• ATTENTION New Members: Please take a few moments to introduce yourself, show your commitment to harm reduction, and chat with the community in the "New Member Introduction" subforum. This will help unlock access to additional forum features and privileges.

Bitcoin Skeptics



Ongoing layoffs at cryptocurrency mega-firm Bitmain could start a fresh wave of selling in Bitcoin Cash and Litecoin markets, according to prominent crypto investor Kyle Samani.

The cryptocurrency-focused venture capitalist said in a tweet that the Bitcoin mining giant is — if rumors are true — running out of money to continue its operations across mining and blockchain development. The financial scarcity has led the Chinese firm to downsize its workforce, reportedly by 50 percent or more. And to further meet its ends, Samani said Bitmain would likely dump its crypto stockpile, which includes a massive number of Litecoin and Bitcoin Cash tokens.
 


Bitcoin currently survives because miners extract value (block awards) put into the system by new entrants/money, who in so doing keep the price propped up. If the price were to fall due to a lack of new inflows, the miners would have no incentive to keep mining. In the non crypto world, this sort of system is normally known as a pyramid scheme. It is generally not advisable.

The only other incentive miners have are fees. But a fee structure alone is unlikely to support the system because it is naturally paradoxical and prone to a free-rider problem.

Note, simple (yes simple) calculations suggest once pyramidal incentives are removed, it could take months before a bitcoin payment is completed.

Meanwhile, with respect to the Lightning Network (the favoured solution to Bitcoin's scaling challenge): the BIS says welcome to our club! As anyone with real experience in banking can tell, the Lightning Network requires social co-ordination or institutionalisation to work, which of course is what the BIS specialises in. Simple centralised solutions, in other words, will always be more effective than decentralised complex ones.

For those who still don't get the reasoning, here's a diagram that explains it neatly:

https___d1e00ek4ebabms.cloudfront.net_production_add09a38-cf8e-4b8a-afe8-c159dc5d850d_FINAL.png

...

In other words, the more the geniuses who brought us bitcoin try to solve inherent problems in their system, the more they recreate and replicate the systems we have already.

Which begs the question: how much money have we wasted figuring stuff we already knew out?

Business leaders (especially in finance) should be wary of Techsplaining IT folk who claim they understand their underlying businesses better than they do.
 


Bitcoin currently survives because miners extract value (block awards) put into the system by new entrants/money, who in so doing keep the price propped up. If the price were to fall due to a lack of new inflows, the miners would have no incentive to keep mining. In the non crypto world, this sort of system is normally known as a pyramid scheme. It is generally not advisable.

The only other incentive miners have are fees. But a fee structure alone is unlikely to support the system because it is naturally paradoxical and prone to a free-rider problem.

Note, simple (yes simple) calculations suggest once pyramidal incentives are removed, it could take months before a bitcoin payment is completed.

Meanwhile, with respect to the Lightning Network (the favoured solution to Bitcoin's scaling challenge): the BIS says welcome to our club! As anyone with real experience in banking can tell, the Lightning Network requires social co-ordination or institutionalisation to work, which of course is what the BIS specialises in. Simple centralised solutions, in other words, will always be more effective than decentralised complex ones.

For those who still don't get the reasoning, here's a diagram that explains it neatly:

View attachment 104782

...

In other words, the more the geniuses who brought us bitcoin try to solve inherent problems in their system, the more they recreate and replicate the systems we have already.

Which begs the question: how much money have we wasted figuring stuff we already knew out?

Business leaders (especially in finance) should be wary of Techsplaining IT folk who claim they understand their underlying businesses better than they do.




Bitcoin has a fundamental problem that’s baked into how it keeps itself secure. A new working paper (PDF) from the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the so-called central bank for central banks, concludes that Bitcoin is limited as a payment method because of the method, called proof of work, that it uses to secure its distributed ledger.
 


There have been suspicions for a while that the markets are overinflated. In fact, fears of market manipulation have held up regulatory approval for a number of proposed Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), frustrating many enthusiasts who believe that the eventual approval of ETFs will spur broader adoption of the technology by investors.

Now, in a twist, a company hoping to list an ETF has reported to US financial regulators that around 95% of all Bitcoin trading volume has been faked by exchanges.

Bitwise, a crypto-asset management firm, analyzed 81 exchanges, finding that 71 of them exhibited patterns that reflected artificial trading volume. One way to manufacture volume is via a technique called wash trading, in which someone simultaneously buys and sells the same asset. Although the exchanges in the study reported a combined $6 billion in daily volume during four days this month, Bitwise determined that only $273 million of it was real.

Bitwise’s global head of research, Matthew Hougan, told the Wall Street Journal that the point of submitting the analysis was to show regulators that “a real market for Bitcoin” still exists despite the storm of artificial trading. Solid evidence for this comes from the small number of exchanges that can actually verify that their trading data is real, he said. If approved, Bitwise’s fund would be based on the volume on those exchanges, which represents only around 5% of the generally reported total.
 


After years of disregarding privacy, exploiting user data, and failing to control its platform, Facebook has now unveiled a cryptocurrency and payment system that could take down the entire global economy. Governments must intervene before a company that "moves fast and breaks things" ends up breaking everything.


Katharina Pistor is Professor of Comparative Law at Columbia Law School. She is the author of The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality.
 
So 98% were legit LMAO

Knowing cryptocurrency was developed as an underground currency, MIT analyzers need to take a closer look at the term legitimacy.
 
So 98% were legit LMAO

Knowing cryptocurrency was developed as an underground currency, MIT analyzers need to take a closer look at the term legitimacy.
Coinbase has flagged many transactions they deemed suspicious (which most were for buying illicit materials which include AAS).

They were forced to do this under pressure from the government.
 
Coinbase has flagged many transactions they deemed suspicious (which most were for buying illicit materials which include AAS).

They were forced to do this under pressure from the government.
I got banned from coinbase about 5 years ago for sending to a source
 
Top