Bitcoin discussion and news

[littlebabyjesus]

I wonder how they are defining "fake" .

There are certainly bots running on centralised exchanges, I had a go at setting one up myself as a side project. But they arent fake as such, they are just following an algorithmic strategy, rather than an actual human pressing a button. I smell human supremacy here tbh.


OK, I'll have a go.

StakerOne will probably take issue with me here, but IMHO all the fiat value of crypto is really bitcoin, just diffused into different projects. If you take the total crypto market, the 4 year cycle holds true. The reason it holds true is because the fiat value of bitcoin has a relationship with the summed fiat cost of providing energy to the bitcoin network since its inception, but the four year halvings are causing spikes.

The current relationship between the fiat price of energy and bitcoin is not linear for all kinds of reasons, mainly because very little energy has so far been supplied. As btc started to hit 10% of global energy production (currrently 0.55%), it the volitility will decrease significantly. By the time it attains 50%, fiat will be a distant memory.

The fact that it's currently 0.55% (perhaps a bit less right now since this year's slump) is itself a staggering number given its inutility. Your idea that the energy used to solve a pointless puzzle is somehow transferred to the tokens is quite wrongheaded (magic!), but it is interesting to me to read some of the defences of this energy waste.

Here's one from last year. Not sure the author realises what he's really saying here. Don't worry - bitcoin's built-in uselessness means miners will lose incentive eventually.

the protocol is built to halve the issuance-driven component of miner revenue every four years — so unless the price of Bitcoin doubles every four years in perpetuity (which economics suggests is essentially impossible for any currency), that share of miner revenue will eventually decay to zero. And as far as transaction fees, Bitcoin’s natural constraints on the number of transactions it can process (fewer than a million per day) combined with users’ finite tolerance for paying fees limit the growth potential of this as a revenue source. We can expect some miners to continue operating regardless, in exchange for these transaction fees alone — and in fact, the network depends on that to keep functioning — but if profit margins fall, the financial incentive to invest in mining will naturally decrease.

How Much Energy Does Bitcoin Actually Consume?

The rest of the article is mostly squirming and bullshit. Somehow the energy used for mining shouldn't be added to the audit when considering transaction costs. Note how he calls it a 'monetary system' despite admitting that it has a strict limit on transactions per day. The delusions run deep. The self-deception is kind of fascinating to witness. And this is in the Harvard Business Review. The world has truly gone mad. Again. Should we declare war on sparrows next?

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

LTDs, PLCs, LLPs etc are all regulated (by companies house and hmrc), as are co-ops (by the co-op society as well as the other two since they must also be some form of legal organisation). Why wouldn't DAOs be regulated?

I would imagine that things like Prime and Defi Safety will grow into regulatory DAOs.
Providing evidence that they confirm to an agreed set of rules, but where people are free to choose others that dont.
So for example you could have voluntary regulations that DAOs sign up for where for example, they pledge to have no interaction with Tornado Cash.

There are a load of shit, scammy and downright dangerous smart contracts out there. There are also some wonderful and innovative contracts that do amazing things, People should be free to determine their own path and take their own risks,

 

[StakerOne]

You think you have expertise in subjects that people literally spend their lives studying, and you know literally nothing about those subjects.

I don't. You can't just build up barriers telling people that if they want to change things they need to invest their time into a disclipline etc.

The whole basis of regulation is that people CANNOT just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and thus achieve 1 and 2 merely by the sweat of their brow.

This basis of regulation that you speak of was established before the internet and smart phones became a thing.

There will always be power relations embedded into any system. And there will always be knowledge disparity.

Indeed. Which is why normal people who can help themselves find they are barred from pulling themse;ves up.

Who funds the FCA? The people who it is supposed to regulate. Now if you can't see how that has a corrupting and toxic effect on how the FCA views an emerging market that it has no income stream from, then you I'll say right here right now, that the system that you in has corrupted you and your motivations.

need to bring you back to this question:

If a government can organise itself into a collection of DAOs (Which it can, to simply mirror the functions it has now).

What is the difference between a government that has become a collection of DAOs and a collection of DAOs that the people voted should be a government?

I mean, let’s just go and tell Jack the 21 year-old builder’s mate, who left school at 16 and has the average reading age of the country, which is nine years old, that he just has to make sense of 2000 lines of code in order to trust that the union representing him isn’t ripping him off. No problems with that at all.

