Could easily be a big sell off then
MtGox you're only talking about 9-10 billion, even if everybody dumped at once it would be a blip, and the majority will just add it to their stacks and HODL.
They can’t let good FUD go to waste.
It’s the same for every market.
It shouldn’t impact the price but the sentiment could impact the price.
Any Mt Gox dump will have an effect, but it won't be as much as the Chinese government banning first mining and then all crypto except their own crypto spyware, since when, BTC went on to a new all time high. Just another temporary storm BTC will sail through.
anyone know much about the Greed and Fear Index? Something worth taking note of?
Is just showing the sentiment at that point, based on the markets, I never look at it
“Be fearful when people are greedy and greedy when people are fearful.” Warren Buffett.
Its just a sign of the market, buying when people are fearful usually gets better returns than buying in after something has already run. That said holding long term in an established crypto can have the same result or you can buy sh*tcoins and play the lotto. To the MOON!
Using a quote out of context from of the least market influenced investor to justify market behavior….. thanks for the laugh!
what was the context?
What.
My best guess is that Buffet isn't a day trader but the comment is being largely used by them as a day trading aphorism.
Im feeling pretty hedged along with the majority who have ever invested anyway, what kind of performance are you looking for?
.....
Gensler has sent his strongest message yet, encouraging all involved in crypto to come in under the regulatory wing
I'd imagine what he really means is that the government should take over the project and control over writing the software. Putting names to every wallet would be one goal. Might as well chuck in a set of master keys so a court can order the seizure of assets. An aspect of global finances that they dont control, but want to.
There is no worldwide consensus. Look how the US was able to threaten all banks to force compliace with Iran sanctions and foreign governments that disagreed were left helpless. There isn't a single treaty the US made with the native americans they didn't break.
... WTF
Crypto is far too unstable to be a hedge against inflation
Inflation hedges are commodities that will be in such demand that their price will increase in line with inflation
Kosovo has banned Crypto mining because it is too energy intensive and caused blackouts and brownouts
Block chain as a technology is self limiting. As the block is mined, each transaction gets more and more energy expensive.
A single block chain transaction in bitcoin uses the same energy as an entire household uses in 6 weeks.
That is simply unsustainable and it completely ruins any argument that says bitcoin is a viable currency.
High energy costs now are helps with security, making an attack on the network too expensive.
Also, every block doesn't get progressively more expensive, the mining difficulty adjusts up and down, to keep it around a consistent value. High energy usage incentives people to look for cheaper and more sustainable energy sources, which has already started happening.
I agree Bitcoin probably won't be used as a currency though.
Why not use something other than proof-of-work that is essentially wasting energy
There are a maximum of 21 million bitcoin in existence, 18.9 of them have already been 'mined'. After every 210k blocks are mined, the number of bitcoin per block halves, by design, so about every 4 years roughly, you have to mine twice as many blocks to get the same amount of bitcoin
The fact that it's so energy intensive doesn't mean the miners will go to sustainable electricity, they go to Cheap eletricity, ie, places where electricity is heavily subsidised, like Kosovo, or uses a very cheap energy source, (like coal)
If the world had a global surplus of clean renewable electricity capacity that was just going to waste without crypto mining, then this would be fine, but we don't, there is a climate change crisis caused by excessive energy consumption at a time when most of our energy still comes from fossil fuels. And the transaction cost in energy for bitcoin mining means that we are burning very real energy resources, and creating very real pollution, in order to create a purely theoretical token of exchange that people are essentially gambling on. The huge transaction cost makes the blockchain unsuitable for any practical application
The Proof of Work blockchain is going to be regulated into oblivion. Proof of Stake mining has a lower energy cost, but this has its own costs that reduce the utility of the 'currencies' as tradable commodities.
I think most enterprise uses of the blockchain will use a proof of stake model, and transaction fees to pay to maintain the blockchain. the 'Coins' themselves will all be owned by the enterprise as they will want to maintain full control over the blockchain if it is a functional part of a service or application they provide
Once all the blocks are mined, then there is no longer any incentive for miners to give away their computing resources for free, so it will turn to transaction fees, which would make that blockchain ridiculously expensive compared to a brand new one and the coin will collapse in value, very very quickly. (the act of selling/transferring your bitcoin could become a significant percentage of what the coin is 'worth' and then the value would collapse to nothing)
Don't talk about energy wastage. Just don't do it.
I suspect it will be used by banks as a standard and they will run their own miners. The scalability will adjust itself based on profit and demand. So these large holders will maintain the network post profitability for their own interests with small holders not transacting on the main chain at all but at a layer two level.
The next big innovation will be interoperability between all chains for lower transaction fees.
A public blockchain with only a few bank-owned computers processing transactions? ..................... 51% ..........
Bitcoin yes...but there are PLenty of concensus mechanisms that don't work on proof of work and don't **** up the environment.
Self scaling, miners turned on as necessary.
The point about a 51% attack is that the bank's chain, and any of the blocks it added after the attackers chain starting point, gets discarded once the longer chain is released onto the network. If it is only the bank and the attacker, then the bank can try to "catch up" but anyone else on the network will accept the attackers chain as the legit one and their future work effectively helps to secure that.
This would be almost every bank running these in their data centres not just one. As more nodes come online they can lease more mining power if necessary on the fly.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d3e92925f7bde702415f91ea088d4f7a.svg)
