A friend, who's a seasoned CFA analyst, cited Buffett's criticism of Bitcoin that it's a nonproductive asset and most successful Bitcoin investors were "lucky", i.e. investing based on sentiment not skill (like valuing stocks based on DCF).

Of course I need to play defense 🙂 1/
First of all, I’ve always been a fan of Buffett. Love his autobiography “Snowball” and I take his compounding interest lesson to heart. In investing and everything else in life: everything compounds. Knowledge, friendship, etc. 2/
I also love his humility, most successful people have a lot of luck on their side, whether they know it or not. There’s no such thing as a self-made man (Ovarian Lottery theory). 3/
The fact that you were born in the US already gave you a huge leg up over everyone else around the world.

Not sure if this remains true going forward, but this was certainly the case in the past ~100 years. 4/
I grew up in the embargoed, war-torn, poverty-stricken country of Vietnam, but I was still lucky than many many others because I gotta study in the US later.

I often think of my much smarter classmates who never had such an opportunity. 5/
The fact that you were 30-50 year-old when Bitcoin launched in 2009 also gave you a huge leg up vs. other generations: somehow you’re squeezed perfectly in that tiny BTC initiation window, while simultaneously having access to the information AND the savings to invest in it. 6/
So yes investing in BTC requires a certain degree of luck. Age, financial situation, etc.

But when it comes to bashing Bitcoin, you gotta realize Buffett is talking his books: Buffett is by far the biggest beneficiary of the dollar / fiat system created after Bretton Woods. 7/
Not only a big chunk (~600%) of stock value appreciation during the 1970-2020 period came from money-printing, Buffett is also deeply plugged into system: he is close friends with the biggest hotshots in central banking, including all the past and current chairmen of the Fed. 8/
If you don't think Buffett is aware of the Fed's future monetary policies ahead of almost everybody, or that they don't solicit his advice when intervening in the market, you're being naive.

Buffett is as "central" bank as you can get. 9/
As his partner Munger used to say:

"Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome".

That rule applies to them too - of cos the man who benefited the most from fiat bashes Bitcoin and gold (for similar reasons). 🙂 10/
On using DCF as a valuation framework: I made the same mistake when looking at Bitcoin for the 1st time in 2011. At the time I was hooked on value investing & turned away from Bitcoin because I couldn't value it using that framework.

But this is the wrong way to look at it. 11/
Using DCF to value money == square peg, round hole. The costliest mistake of my life. 12/
Money is not stock. You cannot value them the same way. You need to dig deep and goes back thousands of years in history to understand what makes good money based on selection pressure (read @NickSzabo4's)... 13/
... and why Bitcoin is a game-changer, that the post-Bretton Woods fiat system is actually an anomaly and not sustainable. 14/
Then of course you need to understand the inner-workings of Bitcoin itself to make sure this thing has legs and does not fizzle out like past electronic monies. 15/
And this can get tricky because all this Proof-of-Work, cryptography, networking and software engineering stuff are relatively new, no one can have a perfect understanding.

So you should buffer your understanding with some margin of error / future uncertainty. 16/
What you end up with is a new asset with limited downside, but still a crazy amount of upside. A no-brainer bet once you've worked it out. 17/
Even if you think Bitcoin only has 50% chance of becoming moderately useful and going 10x, that’s a bet you need to take every day.

It’s just weighted outcome math. 18/
When your level of understanding of Bitcoin goes up, that success probability might go up to 70-80%, making it exuberantly irrational not to invest in Bitcoin. 19/
Still, you must combine this understanding with the discipline to hold such an incredibly volatile asset - one that has lost ~90% of its value several times in its short history.

I don't think it's fair to call long term Bitcoin investors just "lucky". 20/
In fact, I've found that Bitcoiners with the strongest conviction study history deeper than most analysts you can find on Wall Street. I have finance friends who don’t give 2 shits about the history of money. Knowledge makes iron hands. 21/
On the argument that Bitcoin is a non-productive asset.

