08-12 16:26 - 'BE SMART AND BECOME RICH IN LESS THAN 3DAYS....It all depends on how fast you can be to get the new PROGRAMMED blank ATM card that is capable of hacking into any ATM machine,anywhere in the world. I got to know about this B...' by /u/Dry-Ask6022 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 78-88min
''' BE SMART AND BECOME RICH IN LESS THAN 3DAYS....It all depends on how fast you can be to get the new PROGRAMMED blank ATM card that is capable of hacking into any ATM machine,anywhere in the world. I got to know about this BLANK ATM CARD when I was searching for job online about a year ago..It has really changed my life for good and now I can say I'm rich and I can never be poor again. a family friend introduce us to them last year after i first sure the review online and my wife is a full house wife could not support looking for another good job was fucking hell, this hack card enables you to make withdraws on any ATM card in the world without having any cash in account or even having any bank account you can also use it to order items online, The least money I get in a day it is about $50,000.(fifty thousand USD) Even now and then I keeping pumping money into my account. Though is illegal,there is no risk of being caught ,because it has been programmed in such a way that it is not traceable,it also has a technique that makes it impossible for the CCTVs to detect you..For details on how to get yours today, email the hackers on :email the hackers on ([[email protected]]1 ) ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: Dry-Ask6022 1: mailto:[email protected]
05-13 08:14 - 'I wouldn´t call "get-rich-quick" scheme lucksters, investors. However, if you really want to complain, you can send an email with your agenda to [[email protected]]' by /u/DoubleEdgeEX removed from /r/Bitcoin within 15-25min
[OC] Which front offices and agents are the 3 major newsbreakers connected to? I went through 6000+ tweets to find out!
If this sounds somewhat familiar, that's because I did a 2019-2020 version and posted it back in March. In terms of changes from that post:
I've expanded the timeline to tweets from September 27, 2018. This is the first official day where each of Shams, Woj and Haynes were at their own respective companies. Shams moved to the Athletic from Yahoo in August, and Haynes moved from ESPN to Yahoo in September.
I've also expanded the criteria on when a tweet could possibly be linked to an agent
TL;DR Tracked tweetsof Woj, Shams and Haynes from 2018-2020 to see whether any of them report on a certain team or a certain agent's players more than their counterparts.Here is the main graphconcerning a reporter's percentage of tweets per team separated into three periods (2019 season, 2020 offseason, 2020 season). Here is aseparate graphwith the Lakers and Warriors, because Haynes's percentages would skew the first graph. During times like the NBA trade deadline or the lifting of the NBA free-agency moratorium, it’s not uncommon to see Twitter replies to (or Reddit comments about) star reporters reference their performance relative to others. Woj is the preeminent scoop hound, but he is also notorious for writing hit pieces on LeBron (sources say it’s been widely rumoured that the reason for these is that Woj has always been unable to place a reliable source in LeBron’s camp). On the other end of the spectrum, it has been revealed that in exchange for exclusive intel on league memos and Pistons dealings, Woj wrote puff pieces on then-GM Joe Dumars (see above Kevin Draper link). Last summer, Woj was accused of being a Clippers shill on this very discussion board for noticeably driving the Kawhi Leonard free agency conversation towards the team. This is the reason I undertook this project: to see whether some reporters have more sources in certain teams (and certain agencies) than other reporters. First I’ll explain the methodology, then present the data with some initial comments.
To make this manageable on myself, I limited myself to tracking the 3 major national reporters: Shams Charania of the Athletic, Chris Haynes of Yahoo Sports and the aforementioned Adrian Wojnarowski of ESPN.
I didn’t use beat reporters, as most (if not all) of their sources would be concentrated on their local team
Others that I considered but ultimately decided not to track:
Brian Windhorst of ESPN (double-dipping in ESPN)
Zach Lowe of ESPN (I consider him more of an analyst)
Marc Spears of ESPN (harder to sift through Twitter feeds, as he posts a lot more unrelated/non-news-breaking content)
Marc Stein of the New York Times (same as Spears)
Kevin O'Connor of The Ringer (same as Lowe)
The time period I initially tracked for was from January 1, 2020 to the end of the regular season March, but after finding a Twitter scraping tool on GitHub called Twint, I was able to easily retrieve all tweets since September 27, 2018. However, a month ago, Twitter closed their old API endpoints, and Twint ceased to work. I used vicinitas.io but the data loading became more time-consuming. Therefore, the tweets are up to the date of October 15 2020. How I determined information was by manually parsing text tweets by the reporter (no retweets):
This means I did not include images or multimedia appearances such as television, radio or podcasts. The rationale for this is that I simply don’t have the time to listen/watch and record all the instances of providing information through sources on these mediums.
Now, I didn’t take every single text tweet:
I didn’t include direct statements, be they from players or front office folks
I separated them, along with podcast guests in another tab
I didn’t include the summary tweet that Woj & Shams love to do: “Story filed to/Story on [employer]:..” because it doesn’t add anything apart from a link to a story (also, I personally don’t want to be called an ESPN/Yahoo/Athletic shill)
If the tweet added a reporter’s own analysis to someone else’s tweet, it was not included
If it was new information, the tweet was retained
Tweets that related solely to retired players were not included: mainly Haynes reporting Dwyane Wade joining CAA, as well as the unfortunate passing of Kobe Bryant on January 26
I grouped multiple tweets about the same subject delivered around the same time frame (such as trades) into one, as doing otherwise would arbitrarily inflate totals
There’s no hard and fast rule for whether or not to group tweets
For example, the big 4-team trade that created the Pocket Rockets was grouped in full
On the other hand, the Miami-Memphis trade was split up because the full details came like a day later
Sometimes, I used my judgment to determine whether a tweet’s underlying information would have come from a source, and therefore whether I should include that tweet or not
For example, consider the All-Star tweets: Haynes and Shams both posted the All-Star starters, but looking at the time signatures led me to believe that this was simply relaying the information from the TNT reveal
On the other hand, both Shams and Haynes posted tweets disclosing the All-Star Reserves before the TNT reveal
Next, I had to assign possible teams to each tweet:
Items such as changes to the league calendar, the naming of All-Star Reserves and salary cap projections were immediately attached to an NBA source
Injuries and trades were fairly straightforward, assigning these tweets to the participating teams
Items such as league mandated fines/suspensions, invitations to All-Star competitions and game protests were credited to both a general NBA source, as well as the related team(s)
Direct sources from agents or mentions of specific agents were attributed as a catch-all “Agent”
In the former, team was not included: examples include Matisse Thybulle’s agent on not being selected for the Rising Stars Game or Royce O’Neale’s agents confirming his contract extension with the Jazz
In the latter, team was included: examples include two Knicks switching their agent to Rich Paul
New addition: anything related to a player's status with a team were also attributed to agents (qualifying offers, extensions, option decisions, waivers, and contracts/deals)
I then found which agents correspond to which players (big shoutout to realgm.com and the Wayback Machine)
Rumours were slightly more difficult
As we know very well, league sources is an exceedingly vague term
Instead of attempting to pinpoint a rival executive with a motive to make a comment, I took the “Occam’s Razor” approach and assumed that the teams involved had someone talk to the reporter
When it was impossible to even determine a participant team, it was the general “NBA” source to the rescue
Chris Haynes has the highest percentage of tweets relating to the Detroit Pistons in all three periods. He also reports on far more Portland news than Shams or Woj.
Shams' Brooklyn edge is evident. The Athletic was also the outlet that Kevin Durant felt comfortable talking to about his positive coronavirus test. As well, Shams reported on Spencer Dinwiddie's quest to tokenize his contract (similar to bitcoin).
Adrian Wojnarowski has increased his percentage of tweets regarding the LA Clippers period-over-period, but so have the other two reporters.
It's surprising that Dallas's numbers are so low, considering they're a good team with an international superstar.
My hypothesis from my previous post is that Shams and Woj each have capable Mavericks deputies in the Tims (Cato and MacMahon, respectively) and decide to leave that market alone
Shams does have the highest percentage of Mavericks tweets in all three seasons however.
