Do You BitCoin?

[Foxx]

all markets are down. a continuation of Friday's slide.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

And the great tulip bulb selloff continues.

 

[GoBills808]

On 2/2/2018 at 2:22 PM, mead107 said:

Fools. I would have sent you a meadcoin that you can hold in your hand.  

I'll take two so I can rub them together.

[Jauronimo]

11 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

And the great tulip bulb selloff continues.

 

Can you describe the mechanics of tulip mania and how they relate to crypto assets?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

Can you describe the mechanics of tulip mania and how they relate to crypto assets?

 

Sure, in the tulip mania, something that had intrinsically no value was bid up to ridiculous prices, only to have a cascading selloff.

 

Crypto assets have no intrensic value and were bid up to values based on well, nothing. Now they're getting slaughtered.

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

13 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Sure, in the tulip mania, something that had intrinsically no value was bid up to ridiculous prices, only to have a cascading selloff.

 

Crypto assets have no intrensic value and were bid up to values based on well, nothing. Now they're getting slaughtered.

 

People are sheep...

[Jauronimo]

18 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Sure, in the tulip mania, something that had intrinsically no value was bid up to ridiculous prices, only to have a cascading selloff.

 

Crypto assets have no intrensic value and were bid up to values based on well, nothing. Now they're getting slaughtered.

 

What's the intrinsic value of fiat?

 

I can think of a few pretty major differences between tulips and BTC or ETH. 

Edited February 5, 2018 by Jauronimo

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, Jauronimo said:

What's the intrinsic value of fiat?

 

Well for one thing it has the backing of government, however tenuous.

 

 

[Jauronimo]

1 minute ago, joesixpack said:

 

Well for one thing it has the backing of government, however tenuous.

 

 

I suppose crypto assets have "no intrinsic value" from the standpoint of traditional equity analysis but plenty of other assets have value that do not produce cash flows.  Comparing bitcoin to speculation on fungus infected tulips solely because of rapid price appreciation demonstrates very little understanding of the situation.  Fun talking points but they ring hollow.

 

Why does gold or silver have any particular value?  Their actual use in tech and products is minimal.  Production grows every year.  Is there really anything more to it than we as a species like shiny stuff that stays shiny?  Not too long ago our paper money and the full faith and credit of the U.S. was based on how much shiny stuff we had yet people balk at crypto like the concept is totally unheard of.

 

Now we have a digital asset with a true finite amount that can act as digital shiny stuff in a trustless environment sans central bank or clearinghouse.  And unlike physical shiny stuff, you can carry a fortune of it in your pocket and send it across the globe in an instant.  Sounds like a process improvement to me.

[ExiledInIllinois]

46 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

I suppose crypto assets have "no intrinsic value" from the standpoint of traditional equity analysis but plenty of other assets have value that do not produce cash flows.  Comparing bitcoin to speculation on fungus infected tulips solely because of rapid price appreciation demonstrates very little understanding of the situation.  Fun talking points but they ring hollow.

 

Why does gold or silver have any particular value?  Their actual use in tech and products is minimal.  Production grows every year.  Is there really anything more to it than we as a species like shiny stuff that stays shiny?  Not too long ago our paper money and the full faith and credit of the U.S. was based on how much shiny stuff we had yet people balk at crypto like the concept is totally unheard of.

 

Now we have a digital asset with a true finite amount that can act as digital shiny stuff in a trustless environment sans central bank or clearinghouse.  And unlike physical shiny stuff, you can carry a fortune of it in your pocket and send it across the globe in an instant.  Sounds like a process improvement to me.

More gold has been mined in the last 50 years than it has during all of human existence.

 

Isn't tech driving this?  The ability to squeeze gold out of the smallest places, tightest ore?

Edited February 5, 2018 by ExiledInIllinois

[BeginnersMind]

13 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

I suppose crypto assets have "no intrinsic value" from the standpoint of traditional equity analysis but plenty of other assets have value that do not produce cash flows.  Comparing bitcoin to speculation on fungus infected tulips solely because of rapid price appreciation demonstrates very little understanding of the situation.  Fun talking points but they ring hollow.

 

Why does gold or silver have any particular value?  Their actual use in tech and products is minimal.  Production grows every year.  Is there really anything more to it than we as a species like shiny stuff that stays shiny?  Not too long ago our paper money and the full faith and credit of the U.S. was based on how much shiny stuff we had yet people balk at crypto like the concept is totally unheard of.

 

Now we have a digital asset with a true finite amount that can act as digital shiny stuff in a trustless environment sans central bank or clearinghouse.  And unlike physical shiny stuff, you can carry a fortune of it in your pocket and send it across the globe in an instant.  Sounds like a process improvement to me.

 

I have no problem with this argument and it backs what I’ve been saying. No one values bitcoin or its alternatives. You can use it to make a small number of trades for services but not many. 99.9999% of transactions still require a medium directly related to govt backed currency, which is why this was a senseless bubble. 

 

Can it become an accepted currency? Sure. But despite blockchain technology, it’s currently following a well trodden path of wildly unsuccessful attempts to dethrone government backed currency. 