I've never done that. I said that the public have a number of options, including reading the code, but after that, there are other things that users can turn to. It's not like I've never listed them.

We have auditors and insurance.

You would like to see a regulator. Ok fair enough.

We have our differences over what should and shouldn't be regulated. But we'll park that up for now.

Who decides who the regulator is? At the moment, it's a government. In the cryptoverse, those that run smart contracts can provide 3 levels of protection, auditing, insurance and justice DAOs.

At the end of the day none of it matters, because if people don't like it then tough. No one can disrupte a DAO.

Thankfully, the market will send smart contract providers into self regulation in so far that independent smart projects will have to appoint justice DAOs that the market (network community, or even network nation) respects.

To summarise, a network nation, just like a normal one, will protect it's citizens, including Jack, in order to function.

Now. Let's see how much British sovereignty means to you.

 

[stdP]

There are a load of shit, scammy and downright dangerous smart contracts out there. There are also some wonderful and innovative contracts that do amazing things, People should be free to determine their own path and take their own risks,

...except your average user doesn't have the ability to determine a scammy smart contract from a legit one by themselves, and there's almost zero recourse to getting their money back if they pick the wrong one.

 

[StakerOne]

LTDs, PLCs, LLPs etc are all regulated (by companies house and hmrc), as are co-ops (by the co-op society as well as the other two since they must also be some form of legal organisation). Why wouldn't DAOs be regulated?

It depends on what the DAO actually does.

I think there is a misunderstanding between myself and others.

When I say that DAOs don't need to be regulated, they don't need to be regulated directly just because they are DAOs in their basic form.

I would guess that DAOs that trade in real world things might be able to get away as being a sole trader, but in the end might require someone to register a ltd company that lists the DAO and/or it's contents as an asset or assets.

Why would a company want to own a DAO? So that it can easily keep track of their assets and do business on the blockchain and raise money with their collateral easily.

 

[StakerOne]

...except your average user doesn't have the ability to determine a scammy smart contract from a legit one by themselves, and there's almost zero recourse to getting their money back if they pick the wrong one.

People catch up with the tech.

Don't need to know how to code.

1. Is the smart contract audited? No - red flag, avoid.
2. Is the smart contract insurable? No - Don't touch now, wait until it is.

 

[StakerOne]

I would imagine that things like Prime and Defi Safety will grow into regulatory DAOs.

This.

 

[StakerOne]

With your system @StakerOne there is a fair chance that at somepoint you could have KYC troubles with coinbase and be unable to convert to sterling, maybe a bit of tornadoed cash came your way, or a fuck up at the passport office leaves you in identity limbo.

Paying for stuff using VISA via coinbase is a start. It's not ideal.

People are backing down re tornado as it's common knowledge that there is a Tornado Cash troll.

In my utopia there would be algo sterling that everyone accepts.

 

[kabbes]

I don't. You can't just build up barriers telling people that if they want to change things they need to invest their time into a disclipline etc.


This basis of regulation that you speak of was established before the internet and smart phones became a thing.

Indeed. Which is why normal people who can help themselves find they are barred from pulling themse;ves up.

Who funds the FCA? The people who it is supposed to regulate. Now if you can't see how that has a corrupting and toxic effect on how the FCA views an emerging market that it has no income stream from, then you I'll say right here right now, that the system that you in has corrupted you and your motivations.

need to bring you back to this question:

If a government can organise itself into a collection of DAOs (Which it can, to simply mirror the functions it has now).

What is the difference between a government that has become a collection of DAOs and a collection of DAOs that the people voted should be a government?



I've never done that. I said that the public have a number of options, including reading the code, but after that, there are other things that users can turn to. It's not like I've never listed them.

We have auditors and insurance.

You would like to see a regulator. Ok fair enough.

We have our differences over what should and shouldn't be regulated. But we'll park that up for now.

Who decides who the regulator is? At the moment, it's a government. In the cryptoverse, those that run smart contracts can provide 3 levels of protection, auditing, insurance and justice DAOs.

At the end of the day none of it matters, because if people don't like it then tough. No one can disrupte a DAO.

Thankfully, the market will send smart contract providers into self regulation in so far that independent smart projects will have to appoint justice DAOs that the market (network community, or even network nation) respects.

To summarise, a network nation, just like a normal one, will protect it's citizens, including Jack, in order to function.