Now, you'll notice that there's two teams missing from the above graph: the Golden State Warriors and the Los Angeles Lakers. Here's the graphs for those two teams. As you can see, they would skew the previous graph far too much. During the 2019 NBA season, 27% of Chris Haynes's qualifying tweets could be possibly linked to the Warriors, and 14% of his qualifying tweets could be possibly linked to the Lakers.
Here's the top 10 agents in terms of number of potential tweets concerning their clients.
Woj has the most tweets directly connected to agents by far. It wasn't uncommon to see "Player X signs deal with Team Y, Agent Z of Agency F tells ESPN." The agents that go to Woj (and some of their top clients):
Mark Bartelstein of Priority Sports (Bradley Beal, Kyle Lowry, Gordon Hayward)
Jeff Schwartz and Sam Goldfeder of Excel Sports (Khris Middleton, Nikola Jokic, CJ McCollum and Kevin Love)
Steven Heumann and Austin Brown of Creative Artists Agency (Andrew Wiggins, Chris Paul, Donovan Mitchell and Zion Williamson)
One thing I found very intriguing: 15/16 of tweets concerning an Aaron Turner client were reported on by Shams. Turner is the head of Verus Basketball, whose clients include Terry Rozier, Victor Oladipo and Kevin Knox. Shams also reported more than 50% of news relating to clients of Sam Permut of Roc Nation. Permut is the current agent of Kyrie Irving, after Irving fired Jeff Wechsler near the beginning of the 2019 offseason. Permut also reps the Morris brothers and Trey Burke. As for Chris Haynes, he doesn't really do much agent news (at least not at the level of Woj and Shams). However, he reported more than 50% of news relating to clients of Aaron Goodwin of Goodwin Sports Management, who reps Damian Lillard and DeMar DeRozan. Here are the top 10 free agents from Forbes, along with their agent and who I predict will be the first/only one to break the news.
Most Likely Reporter
Too close to call, leaning Shams
Too close to call, leaning Shams
Alexander Raskovic, Jason Ranne
Limited data, but part of Wasserman, whose players are predominantly reported on by Woj
Thanks for reading! As always with this type of work, human error is not completely eliminated. If you think a tweet was mistakenly removed, feel free to drop me a line and I’ll try to explain my thought process on that specific tweet! Hope y’all enjoyed the research!
Putting $400M of Bitcoin on your company balance sheet
Also posted on my blog as usual. Read it there if you can, there are footnotes and inlined plots. A couple of months ago, MicroStrategy (MSTR) had a spare $400M of cash which it decided to shift to Bitcoin (BTC). Today we'll discuss in excrutiating detail why this is not a good idea. When a company has a pile of spare money it doesn't know what to do with, it'll normally do buybacks or start paying dividends. That gives the money back to the shareholders, and from an economic perspective the money can get better invested in other more promising companies. If you have a huge pile of of cash, you probably should be doing other things than leave it in a bank account to gather dust. However, this statement from MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor exists to make it clear he's buying into BTC for all the wrong reasons:
“This is not a speculation, nor is it a hedge. This was a deliberate corporate strategy to adopt a bitcoin standard.”
Let's unpack it and jump into the economics Bitcoin:
Is Bitcoin money?
No. Or rather BTC doesn't act as money and there's no serious future path for BTC to become a form of money. Let's go back to basics. There are 3 main economic problems money solves: 1. Medium of Exchange. Before money we had to barter, which led to the double coincidence of wants problem. When everyone accepts the same money you can buy something from someone even if they don't like the stuff you own. As a medium of exchange, BTC is not good. There are significant transaction fees and transaction waiting times built-in to BTC and these worsen the more popular BTC get. You can test BTC's usefulness as a medium of exchange for yourself right now: try to order a pizza or to buy a random item with BTC. How many additional hurdles do you have to go through? How many fewer options do you have than if you used a regular currency? How much overhead (time, fees) is there? 2. Unit of Account. A unit of account is what you compare the value of objects against. We denominate BTC in terms of how many USD they're worth, so BTC is a unit of account presently. We can say it's because of lack of adoption, but really it's also because the market value of BTC is so volatile. If I buy a $1000 table today or in 2017, it's roughly a $1000 table. We can't say that a 0.4BTC table was a 0.4BTC table in 2017. We'll expand on this in the next point: 3. Store of Value. When you create economic value, you don't want to be forced to use up the value you created right away. For instance, if I fix your washing machine and you pay me in avocados, I'd be annoyed. I'd have to consume my payment before it becomes brown, squishy and disgusting. Avocado fruit is not good money because avocadoes loses value very fast. On the other hand, well-run currencies like the USD, GBP, CAD, EUR, etc. all lose their value at a low and most importantly fairly predictible rate. Let's look at the chart of the USD against BTC While the dollar loses value at a predictible rate, BTC is all over the place, which is bad. One important use money is to write loan contracts. Loans are great. They let people spend now against their future potential earnings, so they can buy houses or start businesses without first saving up for a decade. Loans are good for the economy. If you want to sign something that says "I owe you this much for that much time" then you need to be able to roughly predict the value of the debt in at the point in time where it's due. Otherwise you'll have a hard time pricing the risk of the loan effectively. This means that you need to charge higher interests. The risk of making a loan in BTC needs to be priced into the interest of a BTC-denominated loan, which means much higher interest rates. High interests on loans are bad, because buying houses and starting businesses are good things.
BTC has a fixed supply, so these problems are built in
Some people think that going back to a standard where our money was denominated by a stock of gold (the Gold Standard) would solve economic problems. This is nonsense. Having control over supply of your currency is a good thing, as long as it's well run. See here Remember that what is desirable is low variance in the value, not the value itself. When there are wild fluctuations in value, it's hard for money to do its job well. Since the 1970s, the USD has been a fiat money with no intrinsic value. This means we control the supply of money. Let's look at a classic poorly drawn econ101 graph The market price for USD is where supply meets demand. The problem with a currency based on an item whose supply is fixed is that the price will necessarily fluctuate in response to changes in demand. Imagine, if you will, that a pandemic strikes and that the demand for currency takes a sharp drop. The US imports less, people don't buy anything anymore, etc. If you can't print money, you get deflation, which is worsens everything. On the other hand, if you can make the money printers go brrrr you can stabilize the price Having your currency be based on a fixed supply isn't just bad because in/deflation is hard to control. It's also a national security risk... The story of the guy who crashed gold prices in North Africa In the 1200s, Mansa Munsa, the emperor of the Mali, was rich and a devout Muslim and wanted everyone to know it. So he embarked on a pilgrimage to make it rain all the way to Mecca. He in fact made it rain so hard he increased the overall supply of gold and unintentionally crashed gold prices in Cairo by 20%, wreaking an economic havoc in North Africa that lasted a decade. This story is fun, the larger point that having your inflation be at the mercy of foreign nations is an undesirable attribute in any currency. The US likes to call some countries currency manipulators, but this problem would be serious under a gold standard.
Currencies are based on trust
Since the USD is based on nothing except the US government's word, how can we trust USD not to be mismanaged? The answer is that you can probably trust the fed until political stooges get put in place. Currently, the US's central bank managing the USD, the Federal Reserve (the Fed for friends & family), has administrative authority. The fed can say "no" to dumb requests from the president. People who have no idea what the fed does like to chant "audit the fed", but the fed is already one of the best audited US federal entities. The transcripts of all their meetings are out in the open. As is their balance sheet, what they plan to do and why. If the US should audit anything it's the Department of Defense which operates without any accounting at all. It's easy to see when a central bank will go rogue: it's when political yes-men are elected to the board. For example, before printing themselves into hyperinflation, the Venezuelan president appointed a sociologist who publicly stated “Inflation does not exist in real life” and instead is a made up capitalist lie. Note what happened mere months after his gaining control over the Venezuelan currency This is a key policy. One paper I really like, Sargent (1984) "The end of 4 big inflations" states:
The essential measures that ended hyperinflation in each of Germany,Austria, Hungary, and Poland were, first, the creation of an independentcentral bank that was legally committed to refuse the government'sdemand or additional unsecured credit and, second, a simultaneousalteration in the fiscal policy regime.
In english: *hyperinflation stops when the central bank can say "no" to the government." The US Fed, like other well good central banks, is run by a bunch of nerds. When it prints money, even as aggressively as it has it does so for good reasons. You can see why they started printing on March 15th as the COVID lockdowns started:
The Federal Reserve is prepared to use its full range of tools to support the flow of credit to households and businesses and thereby promote its maximum employment and price stability goals.
