BC TRADING
Saved by @Alex1Powell

I'm having difficulty seeing the need for any other currency in the world other than G$.

If it works, and it is decentralized, then why would we need more than one global-reach currency?

If it does the job perfectly, then why do we need another?

 I don't mean there won't be others. What I mean is that maybe Crypto UBI will be like the existing non-democratic crypto market ranking. There will be a first-place market cap amount, and exponential decay to the #2, #3, #4, etc.
This is in contrast to the simplistic view where we assume there will be X systems and they all have more or less the same abstract Y market cap or reach, and they all add up to an integrated system with X*Y market cap.
All you have to do is design the controls the way they want to be designed. If you don't introduce some unneeded damage in it, then there won't be the need to come up with another system that fixes the damage and actually does complete "the system" that we will use.
E.g. Bitcoin would have worked, except it introduced the damage that is Proof-of-Work, which means it is unusable and will be replaced by Ethereum, which will use PoS, thus fixing the damage.
From the GoodDollar simulation page, and from public statements from the people in the project, the GD project can be seen as a long-term project, in the 2020 planet-melting sense of long-term, which is not that long.
The success of GoodDollar depends on US Dollars. GoodDollar is animated by the previous currency construct, which has a hegemonic hold on people's imaginations (earned through a realpolitik effort by imperialism, war, etc.)
GoodDollar takes the old-world money and uses it as a referral to the money system that's going to replace it. It uses the story known as "Compound Interest" (a math trick that mesmerizes humans for some reason) to suck up legitimacy from a nondemocratic currency system to itself
Whereas compound interest (aka "permanent funds") were deployed before, and they are the technology behind the Quatinga Velho pilot by @ReCivitas, they were deployed as a means to achieve financial sustainability *in old-world money* to these UBI projects.
What GoodDollar is doing, as a "Web3" project, is reinventing money. The compound interest engine is, superficially, used to "pay" for people's Universal Basic Income in old-world money legitimacy that's proxied through a "crypto" (cryptographic & "pseudo") currency.
However, the only difference between a pseudo-currency that can technically function as a non-pseudo one is legitimacy. The pseudoness is not technical, but cultural, "legal", social.

All religions are fake upon their founding.
GoodDollar is using compound interest to produce a democratic currency.

In other words, GoodDollar is using one of the most powerful cultural spells we have ever invented as a perpetual engine that syphons legitimacy from the old nondemocratic monetary system to a democratic one
And so, GoodDollar depends on the deposits of US Dollars to get started doing its magic. Once the magic kicks in, more and more US Dollars will be donated to the fund, which is not controlled by anyone. And once "all" US Dollars are in it, then it's over.
At that point, the GoodDollar currency is the only currency that's moving around. And it is a democratic, UBI currency. It becomes what people consider "money." And nondemocratic currencies that are locked into their reserves can be forgotten, or even abolished.
Imagine the speed at which people will cast away these disgusting "fiat" (debt-based, non-UBI, capitalist) currencies and switch loyalty to UBI.

Of course, "conservatives" (including "financial conservatives") won't do that, because they are stuck in a racist, classist past.
But since the US Dollar is like every other "fiat" (debt-based, capitalist) currency in the world, its normal functioning has led to its accumulation by extremely skilled sociopaths who can pose as "good" people. The "billionaires" (now, trillionaires).
Not all billionaires are evil, but they /are/ billionaires, meaning there's something wrong with them. The exceptions just prove the rule.
And since we need US Dollars (used as a stand-in for all "fiat", debt-based, capitalist, deprivation-oriented money) to start GoodDollar's legitimacy-siphoning scheme, that means we need billionaires to donate to the fund. Our donations mean jack shit.
For a million (1,000,000) people to donate 1 billion dollars, each person has to part with $1,000, which they don't have. One (1) billionaire can fund what 1,000,000 people can't.