Now. Let's see how much British sovereignty means to you.

You know that you’re asking me to choose between whether regulation should be via accountable democratic institutions or opaque private for-profit organisations? I’ll take the state, thanks.

 

[StakerOne]

You know that you’re asking me to choose between whether regulation should be via accountable democratic institutions or opaque private for-profit organisations? I’ll take the state, thanks.

What makes an organisation "for profit" ?

DAOs are democratic if they allow voting.

Right now a small board at the FCA has the power to ban financial products and by God they have, without any kind of vote in parliament, without anyone of us getting a say.

Now if you want to change that through lobbying parliament, no chance.

In my utopia, the FCA would be just another DAO and there would be other DAOs that can get rid of it and replace if it gets out of line.

 

[kabbes]

What makes an organisation "for profit" ?

DAOs are democratic if they allow voting.

Right now a small board at the FCA has the power to ban financial products and by God they have, without any kind of vote in parliament, without anyone of us getting a say.

Now if you want to change that through lobbying parliament, no chance.

In my utopia, the FCA would be just another DAO and there would be other DAOs that can get rid of it and replace if it gets out of line.

You’re saying that you want to rely on private audit firms to do your regulation for you. Why would I trust a private audit firm? One of the roles of the state is the protection of its populace. If they fail in that duty, there is a long history of the consequences. There is accountability. Who is this private firm accountable to?

 

[StakerOne]

You’re saying that you want to rely on private audit firms to do your regulation for you.

Nope. A DAO isn't a company if it's job is to oversee another DAO.

One of the roles of the state is the protection of its populace.

Did that come about because your noble ancestors imposed it on my savage backward ancestors, or because as society human beings naturally gravitate towards justice?

If they fail in that duty, there is a long history of the consequences.

But they are failing in their duty.

The FCA benefits the banks and other established institutions, not normal people and they are accountable to a government and parliament that are even more corrupt.

If they fail in that duty, there is a long history of the consequences. There is accountability.

hahaha, you do like a larf don't you? By long history of consquences, if you mean some fines that don't approach the level of fraud, then no there isn't real consquences and there is no accountablity to normal people.

There isn't a firm or even a private DAO but over time, there will be a number of DAOs.

This is all getting silly. Because you subscribe to a world where there is no choice. There is one regulator and if we don't like it, we can lump it.

But now, we can chose what we want in the cryptoverse. If we don't like an auditing firm, we can always choose another one. It's all based on reputation, rather than a government using the treat of force to make us respect their authority.

Look, I know you're a closet nationalist who hates British people becoming a citizen of the world, participating in systems are quite liberating, but you'll get used to the fact that people are free. We can do what the fuck we want.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Paying for stuff using VISA via coinbase is a start. It's not ideal.

People are backing down re tornado as it's common knowledge that there is a Tornado Cash troll.

In my utopia there would be algo sterling that everyone accepts.

Tornado Cash is sanctioned by the US Government, any US citizen suspected of using it is facing up to 30 years in jail,
The only troll is the US government.
I;m curious. If you had to choose, really choose, to use exclusively Ethereum, Bitcoin or fiat currency (of any denomination) which would ou choose?

 

[kabbes]

“Don’t worry about these 20000 lines of code governing your life, just because you don’t understand what they are, where they came from or how they work! They are algorithmically audited in a way nobody is going to explain to you by this other 100,000 lines of code you don’t understand! All overseen by a shadowy cabal of very very rich people! You’ll be fine!”

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

kabbes do you use online banking?
Because you aint never going to see their code.

If there is a fuck up you have to rely on them to sort it out. If Alice has got some savings, a spouse, siblings friends that can sub you its a minor inconvenience, but for Bob using his last tenner on topups to get through to the bank its a disaster And its not under your control.

In crypto everything you do is under you choose your own risk.

 

[kabbes]

My bank is regulated to fuck by the BoE and FCA. That’s precisely my point. No way would I trust them without that transparent regulation.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

kabbes do you use online banking?
Because you aint never going to see their code.

If there is a fuck up you have to rely on them to sort it out. If Alice has got some savings, a spouse, siblings friends that can sub you its a minor inconvenience, but for Bob using his last tenner on topups to get through to the bank its a disaster And its not under your control.

In crypto everything you do is under you choose your own risk.

