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
POV: You are released from jail after 7 years. DIAMOND HANDS 💎 You check your portfolio. *Straight back to jail*
Thank you for a realistic POV
It's probably because the second point threatens your POV. Both points are equally correct.
Very clear and well said, I love you POV
My POV : YOU don't know what a nazi is.
POV: You don’t know what a Nazi is.
POV: you believe Elon Musk
Op doesn't understand POV.
It's a very American POV since they're basically used to equate consumer protection with an awkward smile and a shrug emoji
POV: You forget you had short
Yes going from logarithmic to linear growth is what I'm talking about. It's just considerably less interesting from a speculative POV.
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.
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.
POV: You're in a "how to lose all of your money as soon as possible" competition and your opponent is this guy.
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!
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!
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!
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!
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.
I think the same way, I think there is going to be a point where is no longer viable. Talking about code, doge coin the meme was created out of BTC’s code back then and I believe the creators improved it with some upgrades that BTC needed, if it is about code, there are “better” coins out there, the algorithm that btc is based, the SHA-2 (I think it means secure hash algorithm) comes from the NSA, I don’t quite remember the year but there was an article explaining how BTC’s code was based of SHA-2 who was created by a mathematician under the NSA, also satoshi nakamoto loosely means central intelligence, some say CIA, anyway this new money was created on an economic crisis and I don’t want to get super technical in the cycle of money, but there is a cycle where the money goes from gold based to paper to then the country in power falls and then another country replaces it as a world power (ehmmmm Us and china, like England, us, France, all the way back from rome) and regularly they take about 70 years each, it’s coincidental that the BTC came at the time where paper money for the U.S. is about to finishes its cycle. In my opinion BTC will be used for a “store of value lot at least that’s the last big use it is running around for this coin, but We needed someone to trust for then to build over it, get more coins to be real world assets and change the economic point of view, upgrade the network of money that now is being runner by banks. I believe Mr Dan pena said that if people new who satoshi nakamoto is, they will all sell BTC at the same time and the price would go to 0, IMO this is a bit extreme, but he has a point where the value of BTC is attached to the name of the inventor, taking into consideration that the creator has most of the btc. Anyway this was a great post and it’s wiiiiiiiild that they banned you for pointing out this who I think is a fair and valid POV.
leverage on a platform with margin calls... like i will never understand that. I understand fiat leverage without them; fixed term loans etc. those make perfect sense and are dip-proof. and when they have terms over 10 years, its basically free money because inflation will cover interest and more. and when you can take out new debt to cover old, you can also avoid taxes. Its great and makes you wonder how much longer fiat debt will exist. But why would you take out debt in a casino where the house can clear out a winning bet and make it a loser because of a temporary dip, AKA a "margin call"? Because its convenient? Because you dont mind risk? From the POV of someone who chooses bitcoin precisely to avoid the risks of fiat, I really dont understand margin debt. If you want to donate to the rich, you can just send money to billionaires directly.
From my POV it dies not really make sense to own actual crypto except for BTC. Everything else I only do futures trading.
> why all other crypto except BTC is a scam waiting to happen. I have written about this thoroughly from an economic and technical point of view. Most of you just keep spamming the same thing over and over again. Historical data shows a crypto's long-term value is predominantly driven by its sticky social vector, which they view the token as valuable from a social dimension. In other words, the most valuable tokens are permissionless store of value units, driven by social, not technical, consensus. ***Bitcoin has the largest and most Lindy social network using it as a store of value***. When you look at that social graph, you don't include tourists who trade within a year, then disappear for the next 3-6 years. Consequently, the most ***proven vertical of keeping value over time, having buyers perceive it as a speculative macro asset, not a tech bet.*** Now, you might argue, "The past doesn't mean the future." Just because the best use case so far is a permissionless store of value doesn't mean ***there is no room for other things, right***? You can speculate that tomorrow night will turn purple because the Martians decide to troll us. But those types of "whatever goes" speculation aren't meaningful because you can get whatever you want, untethered to reality. A more principled way to speculate is to think from 1) the fundamentals of demand and supply POV + 2) what blockchain tech can do to create goods/services to meet demand. But once you realize blockchain has inherent trappings, it becomes inefficient in doing many things in competition against alternative technologies. So why would others want to adopt an inherently inefficient technology to service their goods? So far, the data shows they only adopt the tech to make money off ppl who made money from betting on the right permissionless store of value token. In other words, ***they are just looking to turn crypto users into their customers, not much else.*** > ETH is a joke ETH joined the Silicon Valley bandwagon and branded itself as a "DApp store." This is horrible branding because it presumes crypto can attract users who aren't interested in crypto, even though every successful crypto DApp has said otherwise. > SOL SOL is taking ETH VC's floppy seconds and joined on the "DApp store" narrative. The only "breakout" DApp they got requires infinitely fast attrition of new users to sustain their revenue stream - it is not sustainable. > XRP Everything else XRP says it wants to do has been done more professionally by others. It runs on a meme narrative. > ADA It is one of the more vaporware in the top 10. If you want to bet on tech, that shouldn't be a choice. If you want to bet on ADA, you are really just betting on a meme.
