It starts with an economic price perspective and we can learn that ECB is closely monitoring this price movement as one of the many indicators.
So we are in the classic central bank frame 2/32
Ok, so what is the significance of the @lagarde statement on bitcoin?
We were offered a very open insight (but slightly flawed analysis) into top level policy perspective behind the crack down on selfhosted wallets.
https://t.co/1LTzrxHbgs 1/32
ECB President Christine Lagarde called for global regulation of #Bitcoin, saying the digital currency had been used for money laundering activities in some instances and that any loopholes needed to be closed. Follow #ReutersNext updates here: https://t.co/4MgFy4jnw5 pic.twitter.com/qlBtoDuZLW
— Reuters (@Reuters) January 13, 2021
It starts with an economic price perspective and we can learn that ECB is closely monitoring this price movement as one of the many indicators.
So we are in the classic central bank frame 2/32
Here she summarises a classic debate on what is currency and what is needed for that. Based on the holy three: unit of account, means of payment, store of value. 3/32
https://t.co/UQzQtETM2E 6/32
History has also seen playing cards been used as a currency.
-> https://t.co/XLU3shkADk
And as a unit of account bitcoin may be much further ahead than @lagarde realises. 7/32
Bitcoin being used as a central currency/unit of account amids a range of other digital coins is quite similar. 8/32
See the thread here: https://t.co/XsirnRwO7N 9/32
Bitcoin: charcoal or diamond?
— Simon Lelieveldt (@finhstamsterdam) March 13, 2020
A thread on the 'value' of bitcoin
1/n
'which has conducted some funny business'
'totally reprehensible money laundering activity'
Here, the narrow FATF-perspective comes into play. Because analytically, this statement is valid for cash, fiat currency and bank behaviour as well. 10/32
Do note that this anti-money laundering perspective has some serious democratic and analytical errors.
See ->
https://t.co/7WpscAWD7I 11/32
A thread on FINCEN files and why I think we can throw the whole money laundering laws/cult in the garbage can.
— Simon Lelieveldt (@finhstamsterdam) September 26, 2020
This has to do with types of law.
1- contract law between entities (to civil courts)
2- administrative law (fin supervision, gov. court)
3- penal law (to jail).
/1
It is flawed to dismiss this as a classic central bank argument, with them only having one flavour of icecream (regulation)
Society by definition regulates what if finds important and rightly so. 12/32
Here the statement becomes interesting as it shows the desire to close the escape routes.
But are we talking AML-rules, stablo-coin rules, what is it ? 13/32
'FATF is clearly an organisation that has expanded in that respect'
So it sounds as a focus on money laundering regulations. And effectively the virtual asset work by the FAT. 14/32
https://t.co/MFNOPuYAPj 15/32
And do note: 'address risk in a forward looking manner', meaning anticipation by supervisors. 16/32
And this is what we start to be seeing. 17/32
Peer-2-peer wallets require verification of beneficiary !
https://t.co/3mji8RBmw7 18/32
FINMA is taking a stricter approach than FATF and demands full third party identification or otherwise supervised entities are not allowed to execute payments on the blockchain.
— Simon Lelieveldt (@finhstamsterdam) August 27, 2019
Read the guidance here:https://t.co/AWzeZanP8o pic.twitter.com/hgH6HurEio
Doing pro-actively what FATF suggested.
https://t.co/NeHZMrH1wv 19/32
A knife on the table.
https://t.co/v5KvSoFH91 20/32
So they wrote a joint letter on Nov 2.
https://t.co/wQJ9xG8oQu 21/32
https://t.co/Ur1l72AgXo 22/32
https://t.co/OVDV5J7L3J 24/32
Last week we heard rumors that the U.S. Treasury and Secretary Mnuchin were planning to rush out some new regulation regarding self-hosted crypto wallets before the end of his term. I'm concerned that this would have unintended side effects, and wanted to share those concerns.
— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) November 25, 2020
https://t.co/AV5j1yqNWu 26/32
https://t.co/1mEaiUxlqH
More responses came in at the FINCEN than ever received before. 27/32
https://t.co/ZiRS7zrlcF 28/32
https://t.co/NKZixJlksK
But it becomes clear what is meant with 'address risk in a forward looking manner' 29/32
I think it gave us an open insight into the desire to make sure that no escape routes are present for bitcoin/crypto.
