it is just bullshit. It ended with a loud discussion. On one end they were criticizing me for supporting the "scam" and the illegal activity for what it is. On the other, my limited knowledge about the technology behind the blockchain and why it could be a good thing, was the only thing I could think of in the heat of the moment. This was a couple of months ago during a family reunion around my grandfathers birthday.
Interesting. Would you mind elaborating? Also, what would be your POV regarding the question asked, considering you've read both?
You brought it up. ETFs on the horizon. Argentina. China loosening up regs. 04/2024. Plenty of reasons to bullish. The burden of proof is not on others when you state a POV and someone asks why.
lol again... which bank isn't? and i just shared the news... i'm not celebrating raiffeisen, if i'm "celebrating" in your POV, it's because it is adoption for retail customers.
It felt into the abyss in 2018/19 and it didn’t stop it from being one of the most lucrative alt last cycle. The fact that it didn’t dump as much makes it less appealing from a trading POV. That’s purely an assumption but I don’t see the stars aligned as they were in 2021. Only thing that could save it is its community
Thank you for your detailed answer. I also realize that I was a bit antagonizing and came off as an AH. But consider this. When I started buying BTC I was living a lavish lifestyle and had zero savings. But I made more than 10,000 net a month. I started by investing 5,000 every month in BTC. For me the 50% I could take as a risk tolerance. That was many years ago and now I own a nice portfolio of stocks, real estate, loan instruments etc. I still own way more than 10% in Bitcoin and I still continue to buy, because it is the most promising asset class. I could stomach a 50% loss of my portfolio in case BTC suddenly goes to zero. I just want to say everyone is in a completely different financial situation and a classical POV doesn't always make sense. Anyways, nice conversation and I appreciate your explanation. Again, it made a lot of sense. Thanks.
Why is 10% a good number? Bullshit. Everyone is in a different financial situation and has a different risk tolerance. Stop preaching to others what they should do based from your POV.
>they don't give a rat's ass about decentralisation, big wallets etc. I would say, your critique would have been more genuine if ETH hadn't given up L1 scaling and surrendered its future roadmap to VC L2s. Right now, these "big wallets" and "decentralization" issues are nothing burger, when the leading smart contract platform ETH is choosing the worst option possible, letting heavily centralized L2s handle the future volume. This isn't a whattaboutism POV. It is simply a realization that Solana is actually much more far ahead in purusing decentralization at its end game. ETH has barely started ever since it's switch to L2 scaling. In fact, one of its largest L2 is run completely by a CEX, called Coinbase.
Genuinely interested why? From my POV if you need a house (i.e starting a family) and your salary doesn't allow you to mortgage a house, then it's a legitimate use of funds.
POV: Bitcoin jumps up 40% after he posts this
I'm well aware of their claims (which they've been making for years now by the way), I just don't see any way in which it lines up. 1. I don't see how making the network permissionless in a way that's genuinely decentralized actually adds value from the POV of potential customers (and personally, the only part of the tech I thought was interesting at all has nothing to do with making a singular network or being cryptocurrency-adjacent). 2. Hedera's a VC-funded startup that, like most such, is very likely bleeding money like a stuck pig. I hope I don't need to spell out why that might discourage them from relinquishing any control over their tech in practice. > They have been sending 3 representatives to council member meetings and one meeting at their HQ. I suspect they have something cooking on Hedera You're extrapolating an awful lot from them simply having a few people keep tabs on the governing council.
POV: Redditor discovers arbitrage
I like the glass half full POV...but it's definitely easier when starting from 0 vs. losing multiple BTC and then starting over, point well taken though
Good question. Proof of View (POV) is Verasity’s (VRA) technology to solve advertising bot fraud that. They integrate their tokens in an automated way to help enterprises solve this problem. The VRA tokens that are used toward POV are not counted toward the total market supply and so not impact the price of VRA. The market supply of VRA is 10B with a price of roughly .007 rn.
VRA has been awarded another USA patent with international priority for their rewarded video technology! VRA has patents in USA, China, South Korea, and Europe for their Proof of View (POV) technology.
This isn’t from the POV of high level PhD math. Hell, even basic input [optimization problems using the Lagrangian method](http://www.ne.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.295573.1473167836!/menu/standard/file/Lagrangian%20method.pdf) would stump over 95% of the general population. Add on econometrics and this isn’t “elementary math”. But, a lot is total BS because prefect representations of demand curves don’t exist and basing the foundation on people are rational while acknowledging someone won a Nobel for proving people aren’t rational isn’t great. But in large enough samples with empirical data does offer solid situations to apply Econ principals. Source: BS in Econ