From his POV, the following quote applies: “You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain”
You need to look at it from another POV. Don't look at how much $ your BTC is worth. Just look at the actual number of satoshis you have. Keep stacking, hold, dont sell.
POV: when you elect a USD maxi 😂
From an accounting POV, what journal entry/to what account should I write this to?
with prices going down, you buy what you need when you need it. with prices inflating, you spend money you down't have on stuff you don't need to impress people you don't like. That's why so many folks got into debt to "keep up with the Joneses". From my POV, the former is the more sustainable concept.
So because DYDX is “well known and respected,” that automatically means they can’t have bad design or flaws? Come on. That’s like saying a major bank can’t have a system glitch just because it’s reputable. And yeah, they usually warn about liquidity and slippage, but the fact that they didn’t this time should’ve been a red flag to you, not a reason to blindly press market order. That’s on you for assuming everything was fine instead of verifying first. Markets are brutal, and exchanges—no matter how big—aren’t perfect. As for “it could happen to anyone,” sure, but it didn’t. It happened to you. And instead of adapting and taking responsibility for your execution, you’re here blaming the exchange for not holding your hand. If you’re gonna be in this game, move smarter instead of crying about what “should” have happened. And just because my POV is in the minority doesn’t make it wrong. It just means most people don’t want to admit when their own mistakes cost them money.
Consider it from the POV of the owner of that miner: Instead of using it to mine Bitcoin, they rent it out to you. So, they must think that they will earn more in rent from you than they would gain by using it to mine Bitcoin. If they could mine more than your rent, they wouldn't rent to you in the first place. Which, when you turn it around, means, that you will pay more in rent than you will earn by mining. You'll make a loss. At least if electricity costs the same for both of you. If you have greatly different costs (their electricity is very expensive, your's is free) then there might be a small sliver of a sweet spot where the rent is actually a bit below *your* mining income (with free electricity), but from their POV is still above *their* potential mining income (if they factor in their expensive electricity). But that's unlikely to be the case, and even if it is, it means that your net income from "mining - rent" won't be more than their electricity costs, i.e. very little and not worth the effort.
POV: US sells their bitcoin to “find” the missing gold. 🤣
They claim some kind of issue with my info when I tried signing up. I tried to contest their decision to deny me an account to no avail. They would not give me a reason for the denial. Pretty shitty of them, from my POV
"Bitcoin > gold" come on already... stop this. Also you are literally wishing panic so that you get richer, people arent going to buy bitcoin for that reason because its negatively seen compared to gold. Its much much more speculative and less less adopted than gold. If gold disappeared the whole stock and market will go into a bigger recession than the covid one. This isnt a debate between gold and btc and whats better, these two are literally different. Seriously we people still didnt learn that the economy isnt just about fiat or gold but a bunch different forms of money and that can include crypto in the future but not necessarily and only btc, but a bunch of cryptos ? Confirmation bias and POV must be taken into count.
I don’t understand the question. Every thing that’s happened fits with the charts. Whether Trump won or not, we’d have had the same result within this period, speaking from a TA POV.
Show us your peer reviewed study that you are citing so confidently. You just ignored mine. I think you're full of shit. Show us. And I bet even if you find a study, it will be a terrible source because you're gullible and will believe anything if it supports your POV even if it's from a geocities page.
Price increase flattens as adoption increases looking at the past 15 years. I do believe reaching 1 mil will be quick (~10 years). But post that it’s hard to see the rationale of it still increasing 70-80% per year realistic. Halving won’t be as significant etc. Tell me your POV though.
