The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
"Crypto trading should be treated like a type of gambling, influential MPs say
The Treasury Committee made the recommendation while describing digital currencies as having "no intrinsic value and no useful social purpose"
https://news.sky.com/story/crypto-trading-should-be-treated-like-a-type-of-gambling-influential-mps-say-12882187#:~:text=The%20Treasury%20Committee%20made%20the,and%20no%20useful%20social%20purpose%22.
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/crypto/article-12090221/MPs-call-crypto-trading-regulated-way-gambling.html
In my opinion it doesn't matter what they do with the block storage on Bitcoin or any other public distributed ledger. The problem with all these tokens, using nodes anyone can set up where each node has access to all the data, is the future potential to decrypt data no matter what level of encryption is in use. There a reason why Banks and other institutions use state of the art firewalls, keep off network backups and use various other techniques to protect customer data, it's because the more inaccessible the data the more secure it is. The whole networking concept of Bitcoin and other Crypto tokens is insecure and flawed in multiple ways, it'll never be seriously used by institutions. Institutions will use Blockchain, but on private networks using their own servers/nodes.
I think the presenter is possibly a candidate for the most annoying presenter 2023, he's hard to watch without cringing. BSV is better than BTC, but they're all a waste of space in my opinion. The Crypto environment is currently heading into stormy waters, many tokens could capsize or sink completely.
And it's back.
Deep fakes are getting better, but still not perfect, imagine what they'll be like in a year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2H1ld5BBDGk
Just to add to my last post, the brokers and financial industry love anything that increases liquidity, since much of their profits come from trading fee's and they hate dividend investors who hold for the long term, as they rarely trade. Most short term retail traders lose money over time, but the financial industry pulls in huge profits off the back of their trading. There is a massive amount of under the radar narrative creation, promoting trading over long term investing. Encouraging people to trade using bots is the ultimate liquidity generator and you can see why the big players want to encourage everyone to trade frequently. I'd be interested to know if profit projections take trading fee's and stamp duty into account? Because small trades are a waste of time in my opinion.
If I was to get into trading, which I wont, the AIM market would be where I'd look as a UK trader. I would probably only trade in £1000 chunks because I consider the trades as high risk. QBT is currently 1.5p and as it's an AIM stock there shouldn't be stamp duty payable; Assuming a dealing charge of £10, (£1000 - £10)/0.015 would buy 66,000 shares. Now lets assume the price goes up to 1.6p, 66,000 x 0.016 - £10 dealing charge = £1,046, which is only a £46 profit in this example, but you could be executing multiple trades across multiple AIM stocks daily with some you'll win on and others you'll lose on. This isn't financial advice, it's just what I would do if I was interested in becoming a trader. The brokers make £20 in this example, irrespective of whether the trader wins or loses.
Yeah it's an incredibly powerful tool and no doubt it'll set the scene for every man and his dog building their own trading bots, with trading morphing into a battle of the bots. Because algorithms don't trade on fundamentals and can amplify moves either way, there will be opportunities to pick up stock in undervalued companies, which could create opportunities for value investors, I'm talking real stocks not crypto. I view crypto as a computer game where people bet against each other and can profit, but with no real world use behind the technology.
My Son works in I.T. development and he pays the subscription for ChatGPT. He uses it for coding and recently used it to aid in solving a software problem at work, for his boss, he then sent the ChatGPT logs to his boss to show him how the app helped out.
I don't invest in Gold either and industrial Diamonds can be manufactured. As far as discovering something different out there, it's unlikely; The periodic table of elements is well understood and documented, so any new elements would have to be at the bottom of the table and be heavy unstable elements. Any new materials will likely be a result of science on Earth and will be molecules/alloys using various elements in a unique way.
Bitcoin is just a blockchain organised in such a way as to control the rate of production using a difficulty algorithm and complex mathematical computations. Because of the complex calculations required to process each block, Bitcoin mining use vast amounts of electricity that could be used for more constructive uses. Imagine if the electricity wasted on Bitcoin was used to light and heat vertical farms for agricultural use, or producing Hydrogen from water through electrolysis and used to power vehicles or planes.
Blockchain is good, Bitcoin is a bad use of blockchain. The whole proof of work concept is a bad idea because of the amount of resource required to facilitate the processing of each 1MB block. The reason I don't like Bitcoin is because it's rubbish at what it does and has no uses that couldn't be done more efficiently using other technologies and processes.
The whole DeFi concept is flawed should commercial Quantum computing become possible, since the the current encryption protocols would be easily decrypted under those circumstances. With DeFi the whole database is accessible to anyone running a node and the whole idea of DeFi is that the information is stored on every node and the only protection is the encryption, which would be insecure for Quantum computers.
The financial and telecommunications world are already preparing for Quantum, with Quantum secure encryption and servers connected by links using technologies like Quantum Key Distribution, to detect intrusion on the interconnecting fibres. Criminals are already probably taking copies of the Bitcoin blockchain with a view to decrypting once the technology reaches a certain point, so I take all the hype about Crypto and DeFi with a huge pinch of salt. In the future, the most secure data will be data stored outside of the public domain, with Quantum secure encryption and firewalls, with data between servers carried over links which are resistant to sniffing off and capturing the data. DeFi and the current crypto protocols wont come close to being secure enough once Quantum kicks in. Quantum computers with the sufficient number of Qubits might be a decade or two away and may never happen, but the world is preparing for it either way.
https://www.global.toshiba/ww/news/corporate/2021/10/news-20211005-01.html
https://screenrant.com/quantum-computers-cryptocurrency-threat-are/
Just because the CFTC has defined Bitcoin as a Commodity, it doesn't mean Bitcoin is a useful commodity. Comparing Bitcoin to Gold is part of the false narrative used to promote and hype Bitcoin up. I've mentioned it in previous posts, but Gold gained its hedging dominance because of its exceptional properties. What can you do with Bitcoin? You can store it, or trade it with other crypto enthusiasts and that's it; You previously used a Mercedes Benz dealership as an example of a real world Bitcoin use, but you can bet the transaction involves an immediate Dollar conversion in cases like that. Gold's exceptional properties make it useful for many different real world uses, which I wont bother listing as I've listed them before. I'd go as far as describing Bitcoin as a fake commodity, since it's intangible.
