You said bitcoins future is dependent on Trump. That’s why I said that’s is an hyperbolic statement unless you want to argue semantics, but I believe what most people will read from such a statement is that it fully depends on it for it’s survival. A 50% or even 90% crash doesn’t mean that BTC is/will be dead. It’s not ideal ofc and it will delay future progress but fundamentally nothing really changed other than the price which is setback 1/2 years.
The US or any government can’t control BTC. They can maybe influence its price short term but they can’t control it. They can’t prevent transactions, freeze accounts, print more bitcoin or effectively ban it’s use. China has “tried” so many times it even became a meme. They can try to do some of these things but in a way that only makes the argument for Bitcoin stronger.
This goes a bit into what I was going to say on the posts from a few days ago. In the end that’s as close as what you are going to get for Bitcoins intrinsic value, the combination of the technology + adoption. And adoption isn’t just vendors and people using Bitcoin for everyday transactions. It’s all the nodes all over the world, operating 24/7 while not being controlled by one or a few individuals (the miners are paid actors that have no real say in how things are run).
And yes I do not agree, but if we all agreed and just didn’t discuss the why, there would be 2% of the content on this website and many others
Well, you are right that govt cannot freeze etc. But it is not what I said either. I was talking about the price action and that’s about it.
Regarding adoption -: so just that we are clear. When you say adoption, you mean it doesn’t matter that eventually no one uses BTC for anything IF there are more nodes operating 24x7 and keep moving BTC back and forth between owners?
I think adoption should ideally reflect use which is for something third party can pay for. Otherwise it’s just production
ok but then Bitcoin is not unique in that scenario, in the sense that it isn’t the only asset in the world that Trump or any other US President could tank if he so desired. Gold, USD, a vast number/% of US and even foreign companies etc
That is to say that IMO it’s not really a good argument against Bitcoin if it also applies to the “alternatives”.
I didn’t say that. This was my quote:
Now, theoretically you could have a perfectly healthy network where no one is even transacting anything. The Bitcoin protocol would continue chugging along just fine, because miners would still get paid (just without any fees) and nodes would still validate blocks. In a practical and real world scenario this would be weird if not impossible, as a scenario where BTC price is high and nobody is doing ANY transactions is just not really feasible.
My point was that transactions aren’t the only metric. For something that is considered a store of value I think it’s normal to have periods where transactions are reduced for some reason. But you still have over 20k bitcoin nodes doing their job, and that isn’t meaningless. You still have currently roughly a 90 Million dollar being spent securing your network/transactions per day and that isn’t meaningless either.
When you have money in your bank you still get value out of the service that the bank provides, which is to store and safeguard your money even if you don’t move it for idk how long.
Of course vendors accepting Bitcoin payments (whether on-chain or not) and people making such payments are still a good metric to use when gauging adoption if done with the right context.
Right . Most assets could be tanked
And I am not saying this to have an argument against Bitcoin. But Bitcoin was formed as an establishment and an alternative world unlike other assets. So this is a bit ironic, that’s all
Alright.
So we just have different views of adoption
You are of view that adoption is about people putting their wealth in BTC and trusting it as store of value. Which of course adds transactions and blocks
And for me it was about using BTC as means of utility
And it is. But the Bitcoin never promised, can or will be able to control it’s price. Everything else, (that it did promise) is true. It can’t be controlled externally, it can’t be seized, it can’t be banned etc etc The price is external, it is misleading to attribute (or try to) as a flaw IMO. Again we can argue semantics but it sometimes feels like we discuss things that are not so meaningful.
For me, and many people, adoption is both. That’s my argument. It’s not just 1 or just the other.
And one small note, blocks will go in 10min intervals regardless of adoption (any definition) and transactions. As long as there’s electricity/internet and at least 1 miner and a couple of nodes that will keep on happening. Regardless of price, as it did since it’s inception where 1 bitcoin was a fraction of a cent.
Anti money laundering rules are key tools for fighting against organised crime and corrupt regimes seeking to shelter ill-gotten gains. Such actors cause untold suffering and can take over the legal economy. Please understand that there is a real need for anti money laundering banking rules.
I feel like the basic story of Bitcoin over the last five years or so has been “more people — normal people, exchange-traded funds, corporate treasuries, institutional investors, etc. — are going to become comfortable with Bitcoin, so they will buy it, so its price will go up.” That story has played out, more types of investors have come around on Bitcoin, and its price has gone up.
How does that story end? What happens when everyone is comfortable with Bitcoin and owns some? The other day, I mentioned a Bloomberg article with the headline “Crypto Surge Lures Final Holdouts,” and while I’m not sure I would take “final” literally, it’s plausible that we’re more than halfway from Bitcoin’s foundation to maximal adoption and respectability. What happens if we get there? Possible answers include:
Widespread adoption of Bitcoin will make it increasingly valuable, people who allocate 1% or 2% of their portfolio to Bitcoin will say “you know what really this should be 10%,” they’ll keep buying Bitcoin and it will keep going up. Bitcoin will be something like the stock market, an index of global economic growth that keeps going up as the economy grows.
Widespread adoption of Bitcoin will make it stable: People who buy Bitcoin thinking “this is a stable store of value in an uncertain world” will be correct, and if they ever need to sell some Bitcoin to pay expenses, they’ll find a ready buyer who wants to save money in the form of Bitcoin. And the price of Bitcoin will stay stable at, you know, pick a number, $100,000 or more, say. Bitcoin will be something like cash, or gold, a reliable store of value and a small portion of most people’s financial assets.
Widespread adoption of Bitcoin will cause a collapse: The only reason to buy Bitcoin now at $100,000 is because you think that, in a month, some institutional-investor holdout will capitulate and decide to buy Bitcoin, and you’ll be able to sell it to them at $110,000. But once there’s no one left to capitulate, there’ll be no demand for Bitcoin, and its price will collapse.
These theories are trying to find reason in price action of bitcoin.
The facts are
BTC is up 110% in 2024 and
it’s down 14% since FOMC conference.
MSTR (the leveraged product) is down 35% this week
These are not signs of stability or store of value.
This is sign of a risk asset and investors should treat it like individual stock picking (trading or long term)
El Salvador gets IMF loan (with conditions to get rid of Chivo wallet and not make Bitcoin mandatory) and increases Bitcoin buys for its Bitcoin strategic reserve.
LoL
By reading and partipating to this forum, you confirm you have read and agree with the disclaimer presented on http://www.mustachianpost.com/
En lisant et participant à ce forum, tu confirmes avoir lu et être d'accord avec l'avis de dégagement de responsabilité présenté sur http://www.mustachianpost.com/fr/
Durch das Lesen und die Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestätigst du, dass du den auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ dargestellten Haftungsausschluss gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist.
…