POV you can’t buy more at this very moment
Bitcoin is not going to fail. A couple of days ago I listened to an interview with Ricardo Salinas, 3rd richest man in Mexico (https://youtu.be/SiV7UhoiZM8?si=O_N6iz_IULn4l2Ns . Spanish only unfortunately). He is full on bitcoin for very interesting reasons that are different to what I thought about BTC. It really opened eyes. You don't "imvest" in bitcoin, you are 'getting out' of the FIAT deflationary scam. I've been in Crypto since 2015. But really the POV mentioned by this guy made me think differently about bitcoin.
Out of question. The they are not competent enough (for starters) and, most importantly, way too risky from their POV. Makes zero sense.
You are right, there is bullish crypto news weekly. The problem here is that from macroeconomic POV we are facing major uncertainty. High risk assets usually do not perform well under these circumstances. That is what I tried to say here.
Tech people don’t understand bitcoin in a different way that TradFi bro don’t understand bitcoin, which is also different from how the nomies on the street don’t understand bitcoin. You kinda need to mix some tech with some conservative / Austrian economic with some Libertarianism to be onboard. The tech itself isn’t that impressive. From a techie’s POV it’s just a slow database. Distributed network exists long before Bitcoin etc etc. It’s all just a long ranty way of saying, yes if you only look at the “tech” of a blockchain then it’s natural for you to be unimpressed and wonder what all the fuss is about, why the number has gone up so much.
So, bulls: What's your thesis for how much we go up from here and why? Because from my POV, given facts as we know them now, I'm not seeing anything to cause a breakout before July.
Oh this sub is totally an echo chamber. I'm not denying that. It's also filled with noobs only concerned about price. Most real bitcoiners aren't even here anymore. I just wanted to point out that a sub dedicated to specific topics, unfortunately, isn't really the place to change minds. The style of your post was not really an invite to an open debate. You very much stated your POV as fact and demanded we give props.
Would love to understand your view, happy to just listen and take it in, just want to get the other sides POV
The US would have to be in full meltdown before this happens. Control over social security, healthcare, the internet, surveillance..it's already been taken. But even then, bullets won't win. China knows this, Russia knows this. US is adopting their strategies. From a crypto POV, I think we'll be lucky enough to catch the billionaire wave and make out on top.
I would say memecoins are good for making a quick buck from a retail POV. However, in the long run, it can prove to institutions that a chain is able to maintain high volume of trades without breakdowns.
Is your position that maybe he was trying to manipulate the market 11 years ago or more like today? I have invested pretty hard into BTC and MTSR over the past 5 years. I don't jump in blindly into any investment and do a shit ton of my own research. I am not quite sure why there is so much fear over Saylor. If you look into his background and history, he is a straight shooter and also a brilliant mind. He originally thought BTC was a fad and had little to no value. But after his own deep dive, he changed his POV and now is one of the biggest advocates that both BTC and MSTR have.
The Alt season has started, yesterday you had literally a live POV of how alts move despite BTC falling. Get your bags ready
I work as a KYC analyst at s bank, so I kind od know how this works. Due to this cryptoboom I think they have just too many people to rewiev and it just takes very long. From your POV it takes ages from their PoV weeks fly by like nothing. I know this might be frustrating but I would remain hopeful. 🤞
True, I never said it is, but good you understand his POV now.
Fuuuu I bought at $10, and people were saying it was a Dino coin. If I held, I woulda gained $10k. I shouldn’t have listened, I didn’t listen when I bought Solana at $20-30. It paid off. I think I prefer my gut reactions to charts than vibes of peoples POV
POV: you've having a bad day investing, have a cold, and are sick of the cold weather, and decide to spend $17 at McDonald's for a "value meal". As you fork over your last roll of quarters, [someone sees you in a mask and jacket](https://abcnews.go.com/US/unitedhealthcare-ceo-shooting-latest-net-closing-suspect-new/story?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dhfacebook&utm_content=null&id=116591169) and things get even worse.
>Currently, Krux (Wonder-K wallet) is also under consideration. A better option from privacy POV - no record of you buying a hardware wallet whatsoever.
She could've made wayyyy more money if she sold exclusive rights to a distributor for a POV BJ scene. Missed opportunity.
