Cryptocurrency mega-thread

[burge13]

No I'm right.

You have no idea what the market cap is about the projects I was referring too.

Of course the price does matter. I mean isn't that why you set an entry point on something? Based on a price?

Clearly just piling into any old shit because its "cheap"

"Cheap" in dollars/cents token price, not actual investment price

 

[Bostonian]

Clearly just piling into any old s**t because its "cheap"

"Cheap" in dollars/cents token price, not actual investment price

Oh dear, you really don't have a clue.

At what point did anyone say piling into anything because it's cheap?

Might be a bit to nuanced for you.

I believe what was hinted at was that some things are undervalued at present and those projects offer an opportunity to accumulate them at a lower price and potentially sell them at a decent profit % when the market rebounds which markets inevitably can.

Nobody said anything about shit coins.

Do you think a market place that can be used to purchase AI from is a shit idea? Never take off?

 

[evolved2]

Man, I love FinTwit. So many bros on there with their hot takes that are both informative to a layman like me and also downright delusional with the constant criticism of government entities.

And I do love the irony of more government intervention = higher bitcoin prices. Nice little (quite bit actually) pump.

I wonder whether this marks the Fed pause (coz there's much fragility in the system at the moment) or whether we'll see 1 or 2 more hikes in a few months and another leg down?

Am I naive to think that banks failing is bullish for bitcoin? Probably not so bullish for shitcoins, but I think the space needs to revisit the reasons bitcoin came into existence in the first place.

 

[beez]

Am I naive to think that banks failing is bullish for bitcoin? Probably not so bullish for shitcoins, but I think the space needs to revisit the reasons bitcoin came into existence in the first place.

I am literally listening to a podcast talking about bank failures and bank consolidation being a healthy, normal part of capitalism (I agree that that is what capitalism is, but I don't agree that is a positive thing).

I have no idea whether banks failing or not is bullish or not. All I know, at this present time, is that there is very strong correlation between money supply and Bitcoin price. If some banks fail and more liquidity is pumped into the system, sure it would be positive for the space. But if enough contagion spreads and the market tanks ~20%, doesn't BTC crash back down to 15-16k anyway?

But yes, as much as I think Bitcoin is a ponzi, not an inflation hedge, and clearly just a risk asset for junkies, there is a something virtuous about the white paper. But again, the irony that government injecting/withdrawing liquidity in/from the system having a direct correlation with the Bitcoin price should not be lost on anyone; something that is rarely acknowledged in the space.

 

[BACCS]

The Fed have injected nearly $500B in liquidity into markets over the last 10 or so days since the bank collapses. Net Liquidity at levels not seen since April/May last year.

New Fed Bank Backstop Has Scope to Inject as Much as $2 Trillion

 

[WaywardSonSon]

 

[evolved2]

I am literally listening to a podcast talking about bank failures and bank consolidation being a healthy, normal part of capitalism (I agree that that is what capitalism is, but I don't agree that is a positive thing).

I have no idea whether banks failing or not is bullish or not. All I know, at this present time, is that there is very strong correlation between money supply and Bitcoin price. If some banks fail and more liquidity is pumped into the system, sure it would be positive for the space. But if enough contagion spreads and the market tanks ~20%, doesn't BTC crash back down to 15-16k anyway?

But yes, as much as I think Bitcoin is a ponzi, not an inflation hedge, and clearly just a risk asset for junkies, there is a something virtuous about the white paper. But again, the irony that government injecting/withdrawing liquidity in/from the system having a direct correlation with the Bitcoin price should not be lost on anyone; something that is rarely acknowledged in the space.

I think bitcoin is the least of the ponzis. Maybe I'm getting old, but I see ponzis and scams everywhere. The entire financial system our society relies upon is a scam. Property, scam. Shares, scam. Oil, scam.

Technically speaking, bitcoin should pump when the dollar is devalued. That makes sense to me. It should also pump when banks go under because banks are the opposition to bitcoin. See, I'm not just a beautiful face.

History would suggest you're right about wider contagion. If everything else falls, crypto will fall harder as we saw with the covid dump.

I see 40k USD this year in my crystal ball.

