$BTC: Two Bitcoin FUDs to address this Thanksgiving weekend:

1. China PlusToken FUD: Old news. Please see linked thread.

2. U.S. Treasury FUD: Read thread below...

1/ These news are much more relevant, as they imply severe trade-offs for people who want to keep their bitcoins undoxxed, with the cost and risks of doing so. I would not disqualify the tweet as mere FUD in the sense that what he posted is false. It should be taken seriously.
2/ For all we know, his decision of making it public before TG weekend may come out of the urgency of informing CT of a poignant anti-Bitcoin move by a Trump administration trying to cut lose ends before leaving office—not just "price manipulation" as I've seen suggested around.
3/ It implies the acceleration of a process already planned for for months in advance, not something he just came up with to "crash the market."
4/ In practicality, assuming this passes, it will have two major consencuences:

a. Armstrong's analysis is correct. And I would go further in saying, this regulation would leave the U.S. severely handicapped to continue to be the leader in the cryptocurrency industry worldwide.
5/ b. It would bifurcate major market actors into two camps. For the sake of simplicity, I´ll call the former the "Conservationsists" and the latter the "Integrationists."
6/ Conservationists are mostly old Bitcoin money, big early-adopter HODLers who believe in Bitcoin's value proposition as a whole, including scarcity, pseudonymity, untraceableness, and unconfiscatableness.
7/ Integrationists are mostly new Bitcoin money, insitutions and HNWIs who value only Bitcoin's scarcity and its capacity to accrue value over time. They also believe that BTC needs to be integrated into the legacy financial system.
8/ Frankly...

The former see the value of Bitcoin as a mechanism to protect individuals against government overreach, as well as save and invest their property in a permissionless manner.
9/ The latter would like to see it taxed to build roads, it seems. They like ETFs and already protect their investments within safe haven jurisdictions.
10/ What does this mean for price direction long-term? In my opinion nothing changes...

Conservationists will continue to HODL (with the added incentive of keeping their coins burried for no-one to find, so even less sell pressure there).
11/ Integrationists will see this as expected or needed or "a trade-off" and continue to buy and hold.
12/ What does this mean in terms of narrative in public debate?

Privacy and ownsership, even more so than price, will be the most contested subjects in Bitcoin in the next few years.
13/ To clearify, a lot of people don't neatly fall in either of camps. Some are apathetic, undecided, a certain mix of both. Also, let's not confuse all major players with insitutional or legacy pedigree as Integrationists:
14/ Jack Dorsey, Cathie Wood, and Michael Saylor, for example, don't strike me as Integrationists at all, as they have supported Bitcoin's entire value proposition in the past. Notice how two of them are also OGs.
15/ I'll leave examples of Integrationists diguised as Conservastionists for you to come up with...
Fin/ In summary, the fundamentals remain the same, so in my view even if we continue correcting ($14k, 12k, or whatever), the cause would be simply out of major market actors taking profits with the aim to buy cheaper.

More from Bitcoin

Another #FreeLoveFriday. So far, I’ve covered Bitcoin, Mastercoin/Omni, and last week ChainLink and the importance of decentralized oracles. Today, let’s talk about one of the most fascinating projects in crypto - @MakerDAO


In my thread about Mastercoin, I briefly touched on the vital role fiat-backed stablecoins play in crypto markets, but there’s a catch with them:

The counterparty risk of a third-party holding fiat in reserves.

Enter MakerDAO, which set out to create a decentralized, collateral-backed cryptocurrency, DAI, that would be “soft-pegged” to the U.S. Dollar using the power of algorithms. In crypto tradition, its supporters said trust game theory, not operators.

In 2017, MakerDAO published a whitepaper describing a system where anyone could create DAI by leveraging ETH as collateral to create Collateralized Debt Positions. Essentially, you take out a digital USD loan against your crypto.

The game theory of the system is structured such that DAI issuance is controlled to keep the price pegged to $1.00. In essence, it buffers the fluctuations of the underlying collateral to create a synthetic dollar bill.
$BTC views

Price needs to let volatility wear off before its next big move. Thinking 30K-40K range for the next 1-2 weeks. Then either 50K straight or after piercing 30K and bouncing back above 30K within 1-2 days.


$27500-$27000 is the key area. If price heads back down to 30K, expect 30K to be breached, fall to that area, and bounce back. FAST. All very fast.


What do I do with this information?

Simple.

I'm trading the range against a core position. Buying when price pushes lower, selling when higher. It's like playing the achordeon. There's always air left inside.

Where exactly?

Nowhere.

I don't use limits for that. $BTC is liquid enough to trade at market without issues.

I'm watching PA, volume and rates for buying and euphoria as reflected in rates for reducing.

Decision making is dynamic. Nothing is set in stone. But most likely if price heads back down to 30K 'll be holding off next time. The gameplan is to have ammo to buy the dip (to redeploy). If 30K breaks absolutely no buying until down to 27Ks or back above 30K.
1/THREAD: WHEN WAS IT CLEAR?

Oct. 8, 2020: The purpose of this thread is to document and timestamp when it first became clear that #Bitcoin was likely to become a major reserve asset for public corporations, and eventually states, with Square's purchase of $50M in BTC.

The purpose is to give something to cite when ppl later claim "But there was NO WAY OF KNOWING..."

h/t @ErikSTownsend who used the same format to call out the impact of Covid on Feb 8 and made me personally aware of the looming shutdown of the country
https://t.co/opuiNgSeqC !


Bitcoiners smarter than me have been predicting the takeover of the dollar by Bitcoin for many years.

In 2014 with Bitcoin barely at $1B, @pierre_rochard wrote https://t.co/EGHa58KqHq, covering all the incorrect narratives of Bitcoin and stating it will overtake the dollar.

"[skeptics] misunderstand how strong currencies like bitcoin overtake weak currencies like the dollar: it is through speculative attacks and currency crises caused by investors, not through the careful evaluation of tech journalists and 'mainstream consumers'" - @pierre_rochard

I first became bullish on Bitcoin in the summer of 2016, around a $3B market cap, but it was still a toy project at that time in the eyes of most in the financial world, while many technologists thought of it as a v1 technology to be improved on.

You May Also Like