Look, it's easy for those of us who have been here for a long time to sitback and watch the rekage happen but shit like that is bad for adoption. I actually have some empathy for her situation. She is trying to capitalize on her "brand" and I gotta give her credit. In this case I think she got taken advantage of by some shady people and people made poor decisions and got hurt. Its easy to blame the victims here, but its really kind of fucked when crypto economists argue the merits of crypto against wallstreet to legitimize the asset class and people start to think that its "safer" now only to find out the hard way that not all crypto is created equally. Rugpulls and memecoins are bad for the cryptoeconomy as we try and build additional credibility to drive adoption. I for one welcome, and I know I am snorting some really good shit here, thoughtful, effective, and well informed regulatory oversight in the broader crypto economy. We can't be the wild west memecoin degeneracy AND expect to be taken seriously. The idea of "fuck you, I don't need you to take me seriously" is some prepubescent temper tantrum bullshit. I realize we are in /r/bitcoin here and there are probably more regulars in here that have a similar POV, but also, that fucking line was GOLD.
Most TradFi folks avoid bitcoin because they think its risky but cant tell you why. I think if they actually sat down and did due diligence on bitcoin the same way they might on Joes Super Awesome Technical Dohickies Ltd. they might change their POV.
In my POV, it's not a race to have more than the other person, it's about being in it in the first place. Congrats on making it, you're on the right track. For those who are in it to attempt to build wealth are missing the point. I'm not saying one can't or shouldn't, it's just that BTC is much more than that. It's an opportunity to leave the old ways behind. If one keeps thinking the end goal is to have the most USD, they're playing for more monopoly money, useless money that political hacks want you to keep using. They're going to keep smearing BTC and us for wanting to not stay slaves to their paper debt. Keep exchanging that paper for BTC and HODL until they have no choice but to accept that BTC will be the something they cannot CONTROL and control us with.
you are only a degen from a tradfi POV, not a crypto degen
Give me 1 hour or 2. By then my cognitive functions should be low enough to appreciate their POV
Both gold and bitcoin are very useful in different way yet we are already seeing massive divergence (subjective value put on each depending on POV of the observer) that will continue
I watch Cowen's videos and have followed some of the advice on the channel. Mostly to sell before the larger % drops from the last cycle and buy mostly BTC at the start/low point of this cycle ($15-$30k). That is to say, I may be biased in his favor. Also, I haven't fully watched your video yet. Just looking through spreadsheet and picked one at random to look at for now: \#13 - BTCUSD will bottom on first Fed rate cut Ben's actual words in the video: What you quoted... >...That on the very first rate cut, that might be the bottom for Bitcoin. And it could be a higher low, it could be a lower low, it could be a double bottom. What he said directly after your quote... >**It all depends on how aggressive the Fed wants to be. And anyone that's going to tell you they know what's going to happen I can assure you that they don't, okay, including myself. Right? You need to be open to all three possibilities. I'm just saying you know if we do get a double bottom or a lower low it should not be that surprising. Or if it's a higher low it should not be that surprising. You have to be open-minded to how the markets change and evolve as we continue to move forward in the business cycle and how the unemployment rate unfolds as we get further into the business cycle as well.** Do you see the bolded words in the quote. You just ignored that part. You didn't put it in the video, nor point it out in any way. So let's break this down from my POV. Cowen has said there are 3 options he thinks are likely: \* Lower low on first rate cut \* Double bottom on first rate cut \* Higher low on first rate cut He also states that he doesn't really know what is going to happen in the future. It depends on how the business cycle further evolves. Ok...so what did you say... (in response to what you quoted above): >Well you've heard this right. Bitcoin might bottom on the first rate cut by the Fed. Now we know that the first cut happened in Sept 2024 as marked by this vertical line. And the price back then was not close to the bottom. In fact if we calculate the move from the bottom it was around 300% of the bottom and if we're a bit more generous and check from the time when Ben published the video it's more than double that price. So, we need to mark this as another miss for Ben. Ok. What actually happened to BTC during the first rate cut? \* Was it a lower low on the first rate cut compared to when the video aired No. It was not \* Did BTC double bottom during the first rate cut? No. It did not \* Did BTC have a higher low on the first rate cut. **Yes and no.** BTC had a higher low on the 6th/7th/8th of Sept. Rate cuts were on the 18th of Sept. So, within 14 days of the Fed's first rate cut BTC had the lowest close it had had since the 26th of February2024. **Based on his full statements above, I at least would qualify this as meeting the requirements of his statement.** It was a higher low. It was higher then when the video was out, and it was a 6-9 month low compared to previous prices. How is this now a 'higher low'? Why are you even classifying this as a "prediction"? \_\_\_\_\_\_ This is the first number I looked at and I feel like I'm already seeing issues with your statements and video. Are you going to come out and 'tweak' your statement in the video just like you accuse Cowen of doing so many times? Please elaborate.
