SV

VoxImperii

- Silicon Valley Bank was founded 30 years ago, long before crypto even existed and as of 31st Dec 2022 it had 209 billion dollars under management which was largely tied to the tech industry (i.e. its namesake, SV startup companies). For perspective, that’s 20% of the entire current crypto market cap. In other words, its failure has absolutely nothing to do with crypto; the bank itself had very little business with crypto companies but it sure makes for a clickbaity story for the media to follow.

Blooberino

Almost 10% of Circle (USDCs) value was stored at SV. They're diversified luckily, but 10% is a gigantic chunk of value.

DMforOpinions

The real question is what other crypto projects were in SV Bank

DMforOpinions

Tether never depegged it just had a few times where it was slightly ABOVE and slightly below the $1. USDC has seriously depegged since a part of its reserves are gone I take it. Its kinda like a bankrun. Once people lose trust that might even be the bigger issue than them having $3bn in limbo at SV Bank.

danorcs

It’s strange that you mention JP Morgan cos Silicon Valley now needs exactly someone like that, a mogul who backstops the entire system, and provides enough confidence that the companies will keep their money in Imagine a Bill Gates or Elon Musk who takes over the bank, wipes out the equity holders and makes depositors whole. It would be relatively cheap to buy rn and they would gain an incredible client base Just saying it’s gonna be an oligopoly either way it’s better that SV has one of their own

borkyborkus

They need to fire whoever is doing their IRR analysis. I do think it’s weird that realizing the loss on the investments was the straw that seemed to break the camel’s back. Tons of banks and CUs have unrealized losses greater (relative to assets) than what they were carrying (0.8% of Dec22 assets). I don’t think their portfolio management was THAT stupid, banks had a shitload of liquidity as deposits skyrocketed and it would have been unwise to hold it all as cash when rates were near zero. It does seem like they would have been better off writing more loans instead of investing but I can see why they went the direction they did at the time. It was a bad idea to have such long dated investments but in my finance dept (CU) we are pretty concerned about the fact that their December financials didn’t really even have any red flags. I’m wondering if SV tech companies are more likely to be heavily utilizing digital banking and have their ear closer to the ground regarding rumors than the typical client at other banks, leading to an extremely rapid run while everyone is already jumpy. It could have been entirely overblown and was solely due to a run, but leadership selling huge chunks of stock recently makes me wonder what was going on behind the scenes. Maybe the rumors did start from within and got out?

wjean

I have bet on certain situations where "the market" dictated a discount on a specific stock transition going through and the levels you suggest (best 90c to make 10c). Fitbit and Omnivision were good examples, even NXP even though qcom didn't buy them is a good one because they all had value even if the deal fell through. In this case, your $11.50 is worth squat if a bailout doesn't come soon enough and further pressure is placed on Circle to redeem their short term tbills at a loss just to cover withdrawals. While USGOV may give SV bank $1 for every $1tbill (essentially paying interest up from) to bail them out, I doubt they would offer the same to circle since they want eventually to own the CBDC themselves.

jsdod

I mean, the SV bank is done for. If another bank takes over, depositors might get all their money back. If no other bank takes over, FDIC will sell their assets at a loss and nobody knows how much they are getting back.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; A company owned by the man who claims to have invented Bitcoin is suing the developers of Bitcoin SV, a fork of the Bitcoin cryptocurrency. Bitcoin SV was forked from Bitcoin Cash in November 2018. The developers deny they owe fiduciary or any other duties to Tulip Trading, which claims to be the true owner of the bitcoin. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*

Llyfr-Taliesin

To the people hoping these banks will pull through...how? By what mechanism would they survive this when SV & SV didn't?

Omgbrainerror

Arent like 93% of all customers at SV Bank uninsured? Dont understimate the upcoming shitshow.

