crazy to think that BTC opened 2019 at $3,693 and ETH opened at $131. both have done extremely well obviously (+403% and +351% respectively). crypto is a game of network effects where you want to bet on the category leader. I expect these two to continue to do well together.
BTC and ETH performance over various timeframes
people tend to forget that anyone who bought ETH after 2017 had to endure a very, very rough 2-3 years. but now their strong hands are paying off. BTC has recovered much faster, as it both saw a smaller peak to trough and already was the world's best perfoming asset in 2019.
that's why victory laps from ETH influencers about its 2020 performance are just as unwarranted as victory laps from BTC influencers about ETH's larger peak-to-trough. this data should make it obvious that ETH in many ways trades as a higher-beta bitcoin.
@lightcrypto has made this point better than I could, but if you actually want to compare BTC and ETH returns on a risk-adjusted basis, you hence need to compare ETH to a leveraged BTC portfolio, or compare BTC to a dampened ETH portfolio (such as 50/50 ETH/USD)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My @coinbase dashboard hasn't loaded for days, saying "This JWT token doesn't support required scopes". I have some funds there that it doesn't display. Anyone had this before? There's no support email and nothing remotely close at help.coinbase.com/en/contact-us.
Never had a problem with Coinbase myself before so I couldn't confirm it, but I'm starting to realize why so many people say their customer support is basically non-existent
yup, if I log in with a different browser or incognito it tells me my ID isn't verified (it is verified). when I upload new documents it tells me the info on them doesn't match my uploaded data (it does match it).
BTC just outperformed ETH on the day the ETH2 launch was announced. Without news of its own or heightened volume. I'm still very new to trading, but that feels like the market sending a message about the immediate future.
And my interpretation of these events is that even very bullish in-cryto events can currently not hold water to the passive macro backdrop BTC finds itself in.
This is btw one of my favorite tools so far. Interpreting how the market reacts to good and bad information and especially the absence of new information. Markets that feast on hope are crushed by the absence of new info - you can see that everywhere in Defi right now.
Drake and Vitalik both seem to think that disabling transfers in phase 0 can prevent the formation of a secondary BETH asset (beacon chain ETH). I disagree and predict that it will achieve the opposite.
Disabling transfers incentivizes the securization of BETH via staking through centralized exchanges. Those exchanges will allow users to trade in and out of BETH, which will be a significant value-add over non-custodial staking.
As a result, it not only can't prevent the formation of ETH/BETH, but also incentivizes TWO dangerous precedents: 1) centralized/custodial staking 2) securitization of stake (terribly for security, introduces principal-agent problems)
That's prob the best analysis of Bitcoin's social layer I've read. It's fascinating to see Ethereans discover and explain why Bitcoin "is doing it right" and why the winner in this space will maybe be 10% decided by technology, and 90% decided by narrative and coordination.
My thesis in 2018 was that competing L1s that previously criticized Bitcoin's social values and methods will ultimately come around to praising and adopting them. The alternatives are simply not scalable.
Not saying @TrustlessState only discovers these things now, he's been lucid on Bitcoin for a long time. My tweets are more the culmination of a larger trend I've been observing for two years
LEO:
Trader pays $10 in fees
Bitfinex sells $10 to buy $10 LEO
Bitfinex burns the $10 LEO
Result: Bitfinex +/- 0, trader -$10, LEO holders +$10
BNB:
Trader pays $10 BNB in fees
Binance burns the $10 BNB
Result: Binance +/- 0, trader -$10, BNB holders +$10
QED
Some people are correctly pointing out that not every trading fee is paid in BNB, and so it has to burn more than it receives from traders. These BNB are taken from their treasury.
The overall point still holds, because BNB has no obligation whatsoever to even hold BNB.
The other day I checked what my most-listened-to crypto podcasts are and was surprised to see @laurashin's Unchained/Unconfirmed on top of the list. As I tried to put the finger on why I like this show better than others, I came up with two reasons.
First, she asks uncomfortable questions. It's hard to do this delicately, and sometimes you get a crazy show like EP78 with Dominic Williams of Dfinity who practically collapsed from her (modest!) pushback. But overall, modest pushback makes shows much better.
That a host should see eye-to-eye with the guest seems obvious, so why don't other crypto podcasts do this as much? I think the answer lies in the relatively high supply of podcasts, and relatively low supply of interesting guests.