 

[beez]

I think bitcoin is the least of the ponzis. Maybe I'm getting old, but I see ponzis and scams everywhere. The entire financial system our society relies upon is a scam. Property, scam. Shares, scam. Oil, scam.

Technically speaking, bitcoin should pump when the dollar is devalued. That makes sense to me. It should also pump when banks go under because banks are the opposition to bitcoin. See, I'm not just a beautiful face.

History would suggest you're right about wider contagion. If everything else falls, crypto will fall harder as we saw with the covid dump.

I see 40k USD this year in my crystal ball.

I don't disagree with the notion that bitcoin should pump when the dollar is devalued, and that is why bitcoin was created. But I feel the premise is flawed. The price isn't increasing because of some virtuous notion, it is increasing because it is easier to fund. Therefore bitcoin as an asset class is the exact same scam as property, shares, oil. At least you admit it is a ponzi

And who pumps and dumps bitcoin? 5/10/20 whales? ie isn't the asset price controlled by a certain few? Exactly the same as our current fiat system?

I mean, you could write a whole stand-up routine mocking the irony of virtuous bitcoiners.

But hey, cash money.

 

[evolved2]

I don't disagree with the notion that bitcoin should pump when the dollar is devalued, and that is why bitcoin was created. But I feel the premise is flawed. The price isn't increasing because of some virtuous notion, it is increasing because it is easier to fund. Therefore bitcoin as an asset class is the exact same scam as property, shares, oil. At least you admit it is a ponzi

And who pumps and dumps bitcoin? 5/10/20 whales? ie isn't the asset price controlled by a certain few? Exactly the same as our current fiat system?

I mean, you could write a whole stand-up routine mocking the irony of virtuous bitcoiners.

But hey, cash money.

Scam, maybe. Isn't everything?

I don't see how it fits the typical definition of a ponzi scheme though.

It sounds like you've got a conspiracy theory going there, mate. Do these 5-20 whales have a private telegram group where they agree to pump or dump bitcoin?

Being virtuous isn't a good trading strategy. Some of the strongest bitcoin advocates also trade the ponzi to make a living. There's nothing wrong with that.

Your take is a little different for a fellow crypto bro. What keeps you in this space?

 

[beez]

Scam, maybe. Isn't everything?

I don't see how it fits the typical definition of a ponzi scheme though.

It sounds like you've got a conspiracy theory going there, mate. Do these 5-20 whales have a private telegram group where they agree to pump or dump bitcoin?

Being virtuous isn't a good trading strategy. Some of the strongest bitcoin advocates also trade the ponzi to make a living. There's nothing wrong with that.

Your take is a little different for a fellow crypto bro. What keeps you in this space?

It's all about the $$$. As I've stated previously, I'm attuned to the American libertarian psyche, I understand how they think. I've made a bet that my ROI over the medium to long term will outpace traditional investments, as most people in this thread have too.

I have no idea who the whales are and what they do. I just think it's ironic that the big bag holders have an asymmetric influence over the price and it is rarely acknowledged.

And you've kinda made my point. I appreciate Bitcoin's virtue. I get it, I sincerely do. But I very much dislike anyone who proclaims they are primarily in it for its virtuous properties without acknowledging they are in it for the money. And without acknowledging they are in it for the far-superior returns. Especially since Bitcoin's value is impossible to calculate as a real number.

Anyone claiming it is worth x or y based on a or b is being a) disingenuous and b) their mathematical calculations are wrong. Sure, log trends based on previous price can be a guide, and the fact the Bitcoin is very cyclical enables modelling that can be understood by a layman, but to ascribe a dollar or numerical value to its price at any given time is false. Why? Because, theoretically, given we know the amount of coins in circulation, the reward for a blockchain and its depreciable value over time, then you could design a model that would affix a price in USD that would be relatively stable (accounting for the fact that the USD nominal value changes as the money supply increases) for the next 100 years. Ie the volatility we see in the price on any given time frame is due to users trying to trade with their asset and make a profit as opposed to buying the asset at its present value based on mathematics.

Again, I have no problem people trading Bitcoin as a regular asset class, but it is disingenuous for anyone to assign a value based on its current price at any given time. It is ludicrous.