To be honest the Bullrun seems much better from the Russian currencies POV. He probably thinks thats good...
From a mining point of view ETC is strong and consistent. It’s not going anywhere , I’m not sure from a trading POV.
not surprised at all... let's say you are in investor and got in early on the latest fomo at 70k. well in less than a month you've made 30%... you'd be kinda stupid not to take those gains and run. from a traditional investors POV, it's smart we are not investors, we are hodlers.... just wait for the investors to finish taking their profits at 99k and we'll restart the rocket.
For Android, I really like "Simple Crypto Widget". From my non-technical POV, the permissions needed seem reasonable and if you are savvy, you can verify (instead of trusting 😉) the code at https://github.com/hwki/SimpleBitcoinWidget
Interesting perception. From my POV it’s being talked about more than it ever has before. Even political appointments in the states tend to reference their sentiment towards BTC - that’s quite new. Institutional coverage is also much higher than it’s ever been.
POV: A new bag holder is born
Nothing changed. At least from my POV. I mean, except the amount of the repetitive questions being asked, which is about 100X up. Most are redirected to r/BitcoinBeginners and some just make undetected for some time when you see them, I guess.
Is that actually generational wealth? Hard time really fathoming that to be the case. Cost of living is bizarre in New York in general so maybe that’s distorting my POV
Oh, you don’t think you’re in an echo chamber? It’s absolutely pathetic on Reddit now - your cest pool is estimated to be nearly 90% liberal from a US POV. You all absolutely live in an echo chamber. Yeah bud, there’s no honesty time, now. You could bring up coherent talking points and counter arguments right off the bat and this conversation goes entirely different. Not really interested in your viewpoint of the federal reserve and the relevance of the constitution, much less your critique on Christianity. I’ve been in this sub for 4 years. I know exactly how it goes around here and I know exactly when an outsider fully engaged with Reddit’s echo chamber decides to show up with a pompous attitude. I find it absolutely priceless listening to self righteous individuals like yourself trying to make counter arguments and win fights by ridiculing.
My POV is that 90% of social media is fake.
My POV: May 2021 BTC €46k >> Nov 2021 BTC €56k After that we had the drop down. Now: March 2024 BTC €66k >> Nov 2024 €86k If we are not having the same pattern as years back, this is going down soon or after new years eve. (Last cycle lasted approx 8 months and now we're in the highest after 8 months) That's my humble prediction looking at the graphs. If someone can correct something or give a personal opinion it's welcome.
\> Should be % based, $ doesn't matter 100% agree; but at the same time, if you put it in terms of how much you can buy with it, its still a pretty big move. These moves dwarf the value of 50% moves when bitcoin was young. on 2021/02/08, bitcoin moved 7500 pounds of ground chuck or 2500 gallons of gasoline on 2024/11/11, bitcoin moved only 1500 pounds of ground chuck, but 2700 gallons of gasoline. From a neutral POV, that means the 2021 move was bigger in % but smaller in real value changed; (meanwhile ground beef had a massive supply crunch) So percentage isnt necessarily much more illustrative, but in all cases the dollar is dogshit.
Well I understand, and obviously it doesn't mean that EVERY SINGLE Bitcoiner is ALWAYS talkative on the subject, but social medias are flourishing with Bitcoiners telling others to either buy the dip or invest on the long run. It's weird from an outsider's POV, it makes Bitcoin look like a scammer's business.
I entirely get your POV but it it meant peace of mind for someone I get that too
Yes, my post has a clear point of view and an argument. But I didn't say anything untrue and I backed up my POV with evidence. I am just tired of hearing the same old "Trump is good for crypto" lines by maxis and bagholders without consideration of any of the nuances or consideration of the stain his NFT and Defi projects bring onto the industry as a whole. Sensible regulation is good for long-term growth. Benign neglect is not.