But I don't want to have everything I do under my own risk. I want to have my money in a place where there are third parties to oversee the process and back-ups if things go wrong - including if I fuck up: forget a password, lose a bank card, mislay documentation, etc. Frankly, it's something I don't want to have to think about too much.

We're in a bit of an absurd situation on this thread now where some posters are called authoritarian or fiat fetishists or whatever just because they want some basic protections from bad shit happening to their money, insurance policies, etc, and they're happy with having those protections handled by someone else, thanks.

The counterargument - you need autonomy in order to protect yourself from malicious actions by government - is purely hypothetical. Yes, that could happen. It's far more likely in the short to medium term here in the UK that any intervention in private finances from government will be a positive one, such as underwriting savings in a crisis as happened in 2008 (happened too much in 2008 imo, but that's another story).

 

[StakerOne]

“Don’t worry about these 20000 lines of code governing your life, just because you don’t understand what they are, where they came from or how they work! They are algorithmically audited in a way nobody is going to explain to you by this other 100,000 lines of code you don’t understand! All overseen by a shadowy cabal of very very rich people! You’ll be fine!”

You don't worry about billions of lines of code that governs your life. Nor do you care about who has your data. In cryptopia, you've got self custody not only of your money, but all of your data too.

 

[StakerOne]

My bank is regulated to fuck by the BoE and FCA. That’s precisely my point. No way would I trust them without that transparent regulation.

But it's not just your bank though is it? Your web browser, PC and mobile phone would have millions of lines of code between them. Look at the sheer amount of trust you put into your web browser and yet you don't lose any sleep over it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Anyhow, boring myself with my replies to this nonsense now. So on to something else. Forbes reckons more than half of all bitcoin trades are fake - intended purely to pump up the price.

1. More than half of all reported trading volume is likely to be fake or non-economic. Forbes estimates the global daily bitcoin volume for the industry was $128 billion on June 14. That is 51% less than the $262 billion one would get by taking the sum of self-reported volume from multiple sources.
2. Tether, the world’s largest stablecoin, continues to be a dominant player in the crypto trading economy, especially when it comes to trades against bitcoin. Its current market capitalization is $68 billion, despite questions about its reserves.
3. In terms of how much bitcoin activity takes place at these firms, 21 crypto exchanges generate $1 billion or more in daily trading activity, while the next 33 exchanges had volume between $200 million and $999 million across all contract types, spot, futures and perpetuals. Perpetual futures, or perpetual swaps as they are also known, are futures contracts that don’t require investors to roll over their positions. Binance is the clear leader, with a 27% market share, followed by FTX. Looking only at spot bitcoin, the top position is shared by Binance, FTX, and OKX. Chicago-based CME Group is the market leader in bitcoin futures trading.
4. The biggest problem areas regarding fake volume are firms that tout big volume but operate with little or no regulatory oversight that would make their figures more credible, notably Binance, MEXC Global and Bybit. Altogether, the lesser regulated exchanges in our study account for approximately $89 billion of the true volume (they claim $217 billion).
5. The creation of new trading assets and products such as stablecoins and perpetual futures adds complications for national authorities seeking to regulate crypto markets. Major U.S. exchanges hardly utilize these instruments or contracts in any of their trading. However, offshore exchanges make significant use of them as ways to synthetically create U.S. dollar liquidity on their platforms (they cannot get U.S. bank accounts).

More Than Half Of All Bitcoin Trades Are Fake

The idea that any of this shit is anything other than a fucking scam to make rich people richer is laughable. 'bitcoin futures' ffs.

 

[StakerOne]

Anyhow, boring myself with my replies to this nonsense now. So on to something else. Forbes reckons more than half of all bitcoin trades are fake - intended purely to pump up the price.



More Than Half Of All Bitcoin Trades Are Fake

The idea that any of this shit is anything other than a fucking scam to make rich people richer is laughable. 'bitcoin futures' ffs.

The wash trading of bitcoin happens on centralised unreglated crypto exchanges, just as wash trading happens on centralised unregulated FX exchanges.

It's not the actual assets that are a scam, it's the people who run dodgy exchanges and then get up to all sorts of dodgy shit behind the scenes.

You have nothing to say if it's wash trading in the USD or GBP but when it involves crypto, you apply a different standard.

In the UK, such exchanges have to register with the FCA, but people like Binance do all sorts of dodgy stuff to deal with UK retail customers, yet stay out of the reach of the FCA.