Money has never been intended to be a productive asset, and no one is saying people should stop investing in stocks or stop building companies. They are 2 different worlds and not mutually exclusive. 22/
You need good companies for the world to progress, you also need good money to oil the economic machine and distribute rewards fairly. 23/
Bad money causes inflation and inflation is silent theft - why do you think wealth inequality is the worst it's been in history going back to the age of Kings & Queens? You can thank central banking for that. 24/
In summary: we need both good money and good companies to push mankind forward. We need Tesla(s) and SpaceX(s), but we also need Bitcoin. FIN.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Hugo Nguyen

Hugo Nguyen Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @hugohanoi

31 Oct 20
I just published Introducing Nunchuk: Multisig Made Easy link.medium.com/7uYBIDxk2ab
(Bitcoin, year 11.)

Alice: This year sucks. You know what’s almost as bad as 2020?
Bob: Yeah?
Alice: Multisig is still scary.
Nunchuk: Hold my beer.

It’s somewhat ironic that for a technology that reveres decentralization as its central operating principle, Bitcoin still heavily relies on single point of failure as the dominant method of ownership. 2/
Read 32 tweets
12 Apr 20
Why S2F has been misapplied in Bitcoin, in mathematical terms:

By using S2F and by restricting ‘flow’ to merely rewards, you are saying Bitcoin supply is an integral function (of changes in supply over time).

But asymptotically changes are zero. There’s nothing to integrate.
Applying S2F to things that are not integrals in nature is a mistake. Math is useful only when it’s applied correctly to phenomenon. It’s mental masturbation otherwise.
Examples of things with true S2F characteristics: population, CO2 concentration, the Bitcoin’s ledger (security strength as an integral of fee flows over time)

Read 6 tweets
28 Jan 19
Last few words on @VladZamfir's poor piece of “work” (or is it propaganda?).

A 18-min rant to express what are some very simple ideas should be enough of a major red flag. But let me point out some tactics/fallacies. They are used elsewhere in this “space” too.
Tactics/fallacies used:
(a) “Call black white, white black”
(b) Deflection
(c) Framing
(d) Ad Hominem
(e) Intentional Vagueness
When someone suggests Zamfir’s idea invites centralized control/reinvents the status quo, note that he doesn’t respond to that point directly.
Read 15 tweets
31 Dec 18
1/ People have asked me to elaborate on the “verification-not-computation” point. And why Ethereum has a flawed architecture from the get-go.

Thread. 👇

*Note: I use “blockchain systems” to refer to Bitcoin-like blockchains that are based on PoW.
2/ First of all, Greg Maxwell explained verification-not-computation concept so well already so I highly recommend reading his full post, linked in @TuurDemeester ’s thread here.
3/ @BobMcElrath also succinctly described the problem here.
Read 32 tweets
29 Sep 18
1/ Emin again with the BS that PoW’s role is merely a “Sybil-controlled mechanism”. (And therefore PoS is a reasonable drop-in replacement.)

It’s the classic mistake domain experts make when analyzing systems purely from their Point-of-View.
2/ Here is Emin’s original “lecture” for reference

I seriously hope Emin is not the only one teaching blockchain at @Cornell. Because he is dead wrong.
3/ Reducing PoW’s role to Sybil control is like an alien looking at cars and conclude that their main purpose is for protecting people from external objects. When they try to create the same thing, they might end up with something like the Flintstones’ car. 🙄
Read 12 tweets
27 Aug 18
1/ Great article by @LaurentMT !

The TL;DR is that energy spent per block contributes not just to UTXOs belonging in that block, but retroactively to all global & past UTXOs.

The often-cited “energy spent per Bitcoin tx” number in many economic papers is flawed for this reason.
2/ Another way to put it is that Bitcoin transactions are secured by high stock-to-flow ratio.

I mentioned this recently in terms of mining hardware stock. But economic history is also another kind of stock.
3/ So Bitcoin possesses high stock-to-flow ratio in two dimensions:
- Stock #1: ledger history
- Stock #2: mining hardware
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!