This strategy is absolutely dependent on rich people getting on board, if it is to cover the globe.
The only reason this is a long process is that rich people are evil and/or stupid and/or damaged in some other way. Otherwise, they could think about it for five minutes and just get rid of their money and dump it into the GoodDollar DAO-managed fund.
We don't need more than one UBI currency that implements this strategy. What we need is one currency that implements this strategy correctly, and no one will be able to surpass GoodDollar's approach. GoodDollar is what we are going to get w.r.t. that strategy.
Of course, there *will* be thousands of Crypto UBI currencies. But most Crypto UBI currencies won't use the "fiat reserve" approach. They will just be like every other community or local currency that has ever existed, and like most other cryptocurrencies: issue and use.
Reserve-less currencies will have the value of the community, and their "market cap" distribution probably will be far more even, because it is capped by region. These currencies may be global reach but the user base is not designed to be "everyone." It's like websites.
Or multiplayer games. Each game or site has a community of members. The website has global reach, but the "topic" of the game or site does not actually scale. Global reach is different from global scale (i.e. institutional reach). Global scale means the topic is "person."
Dailycoin has global reach but it has global scale problems. Its topic is "person" -- it is an institution -- but it is unreadable by most people. It is too alien. Maybe in 100 years.
Also the implementation is experimental. My *theory* is that a single identity oracle can literally cover the globe -- just like Facebook serves and identifies a billion people+ -- but I'm not actually sure of this and I certainly can't produce a proof of that.
So it is possible that Dailycoin needs the identity oracle to be a federated system controlled by a DAO, just like GoodDollar is going to do.
But my point is, there seems to be no point in duplicating GoodDollar.
You can create a different currency for a different community or a different topic. But there is only one globe and only one human species. So if that's your scale, you need only one implementation that is robust. If it is robust and a public good, then it's done.
Nobody goes dicking around in a Star Trek world suggesting that the Federation be replaced by a hundred of overlapping and competing Federations for fault-tolerance.
That doesn't mean it's bad to compete. More is always good. The point is, we don't need competition. My impulse is to contribute to the thing that's doing it right if that's not going to create a vulnerability in the ecosystem of things.
That's what it means to say that blockchain is a computing substrate that allows for the implementation of institutions. GoodDollar *would* be fundamentally vulnerable, and we *would* need redundant implementations, if we did not have Ethereum.
We need to SWARM rich people, especially very rich people, to stake into GoodDollar (GoodStake or GoodReserve).
But we have time to do that. GoodDollar has several years to develop all of the contract infrastructure, the DAO, etc.

Not too much time tho because the planet is dying.
The force that's destroying the planet IS debt. It is the competitive drive itself, which is generated by "fiscal/financial conservatism". As Charles Eisenstein noted, what we are doing is destroying nature and converting it into money. (Debt money).
That's why you need to read Charles Eisenstein's books. They are all free to read online. Read Sacred Economics and The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know Is Possible.
GoodDollar has ONE problem, which is the initial token issuance problem.

Bitcoin laundered its early-mining rewards by way of the "Proof-of-Work" myth: the work of computers that privileged people own is confused with their own work, due to Proprietarianism.
The Seigniorage problem is the fundamental problem of "who is the first owner of a coin." It is an unresolvable problem. The only way to "solve" it is to issue it equally to everyone, which is also impossible because new people are continuously minted into existence.
Since it is somewhat unlikely that the GoodDollar token won't appreciate in value, the usual accusations of "scam" and of "privilege" will be thrown around. But then again, that's inevitable. Of course that the reactionaries will use that as a way to smear the project.
But it is guaranteed that detractors will use a willful misunderstanding of how the GoodDollar system works to attack it: that some people earned like 100 G$ a day in the early days whereas some went into the reserve and bought 5000000 G$ for $500.
The best thing we could do really would be a fundraiser to buy out the entire flat slope of the GoodDollar Bancor curve, and it will generate I don't know 50 billion G$ or something like that, and then we just burn it all.
My point is that the flat part of the Bancor curve, the early part, is like the "Ceremony" part of some Zero-Knowledge protocols like ZCASH: it is a pollution, an externality. But in the case of the Bancor curve vs. the Seigniorage problem it is a cultural pollution.
But this is just a story. It only really has relevance in cultural terms. In functional terms who gets the first G$s is absolutely irrelevant in contrast to what this existing system is doing -- the system that G$ and Crypto UBI and monetary democracy are trying to change.
I know GoodDollar has a part in its equations that's designed to keep the token price in check, and the parameters seem to be chosen carefully so that G$ can be an actual global currency and progress as such, with an appropriate timespan for success in that scope.
Maybe the fact that it is a long-term process is sufficient to use the sands of time to minimize the attack surface via moral panics by reactionaries. On the other hand, the Bancor curve is (usually?) an exponential, so it seems that at some point it does take off.
The curve has 3 states: 1, flat. 2, middle, 3, end. The end part is never reached, because it is exponential. But there's usually a visible transition from the flat part, which has like a ridiculously low asset price vs. the middle, where the "tension" with the end part develops
Unless I'm missing something, this is going to "happen" at some point. And lots of bitching and noise might happen. We don't want that. We want billionaires to buy the reserve because GoodDollar is the system we need and it's going to solve the entire thing for us.
Another thing that would be great would be the ability in GoodDollar for one to donate their own G$ into a pool that goes into the next UBI payment period.