Set1Less

No shit sherlock I bet no one from JP Morgan predicted another bank with minimal crypto exposure SV bank going under within a week JP Morgan should worry about itself - Jim Cramer just posted he is bullish on JPM, we know how these turn out https://twitter.com/jimcramer/status/1634222320398086145?s=20

Set1Less

This is pure nonsense SV bank is not even a top 15 US bank by assets Bank managed its assets poorly and took on haircuts investing them on long dated securities while bond market crashed last year Creditors just have to find out how much they stand to recover via the recovery process

i0s-tweak3r

This- highly untrue. They would steal the funds from other users wallets, ones they know have the capital to pay their ransom, but not so much that they could stand up to them and be an actual threat. I have records showing I did nothing but buy besides a few transfers to Celcius and KuCoin. One transfer in particular they claimed even though it was verified 1000 times on-chain and completed, the coins arrived at their destination, but somehow they also never left my Coinbase wallet. Since there were no extra coins in my wallet, they claimed I must have sold them, or sent them elsewhere(the fact they couldn't even specify what "I did with them" was even more shady). They locked my account while the market was in a major spike in volatility, and demanded I give them $1400 (the cost at the time of rebuying the "missing coins") or they would keep my entire account. Their initial email stated they had some "administrative errors" with several transactions in 3 blockchains, one was Bitcoin SV, that had literally just been hacked, and of course they lumped in ETC, even though the coin hadn't had a hack in over two years and was more secure than ever at the time. I later found out not only was BitcoinSV hacked, but Coinbase was hacked as well. They robbed me to pay off funds they lost in their hack. And they did it like a classic ransom-ware attack, in broad daylight. There was no rationalizing how anything they did could be legal, or somehow rectifying an "administrative error". I had no choice but to comply though so I could get the rest of my money the hell out of there.

KARMAWHORING_SHITBAY

It’s even worse. He has Bitcoin SV

Flat4Power4Life

What hard forks threaten BTC? SV? Cash? Common those are just silly.

Cryptochist

Ok this is the second best reply! SV LMFAO

Lillica_Golden_SHIB

But then he would rememeber it years later, find it again and discover it was Bitcoin SV actually...

Lillica_Golden_SHIB

At least it is not Bitcoin SV

GabeSter

Wait Bitcoin SV?

002_timmy

Better than Bitcoin SV I suppose….

Rusty_Shacklefurd69

Even worse- Bitcoin SV!

MrQ01

>repeated hard forks will slowly kill BTC, like death by a thousand cuts I tend to think of a hard-fork as an upgrade proposal being rejected and exiled into its own currency. >For the uninformed, it’s difficult to make sense of them all, and to even know if BTC is the best option moving forward. The "uninformed" should make the effort to inform themselves. Why, with there being 20,000 cryptocurrencies, is the main currency still the 1st one ever made. This would not happen in any other industry - to the point its difficult thinking up another analogy. It would be like if the most popular video game in 2023 happened to be the game *"Pong"*. The only time there's any confusion is when somebody walks up to them directly and shills them. And the first thing a newbie is going to say is *"So if Bitcoin SV is the original Bitcoin.. then why is it worth only $40 per coin but everywhere else is saying its $22000 per coin?"* The vast majority of people are not going to confuse BTC with a hard-fork.

dhork

I've taken profits along the way, but have only ever gotten rid of shitty fork coins, like Bitcoin Gold and BitcoinSV (the SV stands for Shitty Version). I also have more Moons now than zip did three years ago.

OurNumber4

Ethereum Max, Bitcoin SV etc. A tale as old as time.

KAX1107

>If we successfully establish higher layer protocols that aggregate fees then it will never become an issue. STARKs was already proposed a decade ago and it's first [coming to TARO](https://youtu.be/pStJqHrJhVs) later this year. There's also more momentum than ever behind drivechains idea now although I'm not personally sold until at least SV2 becomes ubiquitous.

WordWord4Digits

Bro, I got the Charizard SV49 pack fresh shiny, and the evolutions reprint. I went bonkers at one point and switched my dca to pokemon cards.

InsaneMcFries

Let’s shut down Bitcoin SV the ultimate shitcoin. What a frustrating guy Craig Wrong is

Beyonderr

I think this applies to many people here. It is always said that only after rate cuts, the price will boom. This is typically a lie. [I would urge you to study here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SV2eZxcXaZ4). The moment the rate cuts start is typically when the stock market goes into a longer bear market. I will sell almost all I have when the cuts happen.