 

I wish it luck but if the digital metals-backed currencies didn’t catch on, I have serious doubts about the blockchain currencies, except in very narrow sectors. 

 

Edited February 6, 2018 by BeginnersMind

[mead107]

Mead coin didn’t drop at all.  

[Jauronimo]

4 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

I have no problem with this argument and it backs what I’ve been saying. No one values bitcoin or its alternatives. You can use it to make a small number of trades for services but not many. 99.9999% of transactions still require a medium directly related to govt backed currency, which is why this was a senseless bubble. 

 

Can it become an accepted currency? Sure. But despite blockchain technology, it’s currently following a well trodden path of wildly unsuccessful attempts to dethrone government backed currency. 

 

I wish it luck but if the digital metals-backed currencies didn’t catch on, I have serious doubts about the blockchain currencies, except in very narrow sectors. 

 

Cool.  But you have still only described maybe 1/3 of the total space.

 

Read up on Ethereum which is anything BUT an attempt dethrone fiat and if that makes sense, take a gander at the hundreds of projects that are developing on the Ethereum platform. 

[BeginnersMind]

4 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

Cool.  But you have still only described maybe 1/3 of the total space.

 

Read up on Ethereum which is anything BUT an attempt dethrone fiat and if that makes sense, take a gander at the hundreds of projects that are developing on the Ethereum platform. 

 

Fair point. Let me restate so there’s no misunderstanding. I have serious doubt about the currencies: I see them as a most dubious prospect. 

 

The blockchain technology has widespread application.

[row_33]

16 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Fair point. Let me restate so there’s no misunderstanding. I have serious doubt about the currencies: I see them as a most dubious prospect. 

 

The blockchain technology has widespread application.

 

sounds good twice

 

 

[Foxx]

you read it here first.

 

essentially, regulators are embracing crypto currencies.

 

read and understand what is being said. this is huge.

 

 

 

WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF

J. CHRISTOPHER GIANCARLO

CHAIRMAN, COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

BEFORE THE

SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE

WASHINGTON, D.C.

FEBRUARY 6, 2018

 

 

 

Quote

VI. Potential Benefits

I have spoken publicly about the potential benefits of the technology underlying Bitcoin, namely Blockchain or distributed ledger technology (DLT). 22 Distributed ledgers – in various open system or private network applications – have the potential to enhance economic efficiency, mitigate centralized systemic risk, defend against fraudulent activity and improve data quality and governance.

23 DLT is likely to have a broad and lasting impact on global financial markets in payments, banking, securities settlement, title recording, cyber security and trade reporting and analysis.24 When tied to virtual currencies, this technology aims to serve as a new store of value, facilitate secure payments, enable asset transfers, and power new applications.

 Additionally, DLT will likely develop hand-in-hand with new “smart” contracts that can value themselves in real-time, report themselves to data repositories, automatically calculate and perform margin payments and even terminate themselves in the event of counterparty default.

25 DLT may enable financial market participants to manage the significant operational,transactional and capital complexities brought about by the many mandates, regulations and capital requirements promulgated by regulators here and abroad in the wake of the financial crisis. 26 In fact, one study estimates that DLT could eventually allow financial institutions to save as much as $20 billion in infrastructure and operational costs each year.27 Another study reportedly estimates that blockchain could cut trading settlement costs by a third, or $16 billion a year, and cut capital requirements by $120 billion.28 Moving from systems-of-record at the level of a firm to an authoritative system-of-record at the level of a market is an enormous opportunity to improve existing market infrastructure.

29 Outside of the financial services industry, many use cases for DLT are being posited from international trade to charitable endeavors and social services. International agricultural commodities merchant, Louis Dreyfus, and a group of financing banks have just completed the first agricultural deal using distributed ledger technology for the sale of 60,000 tons of US soybeans to China.30 Other DLT use cases include: legal records management, inventory control and logistics, charitable donation tracking and confirmation; voting security and human refugee identification and relocation.

31 Yet, while DLT promises enormous benefits to commercial firms and charities, it also promises assistance to financial market regulators in meeting their mission to oversee healthy markets and mitigate financial risk. What a difference it would have made on the eve of the financial crisis in 2008 if regulators had access to the real-time trading ledgers of large Wall Street banks, rather than trying to assemble piecemeal data to recreate complex, individual trading portfolios. I have previously speculated32 that, if regulators in 2008 could have viewed a real-time distributed ledger (or a series of aggregated ledgers across asset classes) and, perhaps, been able to utilize modern cognitive computing capabilities, they may have been able to recognize anomalies in market-wide trading activity and diverging counterparty exposures indicating heightened risk of bank failure. Such transparency may not, by itself, have saved Lehman Brothers from bankruptcy, but it certainly would have allowed for far prompter, betterinformed, and more calibrated regulatory intervention instead of the disorganized response that unfortunately ensued. ...

 

 

 

 

Quote

VII. Policy Considerations

Two decades ago, as the Internet was entering a phase of rapid growth and expansion, a Republican Congress and the Clinton administration established a set of enlightened foundational principles: the Internet was to progress through human social interaction; voluntary contractual relations and free markets; and governments and regulators were to act in a thoughtful manner not to harm the Internet’s continuing evolution.