There's a similarity between disaster preppers and Bitcoin enthusiasts. Preppers are preparing for the end of civilisation and the Bitcoiner's is preparing for the end of civilisation lol.
One group prepares by stocking up on supplies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw1I6_ZtLTk
The other group thinks the end of Fiat will lead to a crypto nirvana.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z0__k7g2aQ
Personally I don't see any mechanism where unbacked Crypto currencies could replace Fiat. There are numerous flaws in the narratives touted for Crypto "currencies" like Bitcoin.
The Bitcoin enthusiasts claim that Fiat is unbacked, but that's clearly false. If a country's economy collapses, then the currency follows suit and collapses with it, so Fiat is clearly backed by the Economy of the country issuing the currency, what backs Bitcoin?
Another narrative is that Bitcoin has a limited supply, which is something I disagree with, but under that narrative what's to stop the worlds billionaires buying up all the bitcoin and controlling the World's money supply?
You'll always need intermediaries controlling financial transactions, they provide a gatekeeper function ensuring that both sides uphold their part of the transaction. They say Bitcoin can replace that function allowing buyers and sellers to deal directly, but you could do that with Fiat anyway, but without any security, so even with Crypto people would probably go through third party intermediaries anyway.
I could go on, but every single use case touting Crypto over Fiat can easily be debunked.
Why do you watch Punch & Judy? They're incredibly vested in the success of Bitcoin, so anything they say should be viewed with that in mind. Obviously if Billionaires continue to load up on Bitcoin, like Musk and Saylor did in 2020/21, then Bitcoin will go up, but it could just as easily go the other way if they start to dump. Time will tell what will happen, but if the we live in a sane World then Bitcoin should go the way of the Dodo.
Just another vested interest talking his own book.
"Apparently Einstein's Theory was flawed.."
It may not be perfect, but it explains the motion of planets and the warping of space around dense objects really well, as evidenced by the bending of light around stars and black holes.
"Still, physicists have plenty of reason for confidence in general relativity’s reliability. For one thing, it solved a knotty problem that had perplexed astronomers about the planet Mercury: a discrepancy in its orbit from that forecast by Newtonian gravity. Einstein announced his theory in 1915 as soon as he was able to show that it correctly predicted Mercury’s actual orbit.
Einstein’s key to solving the Mercury mystery was conceiving gravity as an effect of the geometry of space (or technically, spacetime, since his earlier work had shown space and time to be inseparable). Gravity is not a mutual tug of massive objects, Einstein said, but rather the result of a mass’s distortion of the spacetime surrounding it. Objects orbit or fall into a massive body depending on how strongly the spacetime around it is curved. Rather than responding to some attractive force, masses just follow the contours of spacetime’s geometry.
Gravity as geometry led to the famous prediction verified in the 1919 eclipse. Einstein pointed out that the curvature of spacetime near the sun would cause light from distant stars to bend when passing nearby, changing the stars’ apparent positions as seen from Earth. That prediction inspired an eclipse expedition to the West African island of Principe in May 1919, led by British astrophysicist Arthur Eddington. Eddington’s team found that the positions of several stars were shifted by just the amount that Einstein’s math indicated they should be, and twice as much as Newton’s law predicted. When the eclipse team announced the results in November 1919, one news account heralded them as signaling the need for “a new philosophy of the universe.”"
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-probe-validity-of-einsteins-gravity-on-cosmic-scales/#:~:text=While%20Einstein's%20gravity%20has%20passed,in%20case%20it%20doesn't.
"I thought for a brief moment you were being serious "
Serious about what, Gravity? If you're asking about that I was very serious, if you don't believe me get a Ouija board and ask Einstein.
"Here is just one example of a real world use for Bitcoin, there are plenty of large companies around the world that accept crypto."
I'd hardly call that a real world use, especially since you could just as easily buy a car with Dollars. It's likely they'll do the conversion immediately, from Bitcoin to Dollars, as they wont be able to do much with the tokens once the transaction's completed. It isn't like Mercedes will accept crypto in payment from the dealer.
"You lost me at gravity lol"
Gravity isn't a force, it's an effect caused by mass warping spacetime.
"Matter tells spacetime how to curve, and curved spacetime tells matter how to move".
There's no real world use for Bitcoin. It's incredible that it's defied gravity for so many years, but it'll eventually come to nothing. Bitcoin's value is based purely on sentiment, once the sentiment fizzles out Bitcoin will go with it.
Brave move.
If countries like Russia, North Korea and Iran use Crypto to circumvent sanctions, the US will just go after the sector even harder. I don't see any future where Bitcoin is successful, of course that's my personal opinion.
That's the reason I only purchase my own shares in share dealing accounts, I would never use a service like Milton's.