I disagree. I don't think any of those people--with the possible exception of Vance since he was a silicon valley guy--really care about crypto as a technology. I think they see it as a way to make money and/or fuck with people. I mean three years ago Elon publicly [called Dogecoin "a hustle"](https://www.reuters.com/technology/dogecoin-spotlight-cryptocurrency-backer-musk-makes-snl-appearance-2021-05-07/) which caused its price to tumble and it's never come anywhere close to those highs since. I think Gensler is out either way. Harris has gotten really close with Mark Cuban during the campaign, and Cuban has been [publicly savaging Gensler](https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/11/mark-cuban-gary-gensler-fight-sec-future-harris-00183090) in a big way. Not to mention that Harris has signaled that she's open to developing sensible regulation and has been having industry people draft up some policy proposals around crypto. The other thing from my POV that makes Trump uniquely bad for crypto (and the economy more generally) is that he is so fucking chaotic. Markets do best when there's stability and predictability and I can think of no two words that describe Trump less than "stable" and "predictable." I mean do you remember when he was [publicly threatening to nuke North Korea on Twitter](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42549687)?? [I saw this ad](https://x.com/Daractenus/status/1851599196907860112) recently (not made by/affiliated with Harris) that really captures how I feel like life was when Trump was in office and constantly in our faces. Who needs more of that?
Personally, I see it as the elite class of tech that are following Trump vs. the rank & file tech people. VCs, Elon, Sacks, etc. Those people who would get hit hard by the unrealized capital gains. They are loud, influential and using shilling strategies on us to believe it’s bigger movement than what it truly is…... However— there are more support for the Trump than there use to be so it has had some success. I could be wrong but we’ll know by seeing the election results in tech heavy states (CA, WA, NY, etc.) soon IMO— Dems have done this to themselves though with an anti-innovation attitudes. I do hope that this is a wake up call to the party that they are crushing support and will lose elections in this sector. Gensler is just 🤦♀️. Elizabeth Warren needs to step aside and Ro Khanna needs to become that voice. Also, there has always been a Libertarian movement in tech. Lots of tech startups types are anarchist/rebel, hardcore free speech believers and want to change the world. Personally, I can understand that POV and think that benefits. Can’t go there fully because I believe in funding important things and social responsibility. https://www.voanews.com/amp/silicon-valley-luminaries-take-sides-in-presidential-contest/7735448.html
2012/2013 I Heard about it. Didn’t think anything of it. I was more into partying and chasing girls unfortunately. Then in 2018 I bought it for the first time without understanding it, but then in 2020 during the pandemic is when I really fell into the rabbit hole, and I’m glad I did. Bitcoin has completely changed my POV on money, human history and corruption as a whole. Bitcoin is literally “Financial Truth”.
That is not Gary’s definition and he made up the term “crypto asset security” to intentionally conflate the asset and security components and use it as a blanket to claim jurisdiction over a host of activities that his commission has ZERO say in. Plus, the POV his commission gives (even when unwarranted) is flat wrong and proven so in court repeatedly. Until Harris makes a statement against the actions of the SEC, she is 100% okay with Gary’s behavior.
This is an interesting POV that I haven’t thought of. I don’t know if this is a good comparison, because what I do see is a trend that has developed over the years with BTC/usd in correlation to the halving cycle.
Okay, points we'll taken and very well thought out, but I too have given this particular case much thought since it's inception and I have a completely different POV. While I understand the complexities of waste management and the legal frameworks involved, it's a stretch to say that offering a large sum of money like 500 million wouldn't make a difference in this case. Laws and contracts, while important, are not set in stone when faced with exceptional circumstances, and there are numerous examples where rules are adapted for unique cases. First, the fact that an item is defined as "waste" the moment it's discarded doesn't mean it’s irretrievable. There are cases where people have successfully reclaimed valuable items from the trash, sometimes even with legal backing, especially when those items have significant financial or sentimental value. It’s not impossible for local authorities or contractors to allow exceptions to waste disposal laws—especially for an object with this much value, like a lost cryptocurrency hard drive worth millions. Second, regarding waste management contracts, while the companies involved have long-term agreements with councils, those contracts are not immune to renegotiation. Waste management services are businesses, and businesses are ultimately driven by money. Offering an amount like 500 million could certainly create enough incentive to make exceptions, given that this sum could cover significant operational costs or even be used for community development. It’s not about "disrupting" their entire operation; it’s about creating a one-off agreement that benefits both parties. Finally, while landfill mining might not be common in the UK, it doesn’t mean it’s impractical. Technology is constantly advancing, and with sufficient financial motivation, it’s entirely possible to conduct an efficient and environmentally responsible recovery operation. Environmental and waste management laws aren't immovable barriers—they're frameworks meant to be adaptable when the situation calls for it. With the right approach, there’s no reason why a solution couldn’t be negotiated that respects both the legal requirements and the value at stake. In short, with a unique situation like this, the idea that legal and environmental constraints cannot be adjusted is overly rigid. If enough parties stand to gain from a resolution, it’s possible to navigate these complexities intelligently, without sacrificing the integrity of waste management practices. Im a little long winded but sometimes I can't express my point with any sort of credibility or intelligence without expanding, and this case is the first of its kind and fairly complex. Anyway, what are your thoughts on this take?
