Kbg wrote: ↑Mon Jun 13, 2022 12:16 pm
Down almost 66% since November 2021...
kbg don't you know that dollar valuation is just an illusion? There's only 21 million Bitcoin and 1 sat = 1 sat, so Bitcoin's value remains immutable. The repricing of everything around it is the fault of mismanaged financialization. The purity of Bitcoin is everlasting, it is the only constant in a dynamic world.
In the words of his holiness Michael Saylor: "#Bitcoin is a swarm of cyber hornets serving the goddess of wisdom, feeding on the fire of truth, exponentially growing ever smarter, faster, and stronger behind a wall of encrypted energy."
If you don't understand this, you do not understand economics, psychology, philosophy, and everything that defines the future of humanity. You are, as the kids say, Not Gonna Make It.
Few understand this.
Joking aside: I've said it before and i'll say it again. Sans utility,
Bitcoin can be anything you want it to be. It has been called a monetary network, a unit of account, a store of value, a beacon of hope for the disenfranchised[1], the one stop shop for all things web5[2], etc. It has little to no proof of being literally any of those things, but BTC'ers will convince you "it's only a matter of time. It's inevitable." Those of us who actually believe in using cryptocurrencies for doing good, and creating real change, have moved on to other projects. They're not perfect, but they're actually trying to deliver a use case.
______________
For those who want to read my observations:
[1] Consider what i'll call the Fictitious Freedom Paradox. Isn't it strange that most of the the states/countries adopting Bitcoin are economically weak, relatively underdeveloped and have had checkered governmental histories?
These are the places ushering the new age of personal freedoms? You'd think a country dedicated to the prosperity of it's people would lower barriers to entry and provide sensible opportunities while still keeping an eye on growing systemic changes (you know, what governments are supposed to do) and allowing the citizens to decide freely. Instead, you have politicians lavishly broadcasting their acceptance of Bitcoin using a top down approach that feels almost
too convenient. It's as though the governmental adoption is primary, with the potential improvement to its citizens' lives merely an afterthought...
So these governments who have been providing underwhelming results are now the
real agents of human progress? You'd have to bake in many assumptions to argue that point convincingly and I think Occam's razor applies here. They simply have little to lose and much to gain (this dynamic is often true of "new paradigms", especially when the earlier you are, the more you stand to gain). So to sum up the Fictitious Freedom Paradox, those that score lowest in promoting the rights and freedoms of their citizens are somehow the greatest proponents of Bitcoin and the free utopia it enables.
Even if you wanted to ignore all that, you can very clearly see the deteriorating situation of El Salvador. Not only has their Bitcoin adoption been controversial, but their federal holdings are at a serious loss and their Bitcoin Bonds have been delayed twice (despite claiming to be oversubscribed), all while the internal state of affairs (gang violence, crime, etc.) has only grown more chaotic. BTC'ers would have you believe that Bitcoin solves these problems, but the evidence shows otherwise.
[2] I won't go into it too much detail, but Jack Dorsey, cofounder and previous CEO of Twitter, has announced an initiative to bring "web5" to Bitcoin. The idea is to build the future of the internet over "the rails" of the Bitcoin blockchain. It is meant to be an end all be all solution to dwarf all the hundreds of projects and companies that have spawned over the last few years in the tech and crypto industry. Jack, after having decided that he does not want to associate with the common VC's of Silicon Valley, is biting his thumb at the industry that put him where he is. He was CEO for years and yet somehow asleep at the wheel, not providing much shareholder value despite golden opportunities to advance the success of Twitter as both a company and platform. And now only half a year since stepping down, Dorsey has considered being part of Elon Musk's plan to take Twitter private. Musk cites much of the issues plaguing Twitter and vocally explained the importance of preserving "the de facto public town square", a company Dorsey was in charge of FOR YEARS. And yet somehow Musk directs the blame at its current management? All this is to say that while I think Dorsey's intentions are well meaning, they are wholly misguided and rest on somewhat hypocritical foundations.
A final note: Lyn Alden has been the queen of macro finance, providing illuminating insight and charts relating to where we are and where we're going. Yet one of the most interesting trends she has conveniently kept away from the spotlight- that BTC's correlation to the SP500 has been reaches new all time highs. An asset that is somehow supposed to be a ballast against inflation, lax monetary policy, and economic uncertainty is increasingly becoming a more volatile proxy for equities. She is a great commentator, but not without her faults and biases. Had she been more objective she'd report it much the same as everything else she does, but she's awaiting approval of "what's the current narrative?" from the influential people in the BTC community before posting to her audience information that might hurt the overall message. A user here (whose name escapes me) asked me to explain my comments i've made about her in the past. This is another glaring example. The user has since deleted their posts/account, but I get the feeling they still lurk in the forums from time to time. If they are reading this...hope all is well!