And separating Bitcoin from crypto. I also appreciate the technological aspect of layer 2 protocols trying to build something sustainable for the future. I just think it should be discussed within the bounds of society's rules and norms (ie building something within regulatory frameworks that is accountable to laws protecting consumers) rather than it being framed as systems outside government overreach and designed to facilitate citizens' privacy. Yes, I understand that the previous sentence is just a tad incongruous.


(sorry for my long, difficult to follow posts, I listen to too many really smart people whom I disagree with and want to yell at them. A bit like most in the crypto space right now who want to throw the remote at Powell, Yellen et al. about what they are doing to the USD)

 

[beez]

Basically, my whole gripe with Bitcoin is that if you can design a forward looking model based on its output going forward (which you can), then you can ascribe a linear price going forward (adjustable to the change in the nominal USD value) to 2104 or whatever the year is. Ie each month going forward from here Bitcoin's price should incrementally increase at the same rate (again, adjustable nominally).

That's fine. Great. Let us do that and we all know what it is worth.

But that's not what happens, whales manipulate the price and these big fluctuations aren't because it's a fledgling asset or because USD is being devalued at a exponentially increasing rate, it's because a minute number of accounts control the price.

THE IRONY KILLS ME.

 

[BACCS]

Basically, my whole gripe with Bitcoin is that if you can design a forward looking model based on its output going forward (which you can), then you can ascribe a linear price going forward (adjustable to the change in the nominal USD value) to 2104 or whatever the year is. Ie each month going forward from here Bitcoin's price should incrementally increase at the same rate (again, adjustable nominally).

That's fine. Great. Let us do that and we all know what it is worth.

But that's not what happens, whales manipulate the price and these big fluctuations aren't because it's a fledgling asset or because USD is being devalued at a exponentially increasing rate, it's because a minute number of accounts control the price.

THE IRONY KILLS ME.

But you do understand whales control the price of things like stocks and commodities too? Silver price is controlled by far less whales than BTC, as just one example. The 1%ers in this world control our economies, it's the way the world has always worked.

 

[beez]

But you do understand whales control the price of things like stocks and commodities too? Silver price is controlled by far less whales than BTC, as just one example. The 1%ers in this world control our economies, it's the way the world has always worked.

Yes. That's my entire point.

Take Silicon Valley Bank for example. Peter Thiel caused a run on the bank. I'm not passing judgement on his decision - because it was frankly quite prudent - but I think we all agree that when rich people have incongruent power within a system, it is not good.

So while we all champion something like Bitcoin that is designed to be more egalitarian and take power away from the 1%, it is at this very moment functioning as the antithesis of the very idea which it is trying to solve.

I just wish more people would acknowledge it.

 

[evolved2]

Basically, my whole gripe with Bitcoin is that if you can design a forward looking model based on its output going forward (which you can), then you can ascribe a linear price going forward (adjustable to the change in the nominal USD value) to 2104 or whatever the year is. Ie each month going forward from here Bitcoin's price should incrementally increase at the same rate (again, adjustable nominally).

That's fine. Great. Let us do that and we all know what it is worth.

But that's not what happens, whales manipulate the price and these big fluctuations aren't because it's a fledgling asset or because USD is being devalued at a exponentially increasing rate, it's because a minute number of accounts control the price.

THE IRONY KILLS ME.

I'd think linear regression would provide one of the least accurate models for bitcoin price. We move in bubbles, like tulips, but many of them.

I disagree with your thesis that a small number of accounts control price. I'm not convinced there's enough whales to manipulate bitcoin easily at it's current marketcap; even if they do, they aren't working together.

Like any other financial instrument, the 1% have an edge because they know the news before we do. That's why all finance is a scam imo. And yes, bitcoin too.

 

[evolved2]

But you do understand whales control the price of things like stocks and commodities too? Silver price is controlled by far less whales than BTC, as just one example. The 1%ers in this world control our economies, it's the way the world has always worked.

Nancy Pelosi is one of the best stock traders of all time.

 

[beez]

I'd think linear regression would provide one of the least accurate models for bitcoin price. We move in bubbles, like tulips, but many of them.