It tells us there is a strong FATF-inspired objective to crack down on selfhosted wallets. 30/32
My full FINCEN response:
https://t.co/OTMlwgVqHy 31/32
Still this must be proportional and within the bigger framework of human rights protection.
See European Data Protection Board ->
https://t.co/Y2dpZ1a5ux 32/32
More from Bitcoin
1/ #Bitcoin FUD-busting time!
claim: bitcoin ownership is heavily concentrated.
@business published an article claiming "2% of accounts control 95% of all Bitcoin" 🤣
truth: the facts, my friends, simple don't line up. let's dive in!
2/ interrogating on-chain addresses is tricky.
address =/ account.
one person can control multiple addresses.
one address can hold bitcoin belonging to multiple ppl.
exchanges and trading firms will have addresses with large balances that represent client funds.
3/ the fine folks @glassnode published an excellent analysis of on-chain address balances in January
the ownership distribution of bitcoin among wallets is actually much more diverse than one might expect.
full piece here:
https://t.co/n5IdIQdNoA
4/ 31% of BTC is held in addresses not identified as exchange wallets.
these are likely institutions, funds, custodians, and OTC desks.
our analysis at @CoinSharesCo indicates >15% of all bitcoin is held in third party custody, including @coinbase and our own @KomainuCustody
5/ in fact, between asset managers @Grayscale ($36B in BTC) and our @xbtprovider ($4B in BTC), 4% of bitcoin is locked up by fund providers and asset managers!
our @CoinSharesCo research team publishes an EXCELLENT weekly report on fund flows and AUMs -
claim: bitcoin ownership is heavily concentrated.
@business published an article claiming "2% of accounts control 95% of all Bitcoin" 🤣
truth: the facts, my friends, simple don't line up. let's dive in!
2/ interrogating on-chain addresses is tricky.
address =/ account.
one person can control multiple addresses.
one address can hold bitcoin belonging to multiple ppl.
exchanges and trading firms will have addresses with large balances that represent client funds.
3/ the fine folks @glassnode published an excellent analysis of on-chain address balances in January
the ownership distribution of bitcoin among wallets is actually much more diverse than one might expect.
full piece here:
https://t.co/n5IdIQdNoA
4/ 31% of BTC is held in addresses not identified as exchange wallets.
these are likely institutions, funds, custodians, and OTC desks.
our analysis at @CoinSharesCo indicates >15% of all bitcoin is held in third party custody, including @coinbase and our own @KomainuCustody
5/ in fact, between asset managers @Grayscale ($36B in BTC) and our @xbtprovider ($4B in BTC), 4% of bitcoin is locked up by fund providers and asset managers!
our @CoinSharesCo research team publishes an EXCELLENT weekly report on fund flows and AUMs -
To chaiye chalte h 12K ki taraf.
#BTC https://t.co/Yd4iZqC42s
#BTC https://t.co/Yd4iZqC42s
I don't know why Crypto YouTubers are so bullish on BTC right from the top \U0001f61b while the charts are saying something else. Won't be surprised to see the entire retracement of the marked rise. #BTC pic.twitter.com/SQJkjAfZme
— Aakash Gangwar (@akashgngwr823) April 30, 2022
$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.
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.
My $BTC short-term view after long deliberation and some flip flopping is rangebound in 30K-40K until the curve and vols come off a further. Then, 50K. I wouldn't be surprised if 30K is briefly breached but the risk is to the upside. Those calling for 20K missing the big picture.
— Alex (@classicmacro) January 12, 2021
$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.