600675

He says he is Satoshi Nakamoto. He created Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision, Bitcoin SV.

iPhone40

Craig Wright thinks Bitcoin SV is Bitcoin

KAX1107

>What if they go to Foundry USA, F2pool, and Binance Pools don't control hashrate. Might also want to look into [SV2](https://stratumprotocol.org/)

CiderHouseRulz

Definitely got me confused. Bitcoin SV is a joke

StiltonG

>When he says "bitcoin" he's really talking about about Bitcoin SV and he really, really Wants SV to be bitcoin so he calls it bitcoin This is true, but the funny part is that even describing BSV, he's still wrong :) He's just such a compulsive liar & narcissist he can't help himself. He feels compelled to always say things to sound smart or new, and simply untrue. He's mentally ill.

U_Mad_Bro_33

Seriously this guy... He's playing word games. When he says "bitcoin" he's really talking about about Bitcoin SV and he really, really Wants SV to be bitcoin so he calls it bitcoin.... And that's confusing af for everybody..

mishaog

"Bitcoin SV :: The Original Bitcoin" sure dude

JadioGCity

Rumors are suggesting that Anthony was going to port Ordinals to Bitcoin SV's chain too, but then he realized nobody would give a shit.

KAX1107

There's been a lot of debate around how to do it, also some miner incentives gaming was a major concern several years ago. Few years down the line with sufficient SV2 adoption, it may pick up steam again. In principle, not a bad idea.

KAX1107

AFAIK Foundry is committed to SV2 What do you think happens if Foundry misbehaves?

ELBartoFSL

Bitcoin SV, CW is a slimy MF. Using the fact Satoshi won’t reveal himself and using it to claim he is Satoshi, but has failed time and time again to prove he is Satoshi. Sadly people will follow him off the cliff because of his billionaire mouthpiece pet on his leash.

Odysseus_Lannister

SV because fuck Roger Ver

JadioGCity

Can't decide between Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV or Safemoon

JadioGCity

 I can't decide between Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV

Siliconb3ach

 And then… we swimming

GabeSter

What about Bitcoin SV?

milonuttigrain

I learn the hard way that there is only one Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV or any other spin offs are just centralised replicas.

ChaoticNeutralNephew

Bitcoin SV. I can't offramp it anywhere!

Fluffy-Development86

Hopefully this stops us from talking about him anymore regarding bitcoin and the founding of it. He needs to go back to bitcoin SV and stay there.

GabeSter

Bitcoin SV fanboys get mocked whenever it comes up.

bitsteiner

Yes, it is possible, but that would not be Bitcoin, it would be just another Bitcoin fork like Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SV. You can create as many forks as you want, but you can't make Bitcoin go away.

Maleficent_Plankton

Gavin Andresen is the original lead developer of Bitcoin and the person most trusted by Satoshi to lead the project. He later left Bitcoin for the Bitcoin Cash fork after expressing disapproval of the direction Bitcoin was going away from Satoshi's original ideal. Craig Wright is a scam artist who tricked a lot of people into believing he was Satoshi. He's also the biggest promoter of the Bitcoin SV fork.

Rtbrosk

heard of Bitcoin SV

LifeguardNatural9863

Bitcoin SV Bitcoin Cash Bitcoin Gold Bitcoin Private BitcoinZ Cause they are all one: 🗑

cryptoguy66

Bitcoin SV cos it’s creator sux

C01n_sh1LL

The supply cap is not a lie. If a miner breaks the protocol by attempting to change the supply cap, wouldn't their blocks be rejected by all validating nodes run by non-malicious actors? My understanding is that, at best, the rogue miner would create a hard fork, whose coins would have no value to anybody with a vested interest in the established protocol. It would be a situation like bcash or Craig Wright's SV fork. The best they could hope for, is to spin off a shitcoin whose value will rapidly plummet to zero relative to real bitcoin since no serious Bitcoin actor will take it seriously. You've made a somewhat outrageous claim ("the supply cap is a lie"), so it's on you to refute those points.

