Si usted es profesor,ra de Economía y no encuentra la forma de explicar por qué sube y baja el precio del bitcóin, le sugiero utilizar, a modo de ejemplo, el precio de los 💐 a las 18hrs en el Día de San Valentín, Día de la Madre...
1. El precio de los 💐 vale lo que la gente está dispuesta a pagar. 2. El precio de los 💐 no está regulado. 3. El único factor que determina el valor de los 💐 es el que se establece entre la oferta y la demanda.
Ahora bien, si desea explicar si el bitcóin es una «gran burbuja» , le recomiendo leer lo que se explica en la imagen adjunta.
.@jack: "When the bitcoin white paper came out I admit I didn't fully understand how much of it suddenly came together. I really appreciated the philosophy, how it was introduced to the world under a pseudonym … I didn't really understand the implications of it."
Inspired by @giacomozucco's twitterstorm yesterday, here's some more thoughts on why #bcash is pointless.
Though this has been argued since forever, I've had several irl interactions recently that made me realise BCashers still don't understand these points. #bitcoin <thread>
(First of all, we're ultimately on the same side, main disagreement is on timelines. The ad-hominem name-calling bullshit hasn't helped anyone's cause, and is an easy way to divide and weaken a community that is meant to be strong in numbers. Vires in numeris.)
Technical issues aside, Bitcoin isn't ready to be a payment network yet. "Spend and replace" is a much worse UX than simply paying by card or using PayPal.
UK orders Cayman & BVI to divulge Shell Co ownership info.🤗
US Treas gives Deripraska’s Rusal relief from sanctions.😱
Goldman Sachs lurves BitCoin?😱
CA closes US offices, but will EmerData rise & begin Ops?😱
Why did NYTs falsely attribute list of ?? to SCO? 🤔
Britain agreed on Tuesday to order its overseas territories such as the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands to make secretive company ownership information public by the end of 2020 to try to tackle corruption and tax avoidance.
We're attracted to having large numbers of things.
Some #altcoins should therefore split to unlock latent value; the more utilitarian the $crypto token, the more potential benefit if cheap & numerous.
eg $GEO - large caches seem more bountiful, single tokens have cheap utilities
$BLOCK - Service rewards are non-decimal numbers
$FANS - small bets are still whole numbers; big bets are BIG numbers
$DCR - better representation as a currency as well as store of value
Everyone says #Bitcoin is infinitely divisible and wallets can be revised to move the decimal, but no coin to my knowledge has ever done this (instead splitting by fork). Attempts to hack people's impressions, like promoting denomination in bits (100 sat), have failed so far.
I kind of see @HeyRhett as the Martin Shkreli of cryptocurrency. He's convinced that his hopping from fork-to-fork and turning a profit isn't market manipulation - and maybe legally he's in the clear (I'm not a lawyer). But is it morally corrupt? Hell to the yes.
I am *so* done bearing witness to this behavior. I implore everyone in the #crypto / #Bitcoin / etc. space to call this stuff out and start caring more about projects that actually improve on a technology or benefit society rather than simply paying a dude who forks a coin.
Just to be clear - in the screenshotted thread, Rhett is admitting to *more than doubling* the price of his investment by accumulating Primecoin prior to mentioning a fork on Twitter - which subsequently pumped the price. And he thinks he did nothing wrong. This space... 😐
$BCH isn't a scam, but it kinda is. BCash isn't a scam because #Bitcoin is an open-source project and anyone can fork it (and sometimes it feels that almost everyone did at some point). The software isn't the problem, it's certain people behind it that are committing fraud.
BCash came into existence as an attempt to strong-arm Bitcoin users and businesses. It was backed and funded by 3 people: Roger Ver, Jihan Wu and Craig Wright. Again: no issue with them forking off, their choice and they want to try to take a different route, which is fine.
It resulted in a centralized coin (3 main backers) with centralized development (3/4 different "implementations" by devs who lack experience and all funded by the same people) and centralized mining. Nothing special about it, although claiming it to be decentralized isn't true.
On July 18, 2010 ArtForz started mining bitcoin with GPU, reducing drastically the reward for the rest of the miners. The result was pretty interesting: instead of putting them out of business, the price jumped 10x to fully compensate the new difficulty. ofnumbers.com/2014/04/20/how…
The subjective theory of value states that the value of a good is determined by the importance an acting individual places on it. ArtForz was not selling, so he restricted the offer forcing buyers to reconsider the subjective value of bitcoin and buy at CPU miners price.
2/ By making that statement, @_nirajshah inherently assumes that central banking, free float exchange system and FIAT money creation are simple and well understood by the Average Joe leading to its high acceptance and usage.
3/ Nothing can be farther from the truth. Not more than 1% of the world population would understand the nitty-gritty of how FIAT money works. (Hint: It doesn’t)!
2/starting with a promotion of Bitcoin.com - several pointers: this website presents itself as a Bitcoin site and as a community. In fact, it's a for-profit site to promote $BCH first and foremost. There ARE strings attached. He HAS a stake in it, incentive to promote
3/@rogerkver and many others overestimated #Bitcoin technology in the early days, pitching it in certain way, based on what they saw at that time. Merchant adoption would be nice to see, but is limited by the constraints of the technology. That became clear as adoption grew.
1. Institutional, and all smart money, in general, don't enter the market at the top.
They drive the price all the way down, sponsor propaganda to create negative market sentiment, and force people to liquidate.
2. Let's say a group of investors wants to buy 100,000 $BTC.
Where do you think they will get this amount of liquidity in a bull market?
Now multiply this amount by N number of investors.
There's plenty of people with that kind of purchasing power.
3. Current $BTC liquidity providers are margin traders on 50x leverage and early #Bitcoin investors like @RichardHeartWin who believe $20,000 was the top.
If they don't sell, where do you get so much BTC?
You can't "just buy" 100,000 BTC. There is no such liquidity.
Cryptocurrency is effecting a turning of the tide from Gresham's Law to Thiers' Law.
2/ Gresham’s Law states that "bad money drives out good.” It applies when both forms of money are considered legal tender and have their exchange rate set by law.
3/ People will hoard the “good” money (which becomes the store of value) and transact with the “bad” money (which becomes the medium of exchange). Merchants are forced to accept this “bad” money because of the legal tender laws.
When @NeonaziWallets can run an automated feed showing the daily bitcoin activities of white supremacists, imagine what the Federal law enforcement & counterintelligence who have known about this for at least almost 6 months could do with their data.
To help raise the tide of crypto, I'm going to be doing the 100 days of shitcoins challenge, where I'll try to provide digestible summaries for coins, hopefully inspiring you to want to learn more and DYOR.
The Dutch Hansa takeover.
"They obtained at least some data on 420,000 users, including at least 10,000 home addresses, which they've turned over to Europol to be distributed to other police agencies..."
Some thoughts about the really bigger picture: 1) This week we witness how BTC and blockchain disrupt the banking economy. We all hope to get filthy rich and make a better world.
But what will happen next week?
2) We might see the coming of age of AI and robotics. Look at the latest public robots of Boston dynamics, they work together, realize when a situation changes and react accordingly. Is your skillset still scarce if a bot total recall and <1ms reaction is around the corner?
3) This is the conservative approach, if we look further we might see nanotechnology arriving, which ultimately makes all physical things replaceable and imitable. So what will remain scarce in such a world and as a consequence still be seen as a store of value?