So if I have 5 million G$ that I bought for $500 I can just donate them to the next G$ distribution cycle.
That is the same as burning G$. The cultural and monetary results are almost the same (99.99%).

Think about it: a healthy monetary system has no rich people. Only rich organizations, funds, institutions, charters, projects, initiatives, mandates. Not people.
The moment a healthy society with a monetary system has a person that has a lot of money, what that person does, being a healthy person in a healthy society, is to just get rid of it.
Personal ownership of money is incredibly stupid. Why do people even need money? Let money be an institutional thing. UBI is a way to push us towards a world where we all have more or less the same amount of money that is sufficient for us to live. As if money wasn't there at all
People walking around with personal money, to me, is like people carrying guns. This is the economic Wild West and all the men have economic guns. What we want to do is to create a world where people *genuinely* don't need to walk around economically armed.

More from Fabiana Cecin ๐Ÿด ๐ŸŒน

Fabiana Cecin \U0001f3f4 \U0001f339
Fabiana Cecin ๐Ÿด ๐ŸŒน...
@fabianacecin
Before I try to solve the GoodReserve vs. GoodStaking problem, which involves math and time and interest, let me solve something easier, which is all of modern politics.

Here's an example. When the pandemic was in the first wave here in Brazil, you could see lots of cultural noise about the fact that rich people were not dying because they got hospital care, whereas poor maids etc. were getting infected by rich people e.g. coming back from Italy.

Then, after a while, this story died. We "know" this now, but nothing happened.

When this sort of thing happens -- lots of noise, followed by normalization -- we are trained to think that that's *OUR* fault as cultural noisemakers.

IF ONLY WE MADE MORE NOISE, we think.

Why do we think that?

We think that because of all the times making noise worked.

Or did it? Did it actually work? Was it actually the noise that "changed" things?

Nope. The noise doesn't change anything.

EVER.

Here's how this works.
POLITICS
Fabiana Cecin \U0001f3f4 \U0001f339
Fabiana Cecin ๐Ÿด ๐ŸŒน...
@fabianacecin
This is still the dark ages of software development. I don't mean that in the common nonsense sense of "methods," but of perception and of goals.

As a whole, this behaves exactly like a primitive age does: all effort spent solving the same problems over and over again.

A "technology," if it means anything, is something you do that stops you from solving the same problem over and over again. You can spend J energy solving every instance of problem X as it manifests into infinity, or you can spend J energy abolishing X through a "technology."

Capitalism rewards every industry, not only "tech," to never abolish a good X. Instead, it encourages us to create some machinery to sell temporary remedies for getting rid of every instance of X as it crops up everywhere.

If "technology is what matters," then we must change the social system and culture we live in, because that culture is the greatest meta-machine for mass suppression of technology that has ever been invented.

People's instincts, individually and collectively, are always to correctly decide when to erase instances of problem generators, and when to attack the problem generators themselves. The current system and culture eliminate 99%+ of that wisdom. It's massively stupid.
SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT
Advertisement
Fabiana Cecin \U0001f3f4 \U0001f339
Fabiana Cecin ๐Ÿด ๐ŸŒน...
@fabianacecin
But you see you don't actually understand how lawmaking works there's this set of procedures and dates that BLEAAAARGHHHHHvomitvomit


Neoliberalism is an economic genocidal ideology predicated on maintaining capitalism, and capitalism is the impoverishment, oppression and death of poor people because that's the OBJECTIVE of capitalist ideology. It's a malthusian ideology.

Neoliberals are the original Alt-Right

Capitalism has ZERO todo with "markets vs. no markets," or "central planning vs. decentralization." That's *propaganda*. That's a diversion.

Capitalism is the NAME OF THE ABSENCE of any support for poor people. In capitalism, giving ANY power to poor people is a CRIME.

Capitalism has an *exception* to the strict forbiddance of giving any economic power to the 99%, and that is the concept of "Merit."

