Member Info for HarChris

Nobody's waiting for news, there isn't any news that specifically is going to save Argo, just a bitcoin recovery. Doesn't the lack of Q3 results concern you PI? There's absolutely no support from PW as there's very little that can be done at this stage... And I'm not sure we can say bitcoin is *due* a rise, it's not due anything. It might rise but it's not likely to in the immediate term with the landscape as ugly as it is.

Latest news is BlockFi filing for bankruptcy.

I wouldn't be keeping an eye on Corz for that reason, they are absolutely dead in the water (Around a billion dollars in debt that needs paying off whilst burning through ~$17m a month of their remaining funds, no HODL and a market cap of $50m). Very confident the axe will come down before christmas.

Bitfarms has been under a dollar for I think twenty nine days though so that's one to keep an eye on.

This should be positive for bitcoin, with volume so low currently mining selling pressure isn't helping. The strongest miners are either able to HODL or at least hold on to a percentage of their newly minted coins whereas the weakest ones are having to sell every coin.

If Corz goes offline for example that's nearly 50 coins a day no longer being dumped.

Although likely coming down now difficulty across the month is significantly higher than in October - last month mined 204 bitcoin, I find it very hard to imagine November is going to be an increase on the previous month.

I'll go for 198 mined and 260 sold.

Two weeks away from finding out though and if the lack of Q3 update is anything to go by, well, maybe there won't even be a Nov update.

I'm talking self-mining hash (which makes up 18% from the 'big 11') and on the assumption of winding down activity in say a particular facility, Helios for Argo or Sandersville for CleanSpark etc

Correct me if i'm wrong but I assumed if a public miner were to switch off machines then they would certainly have to inform the market of that and it would be fairly big news as the first to do so voluntarily? As far as I can see none have done that so it most likely is non publicly listed miners that are winding down at the moment...

As AB said publicly listed miners make up less than half the hash, in fact the big 11 only make up about 18% although I know there's a bunch of smaller ones too.

Just teasing BC, no need to be like that, soz!

Back to Argo, has anyone contacted management regarding the Q3 update? Results were on the 2nd November last year, every other miner has released theirs, some as early as October... Is there still a management team functioning?!

Sure but I’ll also be leaving you with my bags.

Well it's not Corz according to their website, it updates their bitcoin mined each day and it's still 47-49 BTC. I imagine it's non publicly listed miners at the moment?

Not long to go though til a few of them start switching off and yeah, if we see sub $14 (not convinced personally) there'll be chaos.

I have buy orders in for bitcoin in the $14s if it goes there, I'll buy it higher than here if it looks like a reversal is on, I own shares in Riot and will probably add another miner or two in the next six months. Why? Because I think I can make money, not because I think it's some egalitarian philanthropic act.

Well the reason the richest 1% own 50% of the global wealth is the same, the people at the bottom have nothing to their name. This will only get worse if bitcoin becomes 'adopted' by 2 billion plus people, the people in less developed countries might have $5 on bitcoin which could go to $100 whilst the likes of Microstategy would make tens of billions.

All those people making intellectual cases for bitcoin have a financial incentive to do so, they own a tonne of bitcoin. I'm not sitting here arguing against bitcoin's price going higher in the future, I think it might but the narrative conjured up that it will solve the world's financial problems is merely a tool to help pump it.

Most of the wealthy bitcoiners don't like seeing their sizeable wealth slightly reduced by an inflating currency, they aren't here to rid the US of homelessness of gross inequality.

In fact the bitcoin wealth gap is arguably much worse than fiat. The richest 1% of the world's population own about 45% of the world's wealth (varies depending on the source up to about 50%) but with bitcoin 1% owns 87% of the network.

There's something like 52 million wallets so the top 1% (i.e the top 520000) owns about $275b worth of bitcoin, about 87% of the total network. The bottom 90% owns $4.5B worth of bitcoin so the top 1% has about 60 times more bitcoin than the bottom 90%.

I think it has substance, in just 13 years the bitcoin wealth gap is already fairly comparable to fiat, there's no reason to suggest it will get any better.

And if bitcoin is to ever reach the dizzy heights of $250k and beyond then that distribution is only going to get worse.

Like any emerging technology bitcoin (and other coins) have made a handful of coders and early adopters very rich, it isn't going to help the starving in the third world.

You can't seriously think that bitcoin has the potential to make the world a more equal place to a meaningful degree? There are only going to be 21 million bitcoin and just 5 wallets hold over 4% of the network, just 115 own 16% of the network. 115 wallets out of nearly 50 million, 0.000023% own 16% of the bitcoin. 2093/0.00042 own 40% of the entire network.

There's the potential for poor people to become a tad better off from bitcoin, there's the potential for the rich to get significantly richer, there's not much chance of global wealth redistribution.

https://twitter.com/btc_buddhist/status/1596532189025665024

Seen a few other threads along the same lines as this too... if 11% turns out to be true that's quite a significant adjustment downwards.

Yeah store of value is not a real life use case, it's no different to saying bitcoin is a hedge against inflation, might turn out to be but certainly no evidence for it yet. You can argue that it will function as a store of value because there's a fixed maximum supply or it's increasingly being adopted around the world etc but the store of value is derived from other properties.

Even gold which has historically served as a store of value isn't guaranteed to maintain that function in the decades to come, it just happened to become a store of value because people desired it and had multiple real life uses as well as seeing relatively low and stable gold supply inflation (something like 180000 tonnes with 3000 additional tonnes being produced each year, or 1.7%). If people stop trusting it as a store of value it will no longer function as a store of value.

Sure but he's not claiming to know for certain, he's expecting the result to be positive which means using his intuition he thinks the odds are high.

He's a private investor with deep pockets and access to key management at Avacta. Whilst they won't legally be allowed to share information that's not in the public domain it is possible that enough has been shared that someone with great intuition (like Myles has) would be able to gauge the probability of success better than me and you.

He is also committed to seeing this investment through (at least to the readout) so he benefits in no way from attempting to mislead investors at this stage.

Without a real world use it's purely a speculative instrument with a fixed supply that will go up when in demand (i.e when speculators group together and buy en masse) and go down when no longer demanded (i.e when speculators group together and decide to sell en masse).

There are plenty of other coins that also have a fixed supply yet very seem to think the price will keep going up over time.