In english: We're going to keep printing and lowering rates until jobs are back and inflation is under control. If we print until the sun is blotted out, we'll print in the shade.
BTC is not gold
Gold is a good asset for doomsday-preppers. If society crashes, gold will still have value. How do we know that? Gold has held value throughout multiple historic catastrophes over thousands of years. It had value before and after the Bronze Age Collapse, the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and Gengis Khan being Gengis Khan. Even if you erased humanity and started over, the new humans would still find gold to be economically valuable. When Europeans d̶i̶s̶c̶o̶v̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ c̶o̶n̶q̶u̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ g̶e̶n̶o̶c̶i̶d̶e̶d̶ went to America, they found gold to be an important item over there too. This is about equivalent to finding humans on Alpha-Centauri and learning that they think gold is a good store of value as well. Some people are puzzled at this: we don't even use gold for much! But it has great properties: First, gold is hard to fake and impossible to manufacture. This makes it good to ascertain payment. Second, gold doesnt react to oxygen, so it doesn't rust or tarnish. So it keeps value over time unlike most other materials. Last, gold is pretty. This might sound frivolous, and you may not like it, but jewelry has actual value to humans. It's no coincidence if you look at a list of the wealthiest families, a large number of them trade in luxury goods. To paraphrase Veblen humans have a profound desire to signal social status, for the same reason peacocks have unwieldy tails. Gold is a great way to achieve that. On the other hand, BTC lacks all these attributes. Its value is largely based on common perception of value. There are a few fundamental drivers of demand:
Means of Exchange: if people seriously start using BTC to buy pizzas, then this creates a real demand for the currency to accomplish the short-term exchanges. As we saw previously, I'm not personally sold on this one and it's currently a negligible fraction of overall demand.
Criminal uses: Probably the largest inbuilt advantage of BTC is that it's anonymous, and so a great way to launder money. Hacker gangs use BTC to demand ransom on cryptolocker type attacks because it's a shared way for an honest company to pay and for the criminals to receive money without going to jail.
Apart from these, it's hard to argue that BTC will retain value throughout some sort of economic catastrophe.
BTC is really risky
One last statement from Michael Saylor I take offense to is this:
“We feel pretty confident that Bitcoin is less risky than holding cash, less risky than holding gold,” MicroStrategy CEO said in an interview
"BTC is less risky than holding cash or gold long term" is nonsense. We saw before that BTC is more volatile on face value, and that as long as the Fed isn't run by spider monkeys stacked in a trench coat, the inflation is likely to be within reasonable bounds. But on top of this, BTC has Abrupt downside risks that normal currencies don't. Let's imagine a few:
A critical software vulnerability is found in the BTC codebase, leading to a possible exploitation.
Xi Jinping decides he's had enough of rich people in China hiding their assets from him and bans BTC.
Some form of bank run takes hold for whatever reason. Because BTC wallets are uninsured, unlike regular banks, this compounds into a Black Tuesday style crash.
Blockchain solutions are fundamentally inefficient
Blockchain was a genius idea. I still marvel at the initial white paper which is a great mix of economics and computer science. That said, blockchain solutions make large tradeoffs in design because they assume almost no trust between parties. This leads to intentionally wasteful designs on a massive scale. The main problem is that all transactions have to be validated by expensive computational operations and double checked by multiple parties. This means waste:
BTC was estimated to use as much electricity as Belgium in 2019. It's hard to trace where the BTC mining comes from, but we can assume it has a huge carbon footprint.
A single transactions is necessarily expensive. A single transaction takes as much electricity as 800,000 VISA transactions, or watching 50,000 hours of youtube videos.
There is a large necessary tax on the transaction, since those checking the transaction extract a few BTC from it to be incentivized to do the work of checking it.
Many design problems can be mitigated by various improvements over BTC, but it remains that a simple database always works better than a blockchain if you can trust the parties to the transaction.
Honestly, the more I read into buttcoin the more sketchy and brilliant it comes across. The points have already been stated here (wanna buy some 1s and 0s with no intrinsic value, not protected by any financial institution, not backed by any government?) so I won't dwell on that. What I wanted to post about was how it's such an ingenious scam: a perpetual, decentralized, headless, slow-boil pyramid scheme. A few frenzied libertarians and nerds sniffing their own farts put money into a genuine (if unscalable and inefficient) technology. This makes news, which attracts some speculators. Amount of money going in generates hype, more news, and brings in normies and more speculators. Value begins to go up, larger entities (companies/wealthy entrepreneurs) invest. Value goes up further. Pyramid reaches final stage as last wave of suckers buy bitcoin at ridiculous prices, convinced this slow, insecure, power-hungry, uninsured, volatile, awkward, unregulated digibuck is gonna replace existing financial systems that answer all bitcoin's shortcomings. The faster and savvy companies and entrepreneurs pull the rug out from the rest of the userbase and the pyramid collapses. Digibuck loses nearly all its value. But, a few frenzied libertarians and nerds sniffing their own farts put money into... Aaaaand on and on. If you look back at the first time the pyramid collapsed, there was a decent progression until around September 2017 when things went fucking crazy leading to the massive price in December 2017, at which point the pyramid scheme winners took their cash and run. So, around three months. People bought into the pyramid scheme again around March 2019, but were a bit more conservative - the price didn't shoot up nearly as high or as fast. Three months later, the pyramid started to topple again, but more slowly and not as devastatingly. It fluctuated after that until a low in March this year. Since then people have been pumping money into the scheme. People are anticipating a big spike, I guess soon we will start to see a big influx of people because it's been "relatively stable" lately, with the pyramid people patiently waiting for a payoff rather than chipping away at the foundation. Of course, as soon as the spike happens it will be a massive plunge down as the pyramid collapses, similar to what we saw in Dec 2017. But, it seems to be an unkillable scam. Even though there's nothing of actual value behind this con, it seems to have really good staying power because it is really hitting some powerful buttons in people's brains:
Get Rich Quick: Yes, even though it is a scam, there are going to be those successful few who walk away with other people's money. If people want to literally gamble by playing chicken with "currency" exchanges, then that's fine (maybe they'll even get luck and win big), but these people need to admit to themselves that bitcoin is only that - gambling. Not an asset, not a currency.
Ideology: It's not just your standard con, it's also bundled itself up with ideals and religiosity. It's an idea! The Internet of money! Libertarianism, utopia, revolution!
Technology: It comes with a veneer of authenticity because it has some real technology supporting it (even if the technology is just...not that great). People are really blown away when they hear vague descriptions of blockchain, words like "node" and "mining" and "private keys".
Hatred: Buttcoiners can be really motivated by hate and bitterness. Their hatred of "greedy banks" and "thieving governments" (legitimate or otherwise, your mileage may vary) seems to really move money.
Fear: If you don't invest in buttcoin, all the money in your bank account with inflate and wither away to nothing! Because inflation is real and not a fabricated boogeyman makes the scam seem more appealing.