If you act as a SLAVE (wage slave), then you can get some crumbs to *temporarily* avoid your death. While you are mechanically useful.

These fucking Neoliberals which are 99% of the Democratic Party in the US are all POSING as nice people. They are not. They are all sociopaths.

This economic fascism is so thoroughly normalized in the US that nobody has a concept of what capitalism is.
LAW
Fabiana Cecin \U0001f3f4 \U0001f339
Fabiana Cecin ๐Ÿด ๐ŸŒน...
@fabianacecin
OK let me try math again.

GoodStaking: you invest X, like you would in a savings account. After many years it produces Y interest, of which Y/2 go to the reserve over time, and Y/2 becomes G$ that you own.

No, that's wrong. Jesus.

The entire Y goes into the reserve, and that generates a Z amount of G$.

Z/2 goes to people as UBI.

Z/2 goes to you.

OK, so I wasn't that far off.

If I donate a large amount of money to the reserve, what I am doing is emulating a large Y. I'm taking a ton of money that I *have* (so it would be a "principal" today, a X) and pretending it's like a Y of someone else that will do GoodStaking.

The money that I have is a small X. It will generate a small Y. Instead, I want to take my small X and pretend it's a large Y, which would originate from a large X. That I don't have. Because I'm poor.

So if I want to make the largest possible impact into the UBI reserve, to make a splash, and help it be noticed, I can take the small amount of money I have, the X I have, and pretend it's a Y of staking, and time warp it to the present and use the X to buy G$ from the reserve.
TRADING
Fabiana Cecin \U0001f3f4 \U0001f339
Fabiana Cecin ๐Ÿด ๐ŸŒน...
@fabianacecin
The US peoples could create an organization that issues a RENT token that is nominally worth 1 USD each of debt as a kind of bond to every homeowner so there is no excuse and you will not be making other people homeless.

The government can do this kind of thing very easily and in fact, every government is doing this, but if your government won't and you have the tech and the social climate to pull this off without being assassinated then you should do it because it would work.

Social debt can be redeemed by anyone, anytime. The origination mechanism of a token tells the story of whether it will be redeemed by society in an entirely volunteer fashion.

If a RENT token exists, you know that it was created by people to avoid other people being evicted. Then you can choose to honor it if (i) you can (iia) you think rent is legitimate or (iib) you think it's strategic to help pretend rent is legitimate (iii) you believe the issuer

Democratic, bottom-up currency creation is a technology that we must hand to people. It must be trivial to create tokens, and we must learn the power of volunteering *towards currencies*. This is an entire social language that's going to emerge.
SOCIETY

More from Trading

Aditya Todmal
Aditya Todmal
@AdityaTodmal
DJ @ITRADE191 multiple chart analysis for INTRADAY TRADING.

1. Core setup
2. Pivot points trades
3. PDH/PDL trades
4. Open interest addictions combined with rejections on charts.
5. Website to confirm bias

Very quick read.

Share if you liked for the benefit of everyone.

โ€ขMain setup of @ITRADE191
He used this setup daily for all trades.

1. EMA crossover 10/20
2. Supertrend 10/3
3. Vwap
4. RSI >


โ€ขVolume always greater than


โ€ขCandle Rejecting from


โ€ขPivot settings
STOCKLEARNINGS , TRADING , DJ SETUP
JayneshKasliwal
JayneshKasliwal
@JayneshKasliwal
๐—ก๐—ถ๐—ณ๐˜๐˜†-๐—•๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ธ๐—ป๐—ถ๐—ณ๐˜๐˜† ๐—ข๐—ฝ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—•๐˜‚๐˜†๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฆ๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ด๐˜†

Complete Backtest and Indicator link

๐Ÿงต A Thread ๐Ÿงต

๐—ฆ๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜‚๐—ฝ:
๐Ÿ”ธ Monthly Option Buying
๐Ÿ”ธ 50 ema on 3 min timeframe
๐Ÿ”ธ Supertrend 10 , 3
๐Ÿ”ธ Chart : Banknifty , Nifty Futures as we backtested on futures
๐Ÿ”ธ Entry 9:20 to 3:00
๐Ÿ”ธ Max 3 Entries per day
๐Ÿ”ธ Premium nearest to 200 Rs only

[2/18]

Why Monthly Option buying ?
๐Ÿ”ธ Less theta decay compared to weekly options
๐Ÿ”ธ Less Volatility
๐Ÿ”ธ Supertrend and MA Settings
[3/18]


๐Ÿ”ธ Indicator Link
๐Ÿ”ธ Click on the below ๐˜ญ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ฌ -> ๐˜ˆ๐˜ฅ๐˜ฅ ๐˜ต๐˜ฐ ๐˜๐˜ข๐˜ท๐˜ฐ๐˜ถ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ด -> ๐˜ˆ๐˜ฅ๐˜ฅ ๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ ๐˜Š๐˜ฉ๐˜ข๐˜ณ๐˜ต from favourites and start using it !