I disagree with your thesis that a small number of accounts control price. I'm not convinced there's enough whales to manipulate bitcoin easily at it's current marketcap; even if they do, they aren't working together.

Like any other financial instrument, the 1% have an edge because they know the news before we do. That's why all finance is a scam imo. And yes, bitcoin too.

Yes, a linear model wouldn't work in the current environment because then no one is going to make 10x gains.

I do agree that I do not think participants are working together to manipulate the price. And it's fair to contend that the current market cap limits participants' capacity to move the market. I still think my premise holds that Bitcoin behaving like a more-volatile normal risk asset is counter-intuitive to its creation.

Nancy Pelosi is one of the best stock traders of all time.

Talking about scams. That Pelosi can stand there straight faced and argue that members of Congress should be able to trade stocks is inconceivable. I still can't believe that the Democrats haven't been able to move Pelosi et al. to change the laws. Democrats lose the moral high ground so often with their own hypocrisy it is infuriating.

 

[bzparkes]

Yes, a linear model wouldn't work in the current environment because then no one is going to make 10x gains.

I do agree that I do not think participants are working together to manipulate the price. And it's fair to contend that the current market cap limits participants' capacity to move the market. I still think my premise holds that Bitcoin behaving like a more-volatile normal risk asset is counter-intuitive to its creation.

Talking about scams. That Pelosi can stand there straight faced and argue that members of Congress should be able to trade stocks is inconceivable. I still can't believe that the Democrats haven't been able to move Pelosi et al. to change the laws. Democrats lose the moral high ground so often with their own hypocrisy it is infuriating.

Interesting that there's a lot of hubris about Pelosi's stock portfolio, yet there's 3 Republicans who have outperformed her.

That aside, none of them should be allowed to own/invest in the stock market. Find another career if that's what you want.

 

[evolved2]

What does everyone think about the binance lawsuit?

 

[beez]

What does everyone think about the binance lawsuit?

The dodgy ****er should go to jail for life tbh. I mean, seriously. How people defend unregulated shit like boggles the mind. On the other hand, **** the regulators, let him do his shit so I can get rich in a couple of years.

Seriously, I don't know enough about it. I'm sure in some regards he's tried to do the right thing (like Coinbase) and build the industry for the better with regulators, but I'm also certain he's done lots of shady shit including manipulating the price with multiple addresses.

Whether as an individual, one thinks what he's done is just "part of the game" is something that everyone will have a different opinion on. And I'm sure a lot will defend it.

 

[Bostonian]

Crypto needs DeSantis to win the next election.

At least he's far more open to working with the crypto space rather than trying to destroy it.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Crypto needs DeSantis to win the next election.

At least he's far more open to working with the crypto space rather than trying to destroy it.

So you’re happy for the US to revert to 1920’s era with book bans, outlawing gays and banning abortion, if it’s good for crypto?

 

[Kram]

 

[Bostonian]

So you’re happy for the US to revert to 1920’s era with book bans, outlawing gays and banning abortion, if it’s good for crypto?

This is a Crypto thread. Take that other stuff to SRP board.
.

 

[evolved2]

This is a Crypto thread. Take that other stuff to SRP board.
.

You're right. The GOP are more crypto friendly than the Democrats.

 

[evolved2]

The dodgy *er should go to jail for life tbh. I mean, seriously. How people defend unregulated s**t like boggles the mind. On the other hand, * the regulators, let him do his s**t so I can get rich in a couple of years.

Seriously, I don't know enough about it. I'm sure in some regards he's tried to do the right thing (like Coinbase) and build the industry for the better with regulators, but I'm also certain he's done lots of shady s**t including manipulating the price with multiple addresses.

Whether as an individual, one thinks what he's done is just "part of the game" is something that everyone will have a different opinion on. And I'm sure a lot will defend it.

That's why I think exchanges should be the main focus of regulators. campaigners like CZ and SBF aren't our friends. On the other hand, we need a shitcoin casino for the degenerate gamblers and binance is the biggest and the best of them all. I hope they give 'em a 8 figure fine and let the degens continue playing musical chairs for a few more years.