In looking over those points, I'm not sure whether it's the technology or ideology that's what's really keeping people from seeing through this con. I mean, anyone could start their own super-duper-coupon company that will only ever produce 21 million coupons. Ok, so the coupons are actually worthless, but if I tell people that one day everyone will use the coupons then suddenly they must have value right? Sounds ridiculous, but if I then say that the super-duper-coupon will be using revolutionary new digital protection, and be supported by a distributed database all over the world, and no government can forge or steal your coupons because of this new zipity-zoop-21 protocol I just developed, suddenly it sounds slightly more appealing. Could just as easily be the ideology though that keeps this con running even after each blow. The amount of purple prose bullshit about freedom and brave new worlds and unlimited prosperity is just crazy. Anyway, I've rambled enough, but wanted to get some thoughts out there after bitcoin enthusiast friends were encouraging me to invest and I did the research. https://preview.redd.it/ucvix7hwwju51.jpg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=220789d26b6f564783dbaef8044e88ca238f0f76
Why Amaury's stunt is clever, why it's a potentially recurring problem, and what can be done about it
TLDR: this isn't an Amaury problem, it's an incentive problem. If BCH splits and the ABC token retains even some residual value, then we're likely to see future "IFP splits" in other tokens and possibly BCH again. Here's my take on The Amaury Situation. I think he wants to get out of dealing with BCH and leading the ABC team. I think he's over it. I think he wants to go do something different. He could quit and walk away. But why do that, when he could create a perpetual income stream for himself as well? "Dead" coins hold value A lot of people here seem to think the ABC split will be worthless. I disagree. It will have significant value: Let's assume ABC is only worth $20. Even under this assumption, Amaury stands to get $10 every ten minutes in perpetuity - for doing absolutely nothing. That's $60/hr. (x 24 hours, or $1440/day) in mail money. That's a decent wage - a perpetual income stream (annuity) - with literally no work required. But I think $20 is super low. Tokens strangely hold value long after the token appears dead. For example LTC is still worth about $50 - and that's AFTER it's champion announced it was a dead project and all the devs left (and LTC is much less scarce than BCH). FFS even BSV is worth $150 and the entire cryptosphere agrees its a scamtoken run by a con artist. If LTC and BSV can do it, so can ABC. I predict ABC token will hold significant value. If the ABC token can hold $50/coin, then Amaury looks to collect $150/hr. (x24 hrs - $3600/day). If it can hold $100/coin, then Amaury gets $300/hr (x24 hrs - ie $7200/day). But even if it drops to $10/token, he still gets $720 every day. For doing nothing. Why is this a problem This is a serious problem with our incentives. If he succeeds, Amaury will have piloted a repeatable exit-scam recipe for any reference implementation. "Tired of supporting your halfass token and ragtag devs? Here's an easy escape hatch! Just create a version that pays you a nice annuity, let the token split, and retire with your annuity." That's the problem. Amaury doesn't have to keep the ticker. He just has to successfully split the token into two tradeable tokens, and he wins his annuity. What can be done I'm not sure. I want Amaury to lose here. I want him to get zero annuity. I want to send a clear signal to the next Amaury that splitting the token in order to collect your annuity is a losing strategy. But I can't see how to accomplish this. One way would be to attack his chain through reorgs. But there is no direct incentive for miners to do this. And I don't support the notion that "bitcoin works because miners attack chains they don't support." Another would be to try to drive the value of his token to zero. But that's basically impossible. I think it will be very hard to drive the value of his token even to $20. And at even $20 he gets a nice little annuity. Not a get rich quick scheme by any stretch, but still, it'll pay for a nice mortgage. I know I wouldn't turn down the chance to get an extra grand per day of mail money. So even at $20/token, Amaury will have demonstrated that his easy retirement plan will work. We need $2/token if we want to declare his strategy an unqualified failure. We can't. And the problem here is that if/when BCHN (or anyone else) becomes the reference client, then its leaders will have the exact same incentive to cause a split when they're tired of managing the project and want out. Conclusion Amaury has surfaced a possible gaping vulnerability in the incentive system which creates a perverse incentive to continually create "IFP" type splits. This vulnerability exists in all bitcoin-like tokens. Unless we can find a way to completely block Amaury from his expected revenue stream, he will be setting a precedence that we can expect to see repeated on other tokens and possibly even on BCH again one day. Edit: I wanted to point out that dskloet has reminded us there is a third option, and that is that instead of allowing Amaury to split the coin, we can soft-fork ABC in such a way that ABC considers the blocks to be valid, but the IFP funds are unusable. The obvious way to do this (as dskloet pointed out) is to blacklist the IFP address. But blacklisting has its own consequences. Another way to do this might be to do something like make the coins sent to that address "unmovable" so that ABC clients will see the blocks paying to IFP and therefore valid, but he can't spend the money. Edit: to clarify
What's the difference between blacklisting and making the coins unmovable? Isn't that exactly what blacklisting is?
Blacklisting means not accepting transactions from address X. I propose instead sending "fake coins" to address X. Like putting slugs into a coin-op machine. The machine owner can still try to spend the slugs, but nobody will take them. But the machine owner can still spend any valid tokens spent in the machine.
I wrote this post because there is an election around the corner, and I wanted to remind everyone that politics don’t matter. This is for anyone who cannot find their way to tendie town. Required Reading-Chads Only For the half of you that were offended by that speech, I hear they are giving away free tampons at Investing where you can buy and hold SPY for the next 50 years. For everyone else who belongs on WallStreetBets, the message is clear: if you can’t make money in the market, you have only yourself to blame. Coffee is for closers (embrace your loss porn) The Closing of the American Mind shows that 18 y/o kids in college know next to nothing and were given participation trophies their whole lives. Does this sound like the stereotypes you hear about millennials? Well, this book was written in 1987. For 50 years, Americans were told that their point of view was valid, and that they were worthy of attention. Very few people are equipped to put their ego aside and realize that they don’t know nearly as much about the world as they thought. The market doesn’t care about your opinion on global warming, your color, your degree, or your politics. If you’re “a good father.” Good, then go home and play with your kids. When it comes to the market, all that counts is being right. If you have major loss porn, embrace this as the most real feedback you have ever gotten. For your whole life, you had an imperfect understanding of reality and everyone around you – your parents, friends, and teachers - were too nice (or didn’t care enough) to correct you. This is an opportunity to learn about where you went wrong and how another trader might have played the situation differently. First place prize is a Cadillac, the 2nd place prize… steak knives (yolo) A lot of famous investors, got their money from relatively few bets. It may be bitcoin, over-leveraged GME options, or Tesla calls, but one way to get rich is to find a niche that is not on the radar and bet (relatively) big. To all the newbies: always play with money you can afford to lose and if you have a position that goes 100X, you don’t need your whole portfolio in that play. 10% is plenty. If it does not work out, at least you saved money because you didn’t need #ROPE. Always Be Closing (the golden rule) Always be closing your positions. If you have a position that is up 50%, sell half. The market is sitting there waiting to give you the money. Are you going to take it? Are you man enough to take it? If you won't pick it up, the market will have no sympathy for you. Novice traders try to time the top. Chad traders are constantly taking profits. TLDR: Always Be Closing Positions: GME is for closers
Ultimate glossary of crypto currency terms, acronyms and abbreviations
[Spoilers S7] Here's what we know about the state of Earth before the bombs
Here's a compiled list of what Earth was like pre-apocalypse using details from the show. Jason Rothenberg has said if the prequel gets greenlit, he wants to implement a lot of flashbacks LOST style. These flashbacks may include references to the following:
In Monty's video message he said: "After sucking the Earth dry of oil, they [Eligius III] went looking for another planet to tap." [Episode 5x13]
This is presumably why Eligius I (unmanned), II (manned), and IV (prison labor) were sent to asteroids to mine for hythylodium, an incredibly efficient energy source. Hythylodium was used to power the Eligius III and IV missions. [Episode 5x03]
Other energy alternatives are used, such as solar energy (the field of solar panels Jaha and Murphy see in 2x14). And in 6x04, Ryker tells Raven the propellant they use for the motorcycles is "ethanol distilled from Earth corn."
During Josephine's flashback in Boston 2043, a man walks into a diner holding a mask, brushing dust off his shoulders. Josephine's friend also says "It's really dusty outside." You can see multiple people in the diner wearing masks around their neck. [Episode 6x07]
During Josephine's flashback, the guy that commits suicide mentions that she posted about going to a water-rationing protest. [Episode 6x07]
Gabriel says his mother's water was cut off in Colombia so the rich could water their lawns. [Episode 7x10]
On Callie's TV, a headline says "Yosemite National Park Burns". [Screenshot] Another headline says: "Deadly Heat Wave". [Screenshot] You can also hear the newscaster mention "above 110 degrees." [Episode 7x08]
On Callie's TV, a headline says "Russian Ankovirus Spreads". [Screenshot] The newscaster mentions the US has declared a public health alert. [Episode 7x08]
Becca says ALIE intends to kill 6.5 billion people to solve overpopulation. She's not trying to kill 100% of the population, so 6.5 billion is not the total population count. [Episode 3x16]
On Callie's TV, a headline says "World's 11 Billionth Child Born". [Screenshot][Episode 7x08]
This is abundant when we look at the technologies developed by just Becca and Eligius, such as large space ships, cryopods, sonic drills, brain chips, ALIE, nightblood, etc.