๐Ÿ”ธ https://t.co/zVXavqLBto
[4/18]

๐—œ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐—ฆ๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด๐˜€ :
๐Ÿ”ธ Max 6 Trades per day ( Both CE and PE buy)
๐Ÿ”ธ Timings 9:20 am to 3:00 pm
๐Ÿ”ธ Supertrend : 10,3
๐Ÿ”ธ Moving Average 50 ema
[5/18]
ALL , TRADING , A OPTION BUYING INDICATOR
Advertisement
Edwin Hayward \U0001f984 \U0001f5e1
Edwin Hayward ๐Ÿฆ„ ๐Ÿ—ก...
@uk_domain_names
Here's how the UK's situation will change after the transition period ends, compared to our former EU membership...

(Come back to this thread. It will keep growing!)

- UK can negotiate its own trade deals
- No more automatic participation in new trade deals reached by the EU

- UK gets to keep fish equivalent to 25% of the catch EU boats previously caught in UK waters, staggered over 5.5 years
- Costly export health certificates for fishery products
- Inbound and outbound customs and regulatory checks (UK side will defer some of these temporarily)

- Stringent rules of origin and local content requirements
- Loss of freedom of movement for UK citizens in the EU and EU citizens in the UK (Ireland excepted)
- No Erasmus programme
- No equivalence decision for financial services

- A border down the Irish sea between NI & GB
- No access to the Galileo military
- Temporary agreement on data, which expires in 6 months
- 2 parallel trademark systems, requiring firms to file twice in the UK and the EU

- 2 parallel product conformity assessment systems (CE and UKCA), requiring firms to file twice in the UK and the EU. One year grace period (with exceptions).
- 2 parallel chemical regulatory systems (REACH and UK REACH), requiring firms to register twice in the UK and the EU
TRADING
Aditya Todmal
Aditya Todmal
@AdityaTodmal
Want to master Option Selling for free?

Here are the best resources.

A thread ๐Ÿงต๐Ÿ‘‡

Collaborated with @niki_poojary

1. Best book of knowledge for a beginner?

Zerodha Varsity from @Nithin0dha's team is the best book for a newcomer to read and increase his basic knowledge about options, especially for the Indian markets.

Link:

2. Best Youtube channel on Options Trading?

The @tastytrade financial network. It's a foreign channel that focuses mostly on selling options.

They teach all strategies for free with their backtests.

Big on Straddle/Strangles selling.

Links:

3. Top Indian YouTube Channel for Options?

Power of Stocks - Subhasish Pani

What you'll learn:
1. How to form a trading plan.
2. How to scale an account with risk-reward in option selling.
3. Technical analysis logics you can use daily.

15


4. What are the preconditions to start option Selling:

You should know technical Analysis basics like:
- Support/Resistance
- Chart Patterns
- Candle Patterns
- Dow Theory (HH, LL)

This will help you start taking high-probability trades.
TRADING
OptionSeller(Vardhan)
OptionSeller(Vardhan)
@CaVardhanca
If you really want to make MONEY in markets:-

Instead of finding SUPPORTS to BUY in Bearish Markets, try to SELL near RESISTANCE in PULL BACKS.

Instead of finding RESISTANCE to SELL in Bullish markets, try to BUY near SUPPORT in PULL BACKS.

You are all set to make MONEY!!!
TRADING

You May Also Like

Vibhu Vashisth
Vibhu Vashisth
@VIBHU_Tweet
RANI NAIKI DEVI AND THE BATTLE OF KASAHRADA

Mohammad Ghori, the young Ghurid Prince conquered Ghaznavids in Afghanistan in the year 1173 CE. He conducted some successful raids into the Indian territory, which even Mahmud Ghazni & the Persians couldn't do.