My answer to this is simple. Use smart contract decentralised exchanges to trade both crypto-currencies and foreign currency. No one can cheat you with was trading as everything is done on chain.

As I said, mental gymnastics. One minute you're very "concerned" that people should be "protected", but when people show you blockchain solutions, your "concern" evaporates, with you pretending that society shouldn't care about protecting so called "greedy" capitalists.

Personally I think you're a rather disgusting nationalist pig who wants to keep the status quo.

The idea of global citizens making a better life for themselves out of reach of government interferance, sickens you to the stomach.

oink oink.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Currency traders of the world unite!

You have nothing to lose but your blockchains.

 

[StakerOne]

Currency traders of the world unite!

You have nothing to lose but your blockchains.

Cool.
So....

1. Cryptos aren't a scam. Scams typically arise because people given half a chance, take the piss with centralised power, like being given cart blanche over a centralised exchange.
2. You need to stop pretending to care about people when all you want is a go on the centralised power gravy train. You're virtue signalling about caring, isn't fooling anyone.

 

[yield]

The Strange Case of Nakamoto's Bitcoin - Part 1 - Sal Bayat

In actuality, categorizing the mother of all crypto as Ponzi or pyramid is an attempt to fit a square peg into a round hole. Bitcoin is neither, it belongs to a new genus of fraud. It has several specific qualities that make it unique, and many others that it shares with known forms of...

salbayat.org

Odd Duck

Like a Ponzi, Bitcoin doesn’t specifically promote a need for liquidity or sales. Like a pyramid, Bitcoin promotes, proselytizes, and preaches as realizing returns is dependent on new converts.

Like a Ponzi, Bitcoin doesn’t sell the rights to acquire new members or sell products. Like a pyramid, the right to sell something can be purchased, the ‘investment’ made during the mining process bestows Miners with the the right to sell the bitcoin they acquire.

Like a Ponzi, a Bitcoin investor’s returns don’t depend on their direct recruitment efforts. Like a pyramid, a Bitcoin investors ability to realize returns depends on transactions with counter-parties recruited into the scheme.

Like a Ponzi, Bitcoin guarantees returns to investors. Like a pyramid, Bitcoin investors entirely depend on recruitment to realize returns.

 

[StakerOne]

The Strange Case of Nakamoto's Bitcoin - Part 1 - Sal Bayat

In actuality, categorizing the mother of all crypto as Ponzi or pyramid is an attempt to fit a square peg into a round hole. Bitcoin is neither, it belongs to a new genus of fraud. It has several specific qualities that make it unique, and many others that it shares with known forms of...

salbayat.org

A pyramid suggest a heirachy. It's just a commodity. If I buy £20 worth of bitcoin, does any bitcoiner get any kind of commission?

If bitcoin is a pyramid schme then so is gold.

Now if you say that gold is tangible, then my next question would be:

If that's the difference, then are you saying that people have never run a pyramid or ponzi involving stuff that's tangible?

For something to be a ponzi, a centralised entity would need to be paying earlier investers. That isn't happening here.

For something to be a pyramid, then people would need to recruit and the money would need to be distributed upwards. It isn't.

Bitcoin is bought and sold on many markets as a commodity. There's no conspiracy to amongst bitcoiners to send money up some kind of heirachy.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The most accurate description, imo, is 'greater fool theory'. It's a bit technical, so here's a diagram showing how it works.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

A car is superior to a bike,

Well, I guess we can also add this to the list of things you’re wrong about.

 

[StakerOne]

Well, I guess we can also add this to the list of things you’re wrong about.

Another plus for cars, is that they enrage sanctimonious virtual signalling tick-box nutters who masquarade as cuddly freedom loving socialists, when in reality they're closet fascist pigs who are desperate to the maintain the status quo, down to their sneering hatred of regular working class folk.

 

[StakerOne]

The most accurate description, imo, is 'greater fool theory'. It's a bit technical, so here's a diagram showing how it works.

View attachment 339912

Rational sensible people could take all of that seroiusly if bitcoin didn't have loads of utility.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Another plus for cars, is that they enrage sanctimonious virtual signalling tick-box nutters who masquarade as cuddly freedom loving socialists, when in reality they're closet fascist pigs who are desperate to the maintain the status quo, down to their sneering hatred of regular working class folk.

Definitely not a cult.