They are correct on force, I worked in decentralized societies, they are dangerous because the state does not have a monopoly on violence
I have a different take on bitcoin, tether, and dollars
Can also speak with authority on nation state violence
"Nothing makes you feel more free than taking another person's freedom"
After much investigation and conversations with people on here, I\u2019ve formed a relatively robust theory of what may be happening with Tether.
— Travis Kimmel (@coloradotravis) January 18, 2021
This thread will attempt to lay it out with neutral language for the purpose of discussion.
1/
They are correct on force, I worked in decentralized societies, they are dangerous because the state does not have a monopoly on violence
But we need to be real, disrupting the global centralized economy won't be like Uber putting taxis out of work
For decentralization to rise the centralized global power of the last 70 years (US Hegemony) has to weaken
Yes we will be rich, but as the Big Short says,
"you can be happy, just don't fucking dance"
Piece I wrote is here, but lets stay focused on tether, bitcoin, and dollar for now
https://t.co/nT6gw6Xw6v
They are doing what the CCP does best
Using the US's 70 years of geopolitical power, 10 aircraft carrier battle groups, and GDP strength without having to pay for it
Would be a wasted opportunity by the CCP
CCP doesn't want fair anything, they want to undo the shame of the Opium Wars and treat the West the way we treated them in the 19th century
But don't care, bitcoin could drop to $1k, would just buy more
Privateers running an unlicensed federal reserve branch printing free dollars with the protection of the CCP and fear their displeasure much more than SDNY AUSAs
Tether and bitcoin are nothing
China kills Indians in the Himalayas to keep India engaged there so its navy does not have funds for defenses at the Strait of Malacca
You would too if you graduated in 2007 for the GFC, spent a decade overseas at war while fed and boomers had a party, came back for a pandemic, everything is expensive, and it all feels fake
Then I look at https://t.co/j0Jxx4Xsjs, see my cost of living going up 12% a year, and it is frustrating
Makes the whole traditional financial system feel dirty
But I don't, so I just stay long bitcoin, and will go into other investments when I find ones I think are good value and make sense to me
None of us should because the only thing that protects global trade is violence and that requires dudes like me
Think people get confused about security
Bitcoin being secure isn't the same as shipments being secured
More from Bitcoin
1/ outlook for bitcoin: positive 🚀
in this thread, i'll quickly outline key data points on #bitcoin sentiment, demand, market structure, and macro conditions
disclosure: i own BTC, obvi. this is not investment advice. DYOR. further disclosures at
2/ let's start w sentiment ☺️
first, investor sentiment:
✅ @blackrock filed to add BTC to 2 funds, CIO has 400k price target
✅ @RayDalio's Bridgewater reportedly issuing BTC research report
✅JPM, Goldman, and other bulge brackets initiated research coverage
3/ next, trader sentiment:
🚨 most important indicator is the forward curve
normally BTC futures trade in backwardation after a price drop.
this time, the curve stayed in contango following drop, meaning market makers are bullish 🐂📈 despite funding rate increase!
4/ sentiment drives demand. so DEMAND next.
💸 let's talk fund flows
🤑 our research shows $359M of inflows into crypto products last week alone (https://t.co/6Kky96m3ob)
🤑 our @CoinSharesCo @xbtprovider ETPs saw $200M trading volume on jan
4/ let's talk bitcoin fundamentals
post-halving, 900 BTC mined per day, 312,000 this year.
👀 47M millionaires. 21M bitcoin.
🏆 collectibles selling at all time highs. bitcoin is the ultimate collector's item. (see
in this thread, i'll quickly outline key data points on #bitcoin sentiment, demand, market structure, and macro conditions
disclosure: i own BTC, obvi. this is not investment advice. DYOR. further disclosures at
2/ let's start w sentiment ☺️
first, investor sentiment:
✅ @blackrock filed to add BTC to 2 funds, CIO has 400k price target
✅ @RayDalio's Bridgewater reportedly issuing BTC research report
✅JPM, Goldman, and other bulge brackets initiated research coverage
3/ next, trader sentiment:
🚨 most important indicator is the forward curve
normally BTC futures trade in backwardation after a price drop.
this time, the curve stayed in contango following drop, meaning market makers are bullish 🐂📈 despite funding rate increase!
4/ sentiment drives demand. so DEMAND next.
💸 let's talk fund flows
🤑 our research shows $359M of inflows into crypto products last week alone (https://t.co/6Kky96m3ob)
🤑 our @CoinSharesCo @xbtprovider ETPs saw $200M trading volume on jan
4/ let's talk bitcoin fundamentals
post-halving, 900 BTC mined per day, 312,000 this year.
👀 47M millionaires. 21M bitcoin.
🏆 collectibles selling at all time highs. bitcoin is the ultimate collector's item. (see
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
My top 10 tweets of the year
A thread 👇
https://t.co/xj4js6shhy
https://t.co/b81zoW6u1d
https://t.co/1147it02zs
https://t.co/A7XCU5fC2m
A thread 👇
https://t.co/xj4js6shhy
Entrepreneur\u2019s mind.
— James Clear (@JamesClear) August 22, 2020
Athlete\u2019s body.
Artist\u2019s soul.
https://t.co/b81zoW6u1d
When you choose who to follow on Twitter, you are choosing your future thoughts.
— James Clear (@JamesClear) October 3, 2020
https://t.co/1147it02zs
Working on a problem reduces the fear of it.
— James Clear (@JamesClear) August 30, 2020
It\u2019s hard to fear a problem when you are making progress on it\u2014even if progress is imperfect and slow.
Action relieves anxiety.
https://t.co/A7XCU5fC2m
We often avoid taking action because we think "I need to learn more," but the best way to learn is often by taking action.
— James Clear (@JamesClear) September 23, 2020
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