JaviLM

Blockchain technology: yes. It allows to secure data and prevent and detect tampering. Think bank records, stored documents, grades, and yes, digital items such as gear in games, licenses for media files, etc. Cryptocurrencies are one of the many possible applications of blockchain technology. However, most cryptocurrencies are implemented as get-rich-quick schemes in order to take advantage of other people's greed and FOMO. Yes, there are serious projects out there: Bitcoin was the first one, a kind of proof-of-concept, and it works. However, Bitcoin is not fungible because it is not really anonymous: you can trace Bitcoin and track how much other people have, which is kind of the point of having a public ledger. It's also difficult to understand and use for the non-technical user: besides the mechanics of sending and receive Bitcoin, which one should they use? Bitcoin Cash? Bitcoin Gold? Bitcoin 2? Bitcoin SV? Just plain old Bitcoin? The average person on the street will be overwhelmed by this and just give up. Monero solves the privacy problem: it is **really** anonymous, but it's even harder to understand than Bitcoin. Try telling your grandma about stealth addresses or ring signatures and let me know how it goes. Leaving aside the technical complexity, there's still one issue that no cryptocurrency today has been able to solve: risk. A single typo in the recipient's address when sending crypto to someone and your money is gone, and there's nothing anybody can do about it. The potential is there, but what cryptocurrencies need to gain traction is precisely what they try to avoid: regulation. Joe Average won't use crypto in his daily life until he has a way to revert that transaction he did last night when he sent 2 BTC to the wrong address while trying to buy a couple more beers at the bar. So no, even though I see the potential, at this point I see most of the activity around cryptocurrencies as nothing more than greed and speculation.

RonPaulWasR1ght

I would argue that the definition of "Bitcoin" in this law, is ambiguous. Seriously, there are like 25 or 30 spinoff hard fork cryptos from the original Bitcoin (BTC Cash, BTC SV, Bitcoin gold, etc.), and each of those would seem to meet the definition provided herein. Anyways, yeah it's bullish. Love to see this stuff.

not_qz

Bitcoin SV ["the original Bitcoin"](https://bitcoinsv.com/) ​ Bring it!

SecondDumbUsername

We will see SHIB SV soon enough - Shitoshi.. uhm.. Shytoshi's Vision. Can I somehow unknow this knowledge of their names, or is my mind forever tainted now?

TheNaijaboi

In case you were wondering who the investors are: > Harrison, who oversaw the US division of Sam Bankman-Fried's now bankrupt digital asset exchange, secured backing from industry giants like Coinbase Ventures and Circle Ventures. > Other participants in Architect's fund raise include SV Angel, SALT Fund, P2P, Third Kind Venture Capital, and Motivate Venture Capital, along with investments from Shari Glazer and SkyBridge founder Anthony Scaramucci. The funding round took less than six months, according to Harrison.

Bunker_Beans

**TLDR**: The Bitcoin SV (BSV) blockchain can now freeze and confiscate other users’ coins, thanks to the Australian computer scientist Craig Wright’s “blacklist manager” – a software tool for recovering lost or stolen coins. The tool allows users to freeze and confiscate BSV coins as long as they provide legal documents proving rightful ownership. Many see this as an affront to the ethos of decentralization and censorship resistance.

PrincePhilipTheFirst

Bitcoin SV stands for Bitcoin $hit Version. Sorry but BTC is the real Bitcoin

comfyggs

Bitcoin SV is not bitcoin and was created by a scam artist.

Invest07723

Bitcoin SV.