Agree mate. Well done @ttmygh @profplum99 and @nic__carter on a ripping show. Im obviously in the "gold is superior" camp, though I am long #BTC (tiny position). I thought the best/most interesting point of whole debate was raised by @profplum99 regarding the fact that a 1/n
#Bitcoin transaction is never really final, given the energy required to keep the network running, and obviously its scale issues will only grow over time. That said, I actually though @nic__carter "won" the debate as it were, and I was unconvinced by the threat to national 2/n
security or undermining Fed policy angles Mike put forward. Two areas that are super interesting to me. One is the issue of #Bitcoin ownership, and how concentrated it is in terms of a small % of addresses that own most of it (2% addresses > 95% of holdings I think). 3/n
made great point a lot of this is omnibus/exchange related - so exchange or fund - ie @Grayscale holds #bitcoin for multiple investors. That may well be true - but it brings up 2 other issues. One - it proves that #bitcoin doesn't really "work" without 4/n
centralisation - as this implies most people need exchanges or funds (or @Paypal) to buy it. If so, that kills off a major "bitcoin is better than gold argument" - as in reality, gold is way more decentralised (from mine supply to ownership distribution). It also brings up a 5/n
Exceptional listen on #Bitcoin.
— Joseph Skewes (@josephskewes) January 26, 2021
In particular Nic's responses to Mike's aggressive anti-BTC stance.
One dispute with Nic: Even if crypto mail list was best place to announce BTC, if Satoshi wanted fair distribution, surely creating 50% of the supply by Nov 2012 was too fast? https://t.co/e1Hpx4wWOu
#Bitcoin transaction is never really final, given the energy required to keep the network running, and obviously its scale issues will only grow over time. That said, I actually though @nic__carter "won" the debate as it were, and I was unconvinced by the threat to national 2/n
security or undermining Fed policy angles Mike put forward. Two areas that are super interesting to me. One is the issue of #Bitcoin ownership, and how concentrated it is in terms of a small % of addresses that own most of it (2% addresses > 95% of holdings I think). 3/n
made great point a lot of this is omnibus/exchange related - so exchange or fund - ie @Grayscale holds #bitcoin for multiple investors. That may well be true - but it brings up 2 other issues. One - it proves that #bitcoin doesn't really "work" without 4/n
centralisation - as this implies most people need exchanges or funds (or @Paypal) to buy it. If so, that kills off a major "bitcoin is better than gold argument" - as in reality, gold is way more decentralised (from mine supply to ownership distribution). It also brings up a 5/n
You May Also Like
I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
One of the oddest features of the Labour tax row is how raising allowances, which the media allowed the LDs to describe as progressive (in spite of evidence to contrary) through the coalition years, is now seen by everyone as very right wing
— Tom Clark (@prospect_clark) November 2, 2018
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
Joshua Hawley, Missouri's Junior Senator, is an autocrat in waiting.
His arrogance and ambition prohibit any allegiance to morality or character.
Thus far, his plan to seize the presidency has fallen into place.
An explanation in photographs.
🧵
Joshua grew up in the next town over from mine, in Lexington, Missouri. A a teenager he wrote a column for the local paper, where he perfected his political condescension.
2/
By the time he reached high-school, however, he attended an elite private high-school 60 miles away in Kansas City.
This is a piece of his history he works to erase as he builds up his counterfeit image as a rural farm boy from a small town who grew up farming.
3/
After graduating from Rockhurst High School, he attended Stanford University where he wrote for the Stanford Review--a libertarian publication founded by Peter Thiel..
4/
(Full Link: https://t.co/zixs1HazLk)
Hawley's writing during his early 20s reveals that he wished for the curriculum at Stanford and other "liberal institutions" to change and to incorporate more conservative moral values.
This led him to create the "Freedom Forum."
5/
His arrogance and ambition prohibit any allegiance to morality or character.
Thus far, his plan to seize the presidency has fallen into place.
An explanation in photographs.
🧵
Joshua grew up in the next town over from mine, in Lexington, Missouri. A a teenager he wrote a column for the local paper, where he perfected his political condescension.
2/
By the time he reached high-school, however, he attended an elite private high-school 60 miles away in Kansas City.
This is a piece of his history he works to erase as he builds up his counterfeit image as a rural farm boy from a small town who grew up farming.
3/
After graduating from Rockhurst High School, he attended Stanford University where he wrote for the Stanford Review--a libertarian publication founded by Peter Thiel..
4/
(Full Link: https://t.co/zixs1HazLk)
Hawley's writing during his early 20s reveals that he wished for the curriculum at Stanford and other "liberal institutions" to change and to incorporate more conservative moral values.
This led him to create the "Freedom Forum."
5/