We also see hologram technology. In 2x16, Jaha first meets ALIE in hologram form. In 7x08, it's used as a telecommunication device when Callie speaks to her father and brother.
On Callie's TV, we see a headline "first human brain transplant successfully performed in Bangalore". [Screenshot] Another headline says "Dubai's Alpha Centauri Group debuts first orbital hotel". [Screenshot][Episode 7x08]
Becca Franko, The Tech Celebrity
She was born in 2025 and went to Harvard when she was 10 years old (2035). [Episode 7x08]
In 2043, she started making tech for Eligius at 18 years old. [Episode 6x01]
She owned her own company. We don't know the name of it but we do know it's corporate logo is an infinity sign and its motto is "Seek Higher Things". [Episode 3x07]
People idolized her. The newscaster on Callie's TV said she had "legions of devotees". In 6x07, Josephine had a magazine with Becca featured on the cover. In 7x08, Reese said "Don't mind my sister. She once dressed as you for Halloween."
She owned her own television network. The channel that Callie was watching on her TV has the infinity sign as its network logo. [Screenshot] The newscaster said "The reclusive billionaire and owner of this network made her last public appearance". [Episode 7x08]
On Callie's TV, a headline says "Stock Market Headed For A ..." and it's cut off. [Screenshot] There's most likely a recession going on and stock markets are crashing. You can also see bitcoin (BTC) is worth 4563.44 (half of what it is today). [Screenshot] Also, on top of the pandemic, huge advancements in AI and technology are most likely disrupting businesses and employment as well. [Episode 7x08]
On Callie's TV, we see a headline "Wyoming joins 32 other states in legalizing the recreational use of psilocybin mushrooms". Shrooms. [Screenshot][Episode 7x08]
Battles in U.S. Cities
The Battle of San Francisco was an armed conflict that Shaw recalls watching on TV as a child. During Diyoza's time in the military, she was one of the soldiers helping the evacuation of thousands of refugees. [Episode 5x07]
Resistance Groups & Terrorism
The United Liberation Army (ULA), was a terrorist group dedicated to fighting against the corrupt government that Diyoza became a part of after the military. The ULA was involved in many terror attacks, including an attack on the 4th of July, 2041 (which they took credit for) that killed 80 civilians in a plane bombing, and a suspected metro suicide bombing in Washington D.C., killing 19 civilians in 2042. [Screenshot][Episode 5x04]
Asteroid Mining Penal Colony
The Asteroid Mining Penal Colony was an off-world penitentiary on the asteroid Proxima 6 that used prison labor to mine for hythylodium. After her arrest in 2043 [Episode 6x07], Diyoza was transported to the colony on Eligius IV.
In 2047, she and the other prisoners learned they were to be abandoned on the asteroid due to getting sick from the hythylodium so they took over the ship, damaging one of it's engines and making the ship significantly slower. It would take 109 years to fly back to Earth. Had the engine not been damaged, it's possible Diyoza and the prisoners could've made it back to Earth before the bombs. [Episode 5x03]
This damaged engine can also explain why it took Eligius IV 75 years to travel to Sanctum, while Eligius III presumably got there in shorter time. [Episode 5x13]
Corrupt U.S. Government
Diyoza says to Clarke "When the fascist government tried to take my home, I wanted blood too." [Episode 5x03]
When Reese mentions Callie dropping out of MIT, she says "Refusing to take part in fascistic regimes is my thing." [Episode 7x08]
On Callie's TV, the newscaster says "... when riot police, on orders from the Wallace Administration, moved in to clear the extreme environmental group known as The Tree Crew." [Episode 7x08]
Callie: "Extreme? What a joke. We were there peacefully. They're the extreme ones."
Lucy: "Don't they know they're defending a system that hurts people like them?"
Callie: People want to believe their leaders are telling the truth, which is why we need to get back there and continue exposing their lies.
The US president at the time of the bombs was a Wallace. In Season 2, Dante says "I love you Cage, and there's been a Wallace in this office since the bombs but if I find out that you're lying there won't be one after me". So most likely the Wallace administration and their family were corrupt. They easily decided to do away with democracy in order to have complete control in Mount Weather. [Episode 2x06]
Russell says to Diyoza in 6x03 "Your face is in our history books next to Hitler and Bin Laden". Eligius took part in federal prison labor, so most likely they had close ties with the government. Fascist governments like to vilify their opponents through propaganda. Even though Diyoza was indeed causing violence, she was probably also used as a scapegoat by the government since she was against them. Even Gabriel said in 7x04, "She was a freedom fighter, not a terrorist".
On Callie's TV, the newscaster says "The 11 billionth baby was born in the Wayne County Internment Camp". Internment camps/concentration camps are "camps where persons are confined, usually without hearings and typically under harsh conditions, often as a result of their membership in a group which the government has identified as dangerous or undesirable." [Source]
On Callie's TV, a headline says "Congress's negotiations on economic relief funds at an impasse amidst violent riots ..." [Screenshot]
Cult Mentality & Conspiracy Theories
In 7x10, Gabriel says to Bill Cadogan "Earth was pretty terrible. But it's good for the cult business, am I right?"
According to this article, Bill grew up in poverty. And Jaha mentioned in 4x03 that Bill's father beat him frequently. Bill, a millennial, says in 7x10 that his first job was flipping burgers, dreaming of the day he'd escape. "There must be more to life than politics, the dying ecosystem, the memes." In times of economic hardship and social upheaval, it's easy for people to latch onto certain beliefs.
Callie says Bill's a vulture capitalist who "traded his precious credibility to become a prophet of doom". She also called him a cultural artifact thief. He found and stole the Anomaly stone from Machu Picchu and in 2042, he started studying it. [Episode 7x08]
It's unknown when Bill founded the Second Dawn, but we know a news article was written about them in 2042, saying that only those with lots of money could "unlock the twelve seals" since it required payments of over $10 million to the cult. [Episode 4x03]
That's what I got. If you spotted anything else from the show, feel free to share! :) Edit: Thanks everyone for the kind words and the awards! Also, thanks to clwrutgers for asking me to make this list.
We are on the cusp of some serious breakthroughs in crypto
I just want everyone to know how insanely excited I am about the progress crypto as a whole has made since the 2017 bull market. The fundamentals are 10x better now than back then. All this is happening while the legacy FIAT system is cannibalizing itself from greedy policy-makers increasing the divide between the rich and poor. * While the legacy system interest rates are kept artificially low, the free-markets in crypto are seeing interest rates of 10+% on stablecoins like USDC. Demand for stablecoins is absolutely exploding to take advantage of this. It's important to understand the role stablecoins will play in all of this and usher in new money into this industry. Why hold FIAT? * Real usecases have emerged that are simply more efficient than the legacy systems. DEFI, NFT's, asset tokenization, etc. Eventually the more efficient systems win, it can be delayed, but not avoided. * All this is happening while Bitcoin's fundamentals are getting better and better. There are many ways buying Bitcoin can now produce yields without selling, the hashrate has gone up 10x since 2017, and the institutions are starting to add Bitcoin to their balance sheet. * Holy shit am I excited for the future!!!