AriSteele87

Yeah yeah you said that, the reality is everything is a trade off. You want bigger blocks your trade off is the blockchain getting absolutely immense. Then who the fuck will be able to run a node? How do you realistically remain decentralised if only data centres can authenticate the network? Bitcoin SV ain’t it, and frankly I don’t see why Bitcoin is broken. I can transact with it any time I want, cheaply, easily, and incredibly securely, as is. If I want to drop 1000 usd worth into a lightening wallet for some walking around money once a month I can do that too. Yes there is more risk that btc won’t be as secure, just as the 100 dollar bills in my wallet are not as secure as the money in my bank. I don’t think Satoshi would think it’s a great idea that the entire collective monetary energy of your life savings is also the same place you buy a coffee from, oh and you’ll have to wait for 3 consecutive blocks to be added by the way. Come on mate, admit you got a bag of BSV and you’re just dirty it hasn’t been adopted. It’s not even a good idea.

AriSteele87

That’s not L2. Bitcoin SV lost bro no one is going to run that protocol. Move on.

Turtlehead88

Bitcoin SV

Teamnyancoin

Like CW. Even the SV sub doesn't talk about him anymore lol

JJJaxMax

Well even I knew it was a low effort. SV is getting canned everywhere eventually. Actually surprised even RH waited this long

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Robinhood will delist Craig Wright’s Bitcoin SV (BSV) on Jan. 25. Bitcoin SV was added to Robinhood in November 2018 following the BCH fork, with BSV distributed to all BCH holders at the time. Robinhood does not disclose the value of the Bitcoin SV held in its custody. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

002timmy


OceanSlim

He's not wrong about 99% of crypto. If it's not a commodity ( decentralized) then it's either a security or stable and the securities are all pump and dumps of pyramid schemes with potential but no real use case. The only sufficiently decentralized coins in the top I can think of are Bitcoin, Litecoin, and monero. Maybe BCH and SV. But the hashing power of anything but BTC is laughable in comparison, this making those other kinda redundant and pointless. There's no point in having more than one money commodity. Money isa zero sum game and BTC has the network effect. The rest are bad investment. If it's a stable or security, it's only propped up by people that want it propped up.

Vinnypaperhands

No, It is complicated, And not many people understand how it works. Sure you and I might understand it but your average Joe never looks into how the monetary system works. Where money comes from, and what backs all the fiat. Many people don't understand the difference between money and fiat. If you know how to use Bitcoin you literally never have to worry about fraud. It's a lack of knowledge that is the problem, not the open source project that is the Bitcoin network. How can you argue that Blockchain offers no advantage. We have never ( in the history of the earth) had an open source tamper resistant global monetary system. That is completely new to our society and it will change alot whether people like it or not. If you think the Bitcoin Blockchain offers nothing that a bank can't, then you don't understand Bitcoin or money. The current financial system and the banks are work with fiat currencies, not actual money. A fiat currency is an iou. Bitcoin is the commodity. Bitcoin is the final settlement. Bitcoin isnt incredibly user friendly. It's going to take some time and innovation to make it accessible to your average idiot and that time will come. It's also not rocket science, just a few hours of learning can do the trick but having some computer knowledge def helps. Bitcoin can be forked... That wouldn't be Bitcoin. Hence Bitcoin cash and Bitcoin SV and many more. They are not Bitcoin. Thinking a fork of Bitcoin is Bitcoin is another misunderstanding. No developer owns the code... Where does anyone get that from. Bitcoin gets upgrades and changed through consensus. No one person has power over anything related to Bitcoin. The large value of transactions is truem Bitcoin is slow and tedious and it honestly is best that way so the network can be as secure and decentralized as possible. Bitcoin being the slow and low tps network it is gives it that strength and allows anyone and I do mean anyone around the world to spin up a Bitcoin node and the more people that have full nodes the larger and stronger and more resilient the network gets. A layer two solution will be build on top of Bitcoin( think of it like the fiat to gold) that will allow for decentralization and fast transactions. Quite literally all of those points stem from the lack of knowledge about Bitcoin and the Bitcoin network.