I look at things in terms of who owns the risk. The “individuals getting rich” are the ones who owned the risk from the earliest points. Say you start a company and tell everyone who joins they need to invest money, take zero pay for an unknown period of time, and work hours beyond 9-5… would they take it? Not likely. People who do, are founders, investors, or founding members who take significant risk. I see a lot of people look at the end result and say things should be “fair” or “equal” without understanding the significant “unfairness” and sacrifice that went into the early days. I’ve been an employee before but spent most of my life as an entrepreneur so I look at things from a risk ownership POV. Watch this video. I’m indifferent on Ben’s views but I think this is a good debate around this topic. https://youtu.be/3xq-q6a9tCM?si=eY52rbmMYm6QWsk0
Ok, we are not talking about the same thing here, although both your POV and mine on the topic are closely related. I think you're talking using a "free banking" approach to this topic while my approach is more of a "scalability of ownership". While you're correct in what you say, let me remind you of FTX, Celsius, BlockFi and many more cases that had Bitcoin in the name of their users, but they actually didn't, my point is that we need change to Bitcoin to actually solve this problem, instead of relaying on the free market doing its thing and expecting a different result this time we can solve it directly and change the definition of a bank from money warehouse, which can operate with less money that what they owe until they can't, to data relayer, which can't owe money since they can't hold nonexistent nor print IOUs, all they can do is transact in name of the users and pocket a fee for letting the users not have to use the chain which is slower and more expensive. This is what LSPs do, but they have to open and close channels constantly and pass on the costs of the on-chain operations tot the user, ARK is a better approach to this problem than Lightning will ever be, but to be as good as self custody we need Covenants so the users don't have to sign constantly just to prevent their funds from being taken.
Quite frankly, I didn't expect a reasonable response. However, this is a reasonable question, so I'll elaborate. My comment, while in response to this post about Cuban, isn't specific to Cuban. When you disagree with people and think your POV is correct, especially if it's supported by facts; the ideal scenario is the person you disagree with, at some point seeing your POV and being able to shift their opinion. Clowning them for their previous position is counterproductive and just leads to others being disincentivized to changing their view. Specifically, to Cuban, I don't know what new information or perspective he has, but he has changed his position on BTC. I feel like we can safely assume something changed. If you think he's being disingenuous, I can't really disprove that. However, it doesn't change my overall point about it being a net positive when anyone is able to change their position when they have more information or a new perspective.
Thank you for your question! There is certainly a perception about projects in our industry with confidentiality features. Our view as contributors is that confidentiality is a spectrum, and we simply want to meet users where they are. Today, there isn't an online tool anyone can use to see one's bank balance or credit card transactions. That doesn't mean they are completely private, of course. But they are private on a peer-to-peer basis. Furthermore, think about it from a business POV. No company wants every customer to know how much other customers pay for a product or service. Companies also don't want anyone to be able to stack rank their best customers by revenue in real-time. This is a big statement, but here we go: Tari contributors believe blockchains without confidentiality features are incompatible with capitalism. So, what is our view on potential legislation or regulation for projects that have confidentiality features? Our view is that Tari is a middle ground. The base protocol is default confidential. On the L2, developers can design their smart contracts so that they have full visibility into the transaction graph. They can burn tokens, mint tokens, create allow/deny lists, etc. As a result, they can build something on Tari, keep their users safe, and comply with the regulations of their local jurisdiction. We hope that people don't view Tari as a run-of-the-mill privacy project. We hope they view it as something purpose-built to meet users where they are, is pro-human, and also enables developers to meet their compliance burden.