The Fed's Losing Battle with Technological Deflation
PART 1/4 - FREE MARKET? First off, let's set the scene. The stock market is telling you nothing about the real economy anymore. Economic fundamentals have never mattered as little for the stock market as has been the case during this 11-year bull market. The correlation between gross-domestic-product growth and the direction of the S&P 500 Index has only been 7% in this cycle - historically it has been 30% to 70%. Why? Well, it is the Central Banks, led by the Fed, who printed their way out of the Recession in '08. In doing so, they have papered over the cracks, and we have seen the longest economic expansion in US history. However, this is not a particularly meritocratic process: money creation itself increases inequality via the Cantillon Effect, as money printing leads to asset price inflation, which disproportionately benefits the rich and hurts the poor. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker told the New York Times in 2018: “The central issue is we’re developing into a plutocracy. We’ve got an enormous number of enormously rich people that have convinced themselves that they’re rich because they’re smart and constructive." The reality of course is that this is largely not the case - it is because the game is rigged in their favour. Now, it is important to emphasise the fact that the path we have taken has resulted in the highest living standards we have seen in human history. However, the issue, particularly since the US completely abandoned the gold standard in 1971, is that debt has exploded to obscene levels. We are not operating in a free market if it takes $185 trillion of debt over the last 20 years to create 'growth'. In fact, the global debt to GDP ratio hit an all-time high of 322% in the third quarter of 2019. Inflation means that your dollar loses value and thus your purchasing power goes down. Deflation means that the value of your dollar goes up and your purchasing power goes up. That's a good thing right? You get more goods and services for less. Well, no. If you have deflation, debt explodes in real terms and you can never pay it back. As the economy is based on debt, if you allow deflation, then you have to reset the debt. This is why central banks fear deflation so much. However, the major force driving the human race is technological progress - and this stops for no mortal... PART 2/4 - TECHNOLOGICAL DEFLATION: The increased abundance created by technology will result in massive job losses. Throughout history, doom porn enthusiasts have screamed that the machines are coming for jobs. This is not a new phenomenon. All technological revolutions are deflationary - since they create "supply side shocks", meaning that they allow for more intensive use of resources and thus higher production. With more goods being produced, all other things being equal, the price of those goods will fall. In the last 20 years or so, software has disrupted and replaced many established goods and services. It is in the next 20 years that another disruptive technology is set to take the stage: AI According to Steve Schwarzman, the co-founder and CEO of The Blackstone Group who has a net worth of $17.6BN: "This is going to touch everyone's life....you're not going to be able to get away from this technology" Moreover, this virus will only accelerate this trend towards tech. Zoom is a fantastic example of exactly this. Old legacy economic systems were not built for this tech deflation, and the thing about exponential growth is that we humans do not intuitively understand it. As an example, if you folded a piece of paper 51 times, of course you can only fold it seven times, but if you could fold it 51 times, it would reach the Sun! PART 3/4 - IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIETY: The question is: how does this play out? In the long term, it is the fundamental structure of the economic system that has a significant impact on people's lives, not who is President for 4 to 8 years. In reality, politicians have limited power and are effectively all puppets. We have seen what happens when a President doesn't stay in their lane... One could argue that the two main mechanisms of control are:
As we have seen many times in the past, herd psychology is worryingly easy to manipulate... Speaking of the censorship, in his book Antifragile, Nassim Taleb discusses the anti fragility of information. Information feeds more on attempts to harm it than it does on efforts to promote it. A fantastic example of this process is what has happened with London Real: they were banned on LinkedIn and David Icke's interview was censored. Now, regardless of what you think of this particular channel or your thoughts on David Icke and the theories provided, censoring information in this way actually spreads it more virally. It's fascinating to observe how many views the videos regarding the bans and censorship have relative to the others. And the impact this has had on subscribers. It is always easier to blame a bigger enemy (or create a new one) rather than to admit it's a structural problem. Therefore, you avoid short term pain...whatever the cost. The real question is if and when this situation will lead to social unrest... PART 4/4 - INTELLECTUAL CAPITALISM: The depth and width of jobs impacted by AI will continue to increase in the future. Now this will not necessarily happen straight away. However, our transition from commodity capitalism to intellectual capitalism is inevitable and the people and nations who fight against this trend will be on the wrong side of history. From a practical investment perspective, and disclaimer this is not investment advice, network effects are a crucial aspect to consider moving forwards. Essentially, this means that the value of the network increases with each additional user - all of the tech monopolies have exhibited this property. An asset which could in time demonstrate very strong network effects is Bitcoin. Looking at the market cap relative to other asset classes, Bitcoin provides an asymmetric investment opportunity. Only time will tell... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nFbKzt-uwE
Hello, first time poster here. From what I can tell, there is significantly less entrenched orthodoxy applied to how monero does things compared to other cryptocurrency. Its the only one with ASIC resistance, has a dynamic block size, is willing to contemplate the concept of linear inflation rather than treating it as an unholy abomination, etc. In general you guys have done a lot better of a job keeping down transaction fees compared to bitcoin, and as a whole are more inclined to plan for monero as an actual medium of exchange rather than a perpetually deflationary get rich scheme. With that in mind, I have a few questions:
In the event adoption of this cryptocurrency gets large enough that it ends up putting strain on the current dynamic block size status quo, what's the precise point at which you'll change how things operate in order to prevent a centralization crisis from an excessively large blockchain? What sort of exact security issues/etc prevents things like the lightning network from currently being options for this scenario?
While to a large extent price stability comes from a sufficiently deepened pool of liquidity, as has been seen with recent trends in bitcoin's price, one thing I've got to wonder about is if things such as block rewards and transaction fees can be dynamically adjusted, akin to a more democratic central bank if you will, such that monetary tightening and loosening can be done?
A lack of commitment to permanent deflation would obviously hurt monero's market capitalization, but arguably that's not a particularly important metric compared to transaction volume. https://finance.yahoo.comyahoo-finance/watchlists/crypto-top-volume-24h Despite basically being a dubiously backed centralized "cryptocurrency", tether still sees a significant amount of transaction volume purely due to its utility as a unit of currency pegged to the US dollar. Now, while I'm sure precise information on monero's own true transaction volume is under-reported due to strong privacy protections in conjunction with low fees, tether does serve as a reminder for how much demand there is for stability. Obviously its significantly more difficult to do contractionary monetary policy than inflationary, but would something like say, a decentralized dynamic peg work, where holdings of bitcoin/etc are bought and sold by a digital entity controlled by the miners work in order to stabilize monero? I'm just spitballing thoughts here though and I know there might be potential issues related to chain analysis. If you have any other good reasons why this is a bad idea please feel free to let me know. Thanks!
Hey, so i’m a semi successful comedian, all that means i made a chunk of my money through comedy. By no means rich, by no means am i thinking where to get my next meal you know? I currently live in Florida and take advantage of never paying, if ever, any taxes at all. Depending the year that is. Some years are wayyyy better than others in this career lol But i’m still very young, i’m nowhere near my comedic peak. I need to continue this career. But like my mom always said, “don’t be relying on these jokes forever” And she’s right, so got involved with crypto currency along the way as a hobby and now a couple years later i find myself in a funny situation. Anyone else bought bitcoin for fun in 2010 for penny’s? On 1 hand i want to be in the north east where comedy thrives. On the other hand the comfort and crazy lifestyle florida has provided me is amazing. It’s making it very hard to leave. I have moved out of Florida before only to find myself missing it like never before. So anyways, as i get older and realize Florida is aging 10x as fast with all these old people moving here from New England, i’m starting to really not enjoy this palace more and more. My ultimate goal is to make enough money from comedy and other ventures if needed to buy a big plot of land in NH, surround myself with live free or die type of folks and just crypto mine during the winter with solar panels on my land and maybe grow some crops and too to offset the taxes and live “FREE” as the state mentions while also being close enough to boston, new york and philly that i can continue this pursue of comedy. So where exactly should i be looking to tour in NH for potential living ? considering i want to be around young people from their late 20 to their mid 40s you know while also owning enough land to be able to have like house on the ranch type vibes while also not being crazy far from the big cities in the area? Thank you in advance, i’m very serious about this move.