Round_Tumbleweed_867

What about Bitcoin SV

tied_laces

That's actually high considering they don't want to pay nurses more than £24K/year ($28.8k/year) But, I'm appalled how low tech folks are valued here (SV Ex-Pat)

MrQ01

Concentrated distribution does not equal centralisation. In order to change bitcoin's functionality and protocol you still need to the consensus of a large network of nodes. By holding Bitcoin, the only thing you can do with it is transfer it to another wallet. ​ >A lot of people think it is but is not. All transactions are public and anyone can see them and monitor them. This information is not new to anyone who decides to verify claims of being completely anonymous, which the Bitcoin white-paper never claims. Instead, the Bitcoin network does not make it mandatory to give personal information in order to participate *(edit: and being a public ledger is intentional, as transactions can then be verified independently - allowing a trust-less ledger)*. ​ >And because of these huge companies you have to verify your identity - which is not anonymous at all! That's not Bitcoin's protocol. That's instead a requirement of a holder of Bitcoin (i.e. the exchange) in order for you to do business with them. The Bitcoin network doesn't force you to do business with them. ​ >If you have your bitcoin in one of these you don't even own it, they own it and store it for you. Who is this information aimed towards? Redditors at r/Bitcoin? You think this sub of all subs fail to know the difference between self-custody and 3rd party custody. ​ >Is there a cryptocurrency that is what bitcoin should be? Yes, you just have to look for it! Ending on a slightly less informative note than the average Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin Cash or Monero endorser.

Maxx3141

>While this is true is also ignores the fact that individual miners have no control over what the pools do with their hash power, only the pool operators can control that. The miners can't control it, but they can see it. It would be extremely easy to detect a mining pool mining on an old block for the miners and also censorship would be evident to everyone who runs a full node. Even trying such a thing would make news and already lead to some miners moving away, just because this two actions would also decrease the income. Any tech savvy miner inside the pool would get a warning for such an event before the fist block would be even completed. ​ >When a mining pool finds a block it can add that block to the blockchain. It can also decide what transactions go goes into that block. They could censor transactions if they wanted to. This has already happened with Bitcoin and can happen with any mining pool that has to comply with regulations So if you mention this, you would naturally also mention how [Stratum V2](https://stratumprotocol.org) eliminate this problem, right? "**Before Stratum V2, transaction sets were selected by pools. With this SV2 configuration they’re selected by individual miners, making the network more censorship-resistant. Miners run SV2 firmware, connecting to the SV2 proxy server. Miners can pick their transactions locally and negotiate them with an SV2 pool**." (from the link)

igadjeed

Is it Bitcoin Cash ABC, Bitcoin Cash Node, or Bitcoin Cash SV?

Socialists-Suck

No Bitcoin nodes in SV? What’s up with that?!

lowercaseCapitalist

I know SV house prices are batshit crazy but 4 mill for that place is outrageous. It looks like a normal, upper middle class house.

0xataki

This is hand-wavy but based on experience in SV: at $30M the burn isn't insane for a Series C startup (w/ ab 130M in total funding). 400k was the average comp of mid-level to senior software engineers. If those numbers are indeed true, then it would mean that most employees are comp'd in that way. I doubt there's too much hierarchy among Algorand seniors with 73 employees, and senior directors at that size of a startup get comp'd maybe 15-20% more than avg. Algorand basically has 3 years to position itself as the market leader in...*something*. They try a bunch of stuff, and hey if anything sticks then it's good money. If not, they'll be stuck in purgatory and eventually sell their tech or float by for a decade until acquired by a bigger entity like a bank / trading firm.

coinsquad

SV stands for satoshi vision

dirtyhandsome

> Bitfinex is bidding farewell to Celsius Network (CEL), Serum (SRM), Pangolin (PNG), BnkToTheFuture (BFT), Bridge Mutual (BMI) & Bitcoin SV (BSV). - Deposits are now closed - Trading will cease on 29/12/2022 - You can still withdraw until 14/02/2023

bobzor

Bitcoin Gold or SV? Oh I think you meant Bitcoin Cash, got it!

OddAd283

SV? What's that?