33 This simple approach is well-recognized as the enlightened regulatory underpinning of the Internet that brought about such profound changes to human society. During the almost 20 years of “do no harm” regulation, a massive amount of investment was made in the Internet’s infrastructure. It yielded a rapid expansion in access that supported swift deployment and mass adoption of Internet-based technologies. Internet-based innovations have revolutionized nearly every aspect of American life, from telecommunications to commerce, transportation and research and development. This robust Internet economy has created jobs, increased productivity and fostered innovation and consumer choice.

“Do no harm” was unquestionably the right approach to development of the Internet. Similarly, I believe that “do no harm” is the right overarching approach for distributed ledger technology.

Virtual currencies, however, likely require more attentive regulatory oversight in key areas, especially to the extent that retail investors are attracted to this space. SEC Chairman Clayton and I recently stated in a joint op-ed, that:
 

 

“Our task, as market regulators, is to set and enforce rules that foster innovation while promoting market integrity and confidence. In recent months, we have seen a wide range of market participants, including retail investors, seeking to invest in DLT initiatives, including through cryptocurrencies and socalled ICOs—initial coin offerings. Experience tells us that while some market participants may make fortunes, the risks to all investors are high. Caution is merited.

 

 

 

 

“A key issue before market regulators is whether our historic approach to the regulation of currency transactions is appropriate for the cryptocurrency markets. Check-cashing and money-transmission services that operate in the U.S. are primarily state-regulated. Many of the internet-based cryptocurrency trading platforms have registered as payment services and are not subject todirect oversight by the SEC or the CFTC. We would support policy efforts to revisit these frameworks and ensure they are effective and efficient for the digital era.”

34 As the Senate Banking Committee, the Senate Agriculture Committee and other Congressional policy makers consider the current state of regulatory oversight of cash or “spot” transactions in virtual currencies and trading platforms, consideration should be given to shortcomings of the current approach of state-by-state money transmitter licensure that leaves gaps in protection for virtual currency traders and investors. Any proposed Federal regulation of virtual currency platforms should be carefully tailored to the risks posed by relevant trading activity and enhancing efforts to prosecute fraud and manipulation. Appropriate Federal oversight may include: data reporting, capital requirements, cyber security standards, measures to prevent fraud and price manipulation and anti-money laundering and “know your customer” protections. Overall, a rationalized federal framework may be more effective and efficient in ensuring the integrity of the underlying market.

 

 

 

 

Quote

Conclusion

We are entering a new digital era in world financial markets. As we saw with the development of the Internet, we cannot put the technology genie back in the bottle. Virtual currencies mark a paradigm shift in how we think about payments, traditional financial processes, and engaging in economic activity. Ignoring these developments will not make them go away, nor is it a responsible regulatory response. The evolution of these assets, their volatility, and the interest they attract from a rising global millennial population demand serious examination.

With the proper balance of sound policy, regulatory oversight and private sector innovation, new technologies will allow American markets to evolve in responsible ways and continue to grow our economy and increase prosperity. This hearing is an important part of finding that balance.

 

Thank you for inviting me to participate. ...

 

someone(s) said Bitcoin was the greatest bubble of all time? i'll say it again, it is the pin that will burst, the greatest bubble of all time.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Foxx

[row_33]

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

you read it here first.

 

essentially, regulators are embracing crypto currencies.

 

read and understand what is being said. this is huge.

 

 

 

WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF

J. CHRISTOPHER GIANCARLO

CHAIRMAN, COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

BEFORE THE

SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE

WASHINGTON, D.C.

FEBRUARY 6, 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

someone(s) said Bitcoin was the greatest bubble of all time? i'll say it again, it is the pin that will burst, the greatest bubble of all time.

 

buy Bitcoin and you fly magically to the land where all your dreams come true

 

[Foxx]

13 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

buy Bitcoin and you fly magically to the land where all your dreams come true

 

nice.

way to address the content of the post

 

Gandhi once observed that every movement goes through four stages: first they ignore you; then they abuse you; then they crack down on you and then you win.

 

can you guess where we are at?

Edited February 6, 2018 by Foxx

[row_33]

10 minutes ago, Foxx said:

nice.

way to address the content of the post

 

people in lockstep over it will never admit the problems with it

 

what would be the point of continuing in the worship of it?

 

 

another get rich quick scheme that will collapse BOOM

Edited February 6, 2018 by row_33

[Foxx]

14 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

people in lockstep over it will never admit the problems with it

 

what would be the point of continuing in the worship of it?

 

 

another get rich quick scheme that will collapse BOOM

what are the problems that you see? it's obvious you didn't read the statement.

 

i see it as much more of a movement than a scheme. it is a trustless mechanism which means that it is honest. one where the select few cannot impoverish mankind (decentralized). do you understand the benefit for the unbanked population of the planet (of which i might add is far in the majority)?

 

 

Edited February 6, 2018 by Foxx