First&foremost,Ghori invaded states of Multan &Uch in India.After this he turned to southern states of Gujarat &Rajputana.Everybody knows this about Ghori,but what most pple r unaware of is the defeat he suffered at hands of Chalukyan Queen Naiki Devi in 1178 Battle of Kasahrada.


When he marched southwards, his first target was the prosperous fortified town of Anhilwara Patan.
It was the capital of Chalukyas(also known as Solankis of Gujarat) which was established by Vanraj of Chapotkata Dynasty in 8th century.


American historian Tertius Chandler states that it was the 10th largest city in the world at that time. The history of Chalukyas has been written by many historians, but the valour of the Great Queen Naiki Devi remains unsung.


Born to the Kadamba King Paramardin of Goa,Naiki Devi was well trained in sword fighting, horse riding, strategy & every other subject of Statesmanship. She was married to King Ajaypala of Gujarat who sat on throne in 1171CE. Unfortunately,the King died within 4 yrs of his rule.
ALL
Vibhu Vashisth \U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
Vibhu Vashisth ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ...
@VIBHU_Tweet
VEDIC COSMOLOGY, also known as Hindu Cosmology, and cosmography are both interesting and inspiring. Todayโ€™s โ€œmodernโ€ Vedic texts originated around 3,000 B.C.E. This is the oldest scientific and the oldest religious doctrine known to the human race.


Our current astronomy of the solar system and universe has its roots in Vedic knowledge. It only shows that man had advanced knowledge of astronomy way before our current civilization came into existence.
We are here to talk about the Vedic version of the planetary system,

starting at the top from the eternal planets to the temporary planetary system within innumerable universes in the material world.

Talking about โ€œcosmic manifestation,โ€ we need to incorporate both spiritual and material existence.


The spiritual realm of the planets is everlasting, and this will forever be beyond what the material universe can encapsulate. The spiritual realm belongs to the โ€œsuper dimensionalโ€ or โ€œanti-materialโ€ dimension. It means that it is beyond what we can perceive,


beyond time as a linear dimension, and the space of our vision and perception.

There are innumerable planets, all indestructible and forever lasting. That is what the Vedas say about the spiritual planets. Our concentration here is more towards the material side of things.
ALL
Advertisement
Dr Naomi Wolf
Dr Naomi Wolf
@naomirwolf
1/Just had an interview scheduled with @goddeketal, Dr Simon Goddek, the post-doctoral researcher at the Faculty of Mathematics and Statistics in the field of biotechnology, at an unnamed Dutch university. This researcher has been publicly pointing out that the paper that...

2/ the PCR test as the gold standard underlying global "lockdowns" was passed after maximum ONE day of peer review, as opposed to the average at that same journal of 172 days in 2019. Also that several authors have conflicts of interest. Unfortunately we were forced to cancel..

3/ because he was strongly advised by his university to maintain silence and not speak publicly -- to step back from this issue. I learned from a source that his university was heavily assailed by many complaints. Other scientists who have signed the review criticizing the PRC..

4/test, the "Retraction Request Letter", a critique that got worldwide attention, have also been bombarded with attacks, their relatives are being called at night, and their universities assailed. Some are at risk of losing jobs. Even former employers are being harassed. I..

5/ Note : scientists around the world are being silenced and harassed if they speak up in normal criticism of the scientific methods or conclusions used to advance the lockdown agenda and COVID testing. This is not post-enlightenment scientific discourse, this is how scientists
SCIENCE
Raman Shalupau
Raman Shalupau
@ksaitor
Maker movement is doing to startups what startups did to corporations.

Here is why ๐Ÿ‘‡

Startups fixed the problem of innovation, that corporations lack.

In big, slow corporations, innovation is a RISK and distraction from the core $$$ profitable business.

Agile startups could launch, iterate fast and eventually stumble upon new growing market opportunities.

However,

When a startup reaches product-market-fit, it has to ๐Ÿš€ "grow at all costs" and reach market dominance before some giant corporation can replicate their new product and distribute it to their existing giant customer base.

Startup's "growth at all costs" often means growth at the expense of charging customers $$$ money.

Hence, to be sustainable, startups have to constantly chase investor money.

Startup teams spend more time finding and pleasing investors, than finding and pleasing customers.

95% of startups die because they run out of (investor) money + no business model + crazy investor expectations.

Same way corporations die, when unable to adjust to new technology and market shifts.
MAKERS
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
CRYPTO


Category Partner: Enkryptopedia