Texaslabrat

I’m in a group on FB. This dude shills SV like it is the only true Bitcoin, he gets roasted daily. Pretty sure he bought at the top

Gr8WallofChinatown

Are you referring to ABC vs SV or when BCH tried to flip BTC

otw

Yeah I mean this is all great and thanks for all the info but still the Bitcoin white paper described much more interesting concepts to me and I don't think anyone would agree Bitcoin has delivered on the full white paper is all I'm saying. That's even the whole reason the SV for exists. The community is just treating it like gold. A thing you buy and do not much with but can store value to some degree. That's a fine use case but as someone who was actually interested in a much more complex tech I just find it kind of disappointing. I used to be a Bitcoin maximilist because I believed the spec was flexible enough to change and adapt and we didn't constantly need new coins, but the community has shown themselves to be extremely inflexible and unwilling to change. I don't really think anything exciting is being built with Bitcoin anymore and it's pretty much irrelevant to me as a technology and is mostly just an investment now.

WPMO

He also made Bitcoin SV. Could anyone here remind me of what the SV stands for? I seem to recall something about a Scam Version

tylermm03

You can’t stake Bitcoin, and Bitcoin has had forks before (take BCH and Bitcoin SV for example). Also if I’m correct, 51% of miners/nodes would have to approve of changes, and with the amount of money big mining companies make there’s no way they’d give it up.

user_name_checks_out

What's SV

Socialists-Suck

This is somewhat true. Central and South America have a generally sordid history regarding strong men who ride in on a wave of popularism and then collapse into tyranny. With Bukele it’s too soon to tell. SV GDP is up and crime is down. So far so good. The interesting component is the IMFs reasons for threatening SV with what amounts to a cancellation of their line of credit. The amounts involved are trivial. Does the IMF focus on reform and “checks and balances”? No. instead the focus on Bitcoin adoption. Seems odd doesn’t it since BTC is not a material line item to the SV budget.

Socialists-Suck

It’s interesting that the article suggests Bukele is a strong man while at the same time pointing out the IMFs threat to collapse the SV economy if SV doesn’t toe the IMF‘s line to receive a loan renewal. The loan amount itself is spare change that the IMF could dig out of their couch in the employee lounge. Instead, of pushing the SV economy ahead they’d prefer to string SV along on dollar life support. The IMF would prefer the Argentina model of continuous default and bailout. That tells you all.

Tokyogoof

Jesse has always been one of us, unlike all the other SV and WS CEOs douchebags

Socialists-Suck

I would agree with this up to a point. They forced merchants to accept it which was by degree. I would have preferred the adoption to be organic as was the case at Bitcoin Beach. But the merchant didn’t have to keep their BTC and could freely convert it into USD. Most of them already had phones for accepting payments. Once the infrastructure was in place it did allow all SV citizens to get a personal banking license via a Bitcoin network and transact globally. No one had to keep their BTC. It’s a wash morally.

Socialists-Suck

Straw man argument. Show me this mythical “anyone” that has been hurt by SV’s adoption of BTC.

RainbowWorldPinkBlue

El Salvador two letter country code is [SV](https://www.iban.com/country-codes)

killerstorm

You shouldn't use "VCs" as a generic term for moneybags. They scope of venture capital, by definition, is to provide funding to early-stage and growth-stage companies with a high potential for growth. VCs funds have relatively limited amounts of money, as they normally invest only what they raised themselves from bigger investors. And they rarely provide loans - they do that only in relation to venture funding, in-between financing rounds, etc. Lending is NOT VC business. > the scraps that crypto was eating off the VC table VC market is relatively small compared to crypto. The entire **global** venture financing was around $40B in 2010, [see here](https://www.toptal.com/finance/venture-capital-consultants/state-of-venture-capital-industry-2019). That's less than Ethereum market cap now. It grew to hundreds of billions in recent years, but that's a recent craze and in fact it might be related to crypto. You shouldn't get this image that we are some fleas feeding off large financial monsters who barely even notice - crypto projects get way more money than tech, for example. For example, a tech company seed round can be $20M - that's considered very good and possible only in few places on Earth (SV). OTOH EOS raised $4.4B in 2018. So crypto funding is 200x bigger than what people hope for in tech.

Trylks

Teabagging blitzscaling is the most usual entrepreneurship approach in SV nowadays. Followed by cookielicking blitzscaling.

BeauBisquette

Yes - they’re a tier one VC shop in SV.