I just read a couple articles that concerned me, and I wanted to get some feedback from the community to see if my fears can't be alleviated:
G7 is blocking Libra until regulations are all in place
IMF/G7/World Bank are creating guidelines for the creation of CBDCs. In their initial notes, it says they should be fast, completely secure with no down time, be able to integrate with legacy systems, counter corporate virtual currencies like Libra, borrow existing blockchain technology, eliminate anonymity, and retain central bank power
I'm not a fan of Libra and don't think it will ever pose a threat to crypto as we know it: Cardano, Ethereum, Bitcoin, etc. What terrifies me is what if they just create CBDCs, make it illegal for any other cryptos to be legal tender, and then everyone is forced to adopt CBDCs. Then we've effectively created our own 1984 nightmare, where cash becomes obsolete and all our money is more traceable and more controlled by centralized entities than ever before in the history of the world. This isn't the first time I've had this thought but reading articles like that have brought it to the forefront of my mind again. I'm gonna have to die in a revolution aren't I? =( So much for getting rich :P
Some Bitcoin Analysts and Prediction Today and Yesterday & Why "It's not the Price, Dummy"
This is just for fun, I generally have no strong feelings toward bitcoin price (I'm just fundamentally against zero-sum get rich schemes). But today I decided to do a little bitcoin search in news.google.com and see what today's bulls were predicting in 2018. Side note, almost all of the news articles came from crypto sites. I tried my best to stay away from them. Farming magazine telling you agriculture is the future isn't exactly shocking. To people who invest, please don't consider this as a prediction that price will fall. I'm not astute or smart enough to predict either way. The only possible use is to make sure you are more skeptic regarding predictions. Keep in mind, a rich CEO or consultant can lose 100 million and not really affect his life that much, but a 10k or 100k lose for some people can be devastating. And remember, some of these rich hedge managers don't believe their own bullshit, and hopefully, some of these quotes will emulate that. (Note, I won't waste time linking them all, but by quoting them directly, it should be easy to google) (another side note, I didn't purposely search out specific names. I went by the first names I came across, and only ignoring those that I couldn't find anything regarding crypto in past years)
Present: Business Inside: Bitcoin is like 'digital gold' and won't be used the same as a traditional currency in at least 5 years, billionaire investor Mike Novogratz says Past: On Nov, 2017, he said: "Bitcoin could ‘easily’ reach $40,000 by the end of 2018, hedge fund legend Novogratz says" 2018: "Michael Novogratz calls a bottom in cryptocurrencies" (it wasn't) Novogratz started a crypto funding in 2018. First 9 months "Mike Novogratz’s Crypto Trading Desk Lost $136 Million in Nine Months" (Bloomberg). Quarter 4: "Galaxy Digital Posts $32.9 Million in Net Loss for Q4 2019". Feb 2020 "Mike Novogratz’s Galaxy Digital Slashes 15% Staff"
Present: "For Raoul Pal, CEO of Real Vision, the bullish atmosphere had been reinforced, and further gains were more likely than ever. “There are literally only two resistances left on the #bitcoin chart - 14,000 and then the old all-time high at 20,000,” he tweeted." In a tweet today, he said, "Bitcoin is eating the world... It has become a supermassive black hole that is sucking in everything around it and destroying it. This narrative is only going to grow over the next 18 months. You see, gold is breaking down versus bitcoin...and gold investors will flip to BTC" Past: 2014: "Put them in the same kind of equation we get a value of bitcoin and that value is a million dollars. Now, you'll never hear an analyst say this—but I don't mind this—I could be wrong by 90%, and it's still worth $100,000." (to be honest, that's a bit of an impressive prediction in 2014) On the other hand, he probably didn't really believe his own prediction because in June, 2017 (when it was 2000 USD or so), he said: " “This is the most exponential move we have seen. I don’t know how far it goes, but I sold out last week… and I’ve [owned Bitcoin] since it was $200. Anything that moves exponentially, always [blows up].”" In 2016, "This view brings Pal to the asset he favors most over the next year out of bonds, equities, currencies and commodities: the dollar."
Eh, that was just two. I was hoping to mention several people, but it appears not many people are actually making predictions anymore, and anyone mentioned are basically not big people so I couldn't find much on them regarding bitcoin before 2019. So, the main thing I like to highlight are the analysts and such are going to make money whatever happens. Fund managers are playing with people's money and, as long as they are not involved in frauds, there is no real harm to them against wrong predictions. Generally, successful business people are successful because they were loud, confident, and were able to convince others that they had the right idea. Even when wrong, they bounce back. Most of us aren't like that. Some bitcoiners come here to boast when price goes up, as if the increase in price is an indication that argument against bitcoin has been proven wrong. While some people here are fanatically anti-bitcoin, I am not one of those. I have nothing against people making money (why would I be upset that people I don't know around the world became wealthier??). But since bitcoin investing is by design a zero sum game, certain people will eventually lose, and it is most likely it is the people who were listening to predictions by experts that would ultimately be financially hurt, and not the experts making the predictions. Crypto investing has been a platform where the average person works hard in his day to day life, and then brings the fruits of his labor into this field. The actual productive part of that person's life is the one outside crypto, where they had been productive for the community, and in exchange, they receive wages. Crypto investing's promise is for this wage to increase without the actual productivity. The concern is mainly that the result of all that labor will be misused by crypto "experts" who's own income (their labor) is directly linked to predictions on crypto. The above paragraph is badly explained, but the main point is that the average person brings in outside money they worked hard for, while "experts" there is generally no outside money, crypto fund management or consulting itself is their job. --- Money can be made, of course, but money being made isn't necessarily an argument for something. Bitcoin, and crypto, has for the past 1.5 decades still largely just about numbers going up. Google trend on "bitcoin" show top related queries being "bitcoin price", "bitcoin usd", "bitcoin usd price". When people come here when it hits a particular arbitrary price point thinking it's their gotcha moment, it actually just reinforces my argument that it is only about the price. Nothing in the history of human economy has ever lasted based only on the economic model of who you could resell it for at a higher price. Even DeFi's smart contracts (as much as I could understand it) is about prices going up. It's like for these people the concept of contracts are based purely on money exchanging hands, and no actual task being done. Almost all contracts globally are based on specific productive tasks being done, such as employee contract, supplier contract, property contract, and so on. Only a tiny amount of it is based on "if this currency goes up, then give me that currency" contracts. ---
Tried to save a very dumb girl from an obvious pyramid scheme today and it went over like a lead balloon. The pyramid scheme involves forex trading. The organization is out of Atlanta and it’s all over social media. It’s a get rich quick scheme basically. I did a ton of research on it by using FB. Then I went on the BBB website and sure enough, there were almost 500 complaints from people who were bamboozled. This isn’t even an MLM because there is no product. It’s a straight pyramid scheme. I wasn’t friends with her on FB, so I just messaged her bf and told him that I did some digging and found a lot of dirt on this situation. I suggested he have her look at the BBB complaints. He’s obviously went around in circles with her on this because he told me to tell her myself. I said that I didn’t know her. He goes “oh well.” Not only does the scheme want you to pay $235 upfront to join, they have you pay with bitcoin so that you can’t get your money back. They also charge $175.00 a month in fees and try to sell you all kinds of bogus trading packets. You never actually learn trading though. They just want you to recruit people. Anyway she was furious that I suggested this was a scam. I told her she could do whatever she wants. I was just looking out. Instead of offering any kind of evidence to the contrary, she tried to recruit me. I said nahhhh, I’m good. That was the end of that. She’s brainwashed I guess. She’ll have to lose her ass before she wakes up.
I dreamt that I was stuck in another Universe as a 7th grader where my parents looked slightly different and my friends were different and everything was different; hell even the sky looked different, the goal of my dream was to get back to my actual reality and I knew either I was dreaming or stuck in a different reality and couldn't wake up and I have all my memories of when I was awake. I was stuck in this universe for days before I came up with a solution to get out of it; which was to cause other people in my dream to steer away from their "deterministic" life. I came up with an idea to get my friends invested in Bitcoins because in a year Bitcoins will be made and we would be able to buy it for really cheap prices and become really rich when we get into our adult years. Most of them got on board with the idea but were still skeptical. Causing this much trouble, I got the attention of an "authority" looking old woman, who says she knows who I am and that I am in the wrong body at the wrong Universe. Somewhere along the line she said that there's infinite amount of "me" all connected through quantum entanglement in different universes. She told me she has a plan for me to get out and which was to make someone else that was already determined to die in that universe to follow me and die in front of me and I simply need to look at where they were looking. I asked her if she can take me to another timeline in my life because I missed being in it and she simply said, "no". So for a few days I had this creepy dude following me everywhere but from afar until he got hit by a car and while the driver was calling an ambulance, I ran to hold his hand while he was dying and he looked up at the sky, I laid next to him and looked up at the sky and saw these connected hexagonal white lights and for some reason was very comforting, as soon as I saw the lights is when I woke up from my lucid dream.
READ THIS NOW: My life of SHOULD'VE, WOULD'VE, COULD'VE until I discovered Crypto.
Mostly all here are invested into Crypto. We all have our own reasons, methods, values of how we invest our money. One thing in common is we all have one main goal. That is to get as much money as possible out of this with the time, and money we can spare.
That's the dam truth##.