Keynessian economic at its finest. Take a look from the Austrian POV.
It all depends on your knowledge and comfort zone. Some believe that we're in the beginning of the greatest transfer of wealth in human history, others business ass usual. The more you study, clearly your POV. Don't let your emotions guide you.
If only you’d understand how POV works, maybe just maybe you might have bought BTC at the bottom
You're right, I was not talking from a legal POV.
It can be but my point was that Taylor's analogy was not contrived. But then I' m a physicist so maybe my POV is a bit different.
First, I can't believe so many don't recognize Francis around here, he ran the Bitcoin Embassy in Canada, which brings me to your ill conceived point: Francis is Canadian (Montreal based I believe, which makes the aforementioned incredibly contentious ) and was a politician/candidate \[0\] (libertarian party) and spoke in the Canadian parliament about Bitcoin policy. So, it must be made clear that here is no R vs D paradigm and acutely underscores what is not being grasped at all by those of you who still think in these false dichotomies: he has tried to 'change the system from within' as a 3rd party type candidate (again its a Parliament so not the same as Representative Republic) only to see Housing sky rocket like nothing seen in N. America, wages stagnate for msot who are not in teh asset and investor class and their Rights be denied during COVID like the Police State some always thought it to be that then led to the truckers protests etc... and that isnt even touching the mass migration and supression of wages enabled by Treudau to supress wage growth for a certain class of people to appease the donor class that keeps this clown in office. He is calling out the Political system as a whole for the farce that it is, regardless of 'who your guy is,' and is best positioned to do so where even the supposed well adjusted Libertarian trying to reform the system from within is pretty much a charlatan talking his is own book and pumping his own bags knowing reform will never change and shouldn't as they stand to to profit anld gain the most from said System. Francis' appearance went full trucker it seems, perhaps from fully empathizing with their terrible plight, but to me it seems he finally succumbed to the inevitable outcom knowing that change cannot happen within the system as it would sooner destroy itself and everyone within it before it changes if left to it's own devices, hence why he thinks a Bitcoin standard is the only solution to Society's ills if you could denythe State of their ability to continue to use the fiat system to prolong said ills. Personally, I'm not as optimistic about how simply employing Hyperbitcoinization will yield a universal utopia, but it is a critical step in a long journey in the right direction and just like how it's incentivizing miners to use/capture/deploy renewable energy this can start to catlyze the incentives required to orientate Society as a whole towards a Nash equilibrium--wherein we can actually deploy more mutual beneficial business models and structures that have been left in the wake since the West has become a low Trust Society in the past century. Also after almost 2.5 decades as an AnCap I'm starting to realize that Markets, free or not, while incredibly useful for many things that bing prosperity cannot solve or even account for externalities and edge-cases which lead so severe crises (weather and migratory shifts due to climate change, contamination from warfare, Ecocide etc...) that perhaps is what led to said erosion of trust in Western Society to begin with: when everything is run like a casino then nothing matters as and the next bet takes presdence and seems to take no account to how we got to the undersired position in the first palce. Panacea-speak aside, I'm glad Francis is stilld doing the rounds and I will try to listen to his panel which I'm gussing was from this last Bitcoin conference, seems like insightful POV now that he has been battle-hardened. 0: [http://www.quebecoislibre.org/15/150915-10.html](http://www.quebecoislibre.org/15/150915-10.html)
From a negotiating POV their current stance makes this an easy “compromise” if it’s really the intended goal. If they start with this, it’ll be some watered down meaningless BS by the time it passes
I have no idea what you are on about but would love to understand things from your POV if you care to share and explain
That means you have to pay 100k$ for every BTC you sell. Makes Sense from govt POV.
btw i dont want you to get the idea that im against bitcoin, im not. i've been investing pretty heavily into it for awhile. But I'm also a big 'gold bug' from way back. I guess i have a different perspective because i come to all this stuff from the POV of a prepper. I see the value in different assets based on what they can do for me in the different situations I feel I would most likely face. Real Estate serves one purpose, gold another, bitcoin another, stocks another, etc. That said, I do have high hopes that one day my bitcoin will make me rich beyond my wildest dreams. I don't harbor that same fantasy when it comes to gold.