The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
I take a completely different view on Bitcoin. I think the scarcity argument is fake, since the 21 million limit is an artificial and easily overcome by protocol changes, and although there's a hundred million satoshi's in a Bitcoin, what stops them subdividing satoshi's with a hundred million of another artificially invented sub token?
DeFi is fundamentally insecure since anyone can start a node and add themselves to the network, giving them access to all the information stored, with encryption inadequate protection in itself. An entity could potentially gain network superiority in a proof of work network, with enough resource, and control/change transaction data.
Because DeFi is based on OpenAi models, the responsibility lies solely on the individual to deal with the technical aspects of the transaction, with no recourse when they make a mistake and lose their money. The whole DeFi model breaks down when you start adding the protections built into traditional finance, and if people wanting protection direct their transactions through big institutions, it's no longer DeFi.
Don't get me wrong there is a place for some sort of CBDC's, but they'll be managed and regulated through centralised Exchanges, with the added protection of being backed by institutions and Government.
The argument's promoting DeFi and crypto currencies gloss over the facts, promoting the "benefits" and completely disregarding the pitfalls. The whole narrative doesn't hold up well to basic scrutiny, it's surprising the music's still playing and there are still chairs that haven't been pulled away. If the Bitcoin price doesn't significantly climb from here, maybe the next halving could hammer the nails into the Bitcoin coffin
In theory it should be easy for him to prove it, assuming he can access any of the initial Bitcoin associated with the first Blocks. I don't see anyone else coming forward claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto though; I suspect he is, but he has to prove it.
Non of it surprises me. I've always said the technology is useful, and that's where the value lies, there's no value in the individual tokens based on that technology and created out of thin air.
I think this highlights the issues with unregulated tokens in relation to ownership, and the problems with a make it up as you go along Open Source model. The way it's going, developers, exchanges and even miners might have accept a duty of care to Crypto holders, which could open up the claim floodgates for lost BTC tokens. Things like this could kill unbacked Crypto if the floodgates open wide enough
Thanks, i'll take a look.
I watched the video. I haven't seen anyone else claiming to be Satoshi, so there's probably a good chance he's being honest. If I was him I'd want my Bitcoin from those early Blocks, but this is the problem with Crypto Tokens when you lose your private key. The developers are the Gods of Crypto and have the power over the Blockchains, which is why he's going after them in court to get his Bitcoin.
Excellent article DS, it echoes in more detail what I stated in my "20 Jun 2023 10:39" post.
Unbacked Crypto of any flavour makes no sense to me, the whole thing feels like collective madness. The only thing keeping BTC up, in my opinion, is the amount of big money that's been pumped in by the mega whales. Firms like Blackrock, are just eyeing an opportunity to suck money in from an untapped source and they probably don't care if Crypto is a good investment or not. As far as the vested interests, in the wider Crypto community are concerned, they only care about keeping the flow of money going.
Fidelity and Schwab have joined the bandwagon today too, what could possibly go wrong?
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/20/crypto-exchange-backed-by-schwab-and-fidelity-goes-live.html
Get ready for the litigation that'll happen somewhere down the road.
Her website:
https://bitcoindefense.org/
In the video she claims this is a threat to Open Source software in general but I'm not sure that's correct, apart from Open Source relating to Crypto. The issue with Bitcoin is the loss of money, for people who've lost their Bitcoin due to loss of their private key. This highlights a massive problem with Crypto in general, since you can lose your money due to loss of your private keys, through hardware failure and other reasons, with no means to recover those funds. If you lose your money in a regulated bank there are methods and laws allowing you to recover those funds, with the Banks responsible for making good losses under most circumstances.
The problem with Bitcoin and other Crypto's, is the control developers and mega whales have over the Blockchain. I have no idea what the court case is about, but what if you mined a load of blocks in the early days of Bitcoin and developers subsequently made changes that somehow altered the private keys for those early Blocks? I'm not saying this is what happened in Craig Wrights case, but imagine how you'd feel if you'd processed Blocks in the early days and a subsequent Fork somehow stopped you accessing your Bitcoin.
Good find DS. Craig Wright has claimed he is Satoshi Nakamoto and it seems he wants his Bitcoin back. If he is Satoshi Nakamoto and he's somehow lost access to the early Bitcoin Blocks he processed, I can understand why he want his Bitcoin. I haven't heard of anyone else coming forward and claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/self-proclaimed-bitcoin-inventors-25-bln-lawsuit-can-go-trial-london-court-2023-02-03/
Yep, all the regulation is preparation for releasing Central Bank Stable Coins. You'll only need one Stable Coin per currency. The unbacked Crypto Tokens will probably be regulated out of existence.
I agree BSV is far superior to Bitcoin, but the Whales have ploughed all their cash into BTC, pinning their colour's to that sail. You know my view, that it'll all eventually end in tears.
Those guys love the sound of their own voices.
I've got nothing against you thinking the Earth is flat, But it makes no sense to me; To me, everything suggest the Earth is a Sphere. That said, I don't know if the Universe is real or a hologram, and I'm not sure about weird Quantum effects that defy logic. Once you get down to the Quantum level, it seems to be all about probabilities, waves and weird stuff, so although though I don't believe the Earth is flat, I wouldn't ridicule someone who believes that themselves. I think religion is questionable, so I don't fall into the God botherer cult and if one God is real then they all must be real, so where's Odin when you need him. If there is a God, then it'd have to be infused throughout the Universe and we'd therefore have to be part of that God, a universal consciousness if you like. Dinner time, I'm having spherical pancakes.
Yeah, it's amazing what they can do these days.
BSV is much better than BTC, but the downfall of BTC will signal the end of all the other public tokens imo. I can see Central Bank CBDC's having a future, but I'm not so sure the rest will survive long term.
Ha, it's back, I gave up checking.
How come Bitcoin is selling at a discount in AUS and it isn't affecting the global price?
"Bitcoin Trades at a 20% Discount on Binance Australia Following Banking Issues in the Country"
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2023/05/30/bitcoin-trades-at-a-20-discount-on-binance-australia-following-banking-issues-in-the-country/
It's a mystery to me what anyone see's in Bitcoin, especially people like Cathie Wood and Michael Saylor. I suspect we are seeing the beginning of the end of Bitcoin.