We are all here together, and since we are all here on our own will , I want to tell you why you should be proud to hold all your crypto. I'm 40 years old. At 18 after I graduated HS I had about $7800. $1400 from my graduation party, and $6400 selling my MTG collection on EBay. I also managed a small arcade for about $350 a week. Back to my MTG collection... I sold it because it changed. The designs on the new series looked too modern. The original designs were a work of art. Anyway, I seriously wanted to hold those magic cards but I kept telling myself... "I can get them back if I want. The price isn't going to move anytime soon. The market is in slight decline. Some of these have been the same price for 2 years now." I was right, the price of my two Lotus's stayed the same for 5 more years. Not budging . 12 years later after that , those same two cards value at over $60,000ea I believe. If I held untill a few years ago or now, I would've been able to do a quick sale at $400,000. Yes at a discount. The same goes for all the first edition garbage pail kids I had.
So, what did I do with all $7800##?
I told myself I want to invest it into Microsoft. But I talked myself out of it by saying "Some people told me the market was a risk, and I had to prepare myself to lose it all" So I didn't do it. I was close, but I didn't. I could've had OVER A MILLION! I instead used that money for a school. Business computer programming. It was a waste because 90% of what they taught me came natural. I was doing basic programming at 13 for fun. I regret not going with my initial FOMO on Microsoft , I regret listening to my own FUD with the MTG cards. 7 years later, I repeated the same mistake... I had about $15,000 in the bank. I wanted to invest $10,000 in apple after I read about the release of the iphone. Instead opted to do 5k over FUD I read. It was FUD about the risk since they never made phones, and alot of people were ridiculing their idea. Then I said to myself... "Fuck that, I don't want to do this. I could do so much more with this 5k" I instead used the 15k turbocharge my transam, add a racing transmission, tires, rims, new stero system, and I took a 2 week vacation ...GONE! I got what I wanted. Got laid a bunch of times, went to car shows. That could of been $500k by now. To top this off, I missed out on a quick $78,000 win at the racetrack because if my own FUD. Horses. I lost $200, and was left with only I $5 that night. I decided, "you know what, fuck it, I'm going to do a completely off the wall wild bet. I did a completely wild bet for $5. I picked all longshots in what they call a "Superfecta"(4 horses in that exact order 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th place prediction. 1 minute before the race started, I Cancelled the bet. I told myself ... "this is stupid, 99:1, 78:1, 56:1, 38:1 long shots coming out in this order? THATS INSANE...Why am I blowing 5 away? Fuck that, I instead put $5 on the 10:1 to win hopefully my to maybe get $50 back " Well. Guess what? The 3nd largest superfecta payout in history. No body won it! It came out in the original order I out it in that's to a series of freak disqualifications in the race. I hate myself for cancelling that. But hey, maybe that happened for a reason. Maybe I wouldn't have ended up living on another country for 2 years. Learning another language. You see So many times in my life I had the perfect opportunity, and I didn't take it. I let Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt make my Choices for me. Then came crypto currency. In late 2016, a client of mine told me he got rich off Bitcoin. He raved about it . He told me about ripple, ETH etc. I invested in his recommendation about XRP when it was $0.005. it FLEW UP from there. I took some of that massive gain and bought other things, and those FLEW. For someone like me, it was LOTS of money off my original $500. Sure this was a "lucky time" to get in but that's not the point I'm trying to make here. The point is that I finally did it! I didn't let FUD fuck with my head. I just did it. I cashed out already in late 2017. About 90% of what I gained. Payed off all my debt, and my truck, and had another $30k or so to put a down payment on a house. If I didn't just stick with my guns and let the FUD get to me, then I would still be in a whole bunch of debt. Especially with this whole lockdown bullshit. But now.... NOW ,I never again I will tell myself... "IF ONLY I DID THAT WHEN I HAD THE CHANCE" NOW I NEVER HAVE TO SAY THAT AGAIN! I DONT GIVE A SHIT IF IT TANKS ANOTHER 50% FROM HERE because it's all house money. I NOW NEVER HAVE TO SAY ... "IF ONLY I DID IT" NOW I DID! Crypto Currency is severely undervalued. Its manipulated down right now. This about this logic, how can something increasingly popular with more and more support by the day drop in price? Crypto isn't human. Bitcoin isnt getting fired over sexual harrassement, there isn't a corporate takeover. Its manipulation. I don't care if this shit takes 5 years to recover. I'm holding . I don't care if BTC dips to $1000. I'm holding till this MCAP tops 10 trillion. so if you love your crypto, hold that F#%KING SHIT! The lesson here is never let FUD make choices for you. Stick to your original beliefs. If there's a voice in the back of your head telling you "I want to do this", then Listen to that voice. That's you! Listen to yourself, not the new voice that intrudes after your choice.
A Friend of mine recently bought his First Bitcoin and asked for some tips on how to keep it safe... Thought I'd share them here as well!
Here are a few things you can do to keep your Bitcoin safe: #1 Use Hardware Wallet: Hardware Wallets are considered one the safest solution to store your bitcoin. Your private Keys stay offline so chances of a hacker stealing your bitcoin are relatively low. Wallets like Trezor and Ledger are two of the most popular wallets currently in the market. #2 Never Store your Bitcoin on Exchanges: Most of the major Bitcoin hacks have always taken place at an exchange. Such platforms are always the high target for cybercriminals thus storing your bitcoin/crypto there is not a good idea. Always withdraw your assets once the trade is made and store them in your personal wallet(s). #3 Use separate wallets for daily use and savings: It is always wise to keep your daily use bitcoin and savings in separate wallets. If you are using bitcoin for daily transaction your wallet will spend a much higher time online, which increases its risk of getting hacked. Only keep a small amount in such wallets. Keeping your extra bitcoin separate protects it at such events. #4 Keep Backup: If anything to your device or wallet, the only to recover your funds is through a backup so make sure you have one. #5 Store your Private Keys/Wallet Seed Offline andNeverShare them: Make sure that your private keys are securely stored offline. This is the most secure way to protect your wallet from hackers. The same goes for your Wallet Seed. Never store your wallet seed online, in case of a cyber-attack you risk exposing your seed to the hacker if they are stored online. #6 Never click links or send your bitcoin to unsolicited schemes: If the recent Twitter hack has taught us anything its that we should never send bitcoin to 'quick-rich' or similar sensational schemes no matter the source. Always verify the source and get more information before sending your bitcoin. Source:Bitcoin & Security: How to keep your BTC Secure
These stories of 10 Bitcoin millionaires prove that there’s nothing impossible, and a smart investment made once can make you go from zero to hero. Cover image via www.123rf.com Let’s find out how people managed to gather their Bitcoin wealth. Yes, you can still get rich with bitcoin. But of. A few years ago the main problem with Bitcoin was transaction sizes and the cost of these transactions. Read the complete article to know more. ADVERTISEMENT [email protected] Submit Press Release ; Submit Guest Post ... Can you still get rich with Bitcoin? Many people have this misconception that you need to own one whole Bitcoin in order to achieve Getting rich with cryptocurrency (Bitcoin) is still possible because the blockchain technology is improving every day, and it is a digital currency rather than a paper one. The technology used in Bitcoin is improving each minute, and one can improve their ... Yes, you can. Of course there are many factors that determine how you got “rich” while mining Bitcoin. (Did you start off being “rich”? I mean, you need to have some money to start up). There are very very interesting factors at play when you get ... Bitcoin officially a potentially harmful 'get rich quick' scheme There is evidence of consumers being harmed by Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies like Ether - but it's not actually a huge problem yet
Bitcoin Investing: How rich can you get realistically ...
This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue 👇🏻Support the channel by using my affiliate links below👇🏻 Exchanges I'm using: Coinbase FIAT https://www.coinbase.com/join/59398125002bcc03276297d6 Bin... To become rich with Bitcoin is not as easy as it seems. Most probably Bitcoin won't do a 1000x during the next bullmarket anymore. Sadly those times are over... 18- year-old Erik Finman made his own rules when he invested in Bitcoin and left high school to start his own business Learn how to get rich with Bitcoin with virtually No Risk! Bitcoin Bitcoin investment Bitcoin profits Bitcoin mining Bitcoin trading Bitcoin Arbitrage Cryptocurrency Digital Currency ...