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
The #Bitcoin fundamentals of four generations of inflation, entitlements, and regulations are separate and apart from #Bitcoin the technological innovation. If we had sound money there would be little demand for Bitcoin. (1/13)
The notion that gold futures hold down the physical gold price or subjects the gold price to long-term manipulation is a canard. CME gold futures deliveries are settled with warrants meeting exact specifications met by approved refineries, carriers, and warehouses which (2/13)
ensures the integrity of delivery apart from the exchange. https://t.co/CpV1OBSsAT One need look no further than the 1980 Hunt Silver fiasco which illustrates how deliverable futures contracts provide for the discovery of an untapped silver supply resting in people's homes.(3/13)
Not so for Bitcoin. The CME Bakkt Bitcoin contract is for Bakkt Bitcoin. It is not Bitcoin. Bakkt Bitcoin is a cash-settled monthly futures contract. While the Bakkt Bitcoin has geographically storage of private keys, they are not your private keys. (4/13)
Not your keys, not your bitcoin. The Bitcoin Warehouse is an internal ledger The internal ledger operates separate and apart from the Bitcoin blockchain. The only interaction with the public blockchain is during the deposit of bitcoin into the Bakkt Warehouse and the (5/13)
@woonomic @realmaxkeiser @stacyherbert @ToneVaysBTC @UglyOldGoat1
— Abolition (@kalsangdolmanz) January 22, 2021
What do you guys think? https://t.co/mF1z9QL1My
The notion that gold futures hold down the physical gold price or subjects the gold price to long-term manipulation is a canard. CME gold futures deliveries are settled with warrants meeting exact specifications met by approved refineries, carriers, and warehouses which (2/13)
ensures the integrity of delivery apart from the exchange. https://t.co/CpV1OBSsAT One need look no further than the 1980 Hunt Silver fiasco which illustrates how deliverable futures contracts provide for the discovery of an untapped silver supply resting in people's homes.(3/13)
Not so for Bitcoin. The CME Bakkt Bitcoin contract is for Bakkt Bitcoin. It is not Bitcoin. Bakkt Bitcoin is a cash-settled monthly futures contract. While the Bakkt Bitcoin has geographically storage of private keys, they are not your private keys. (4/13)
Not your keys, not your bitcoin. The Bitcoin Warehouse is an internal ledger The internal ledger operates separate and apart from the Bitcoin blockchain. The only interaction with the public blockchain is during the deposit of bitcoin into the Bakkt Warehouse and the (5/13)
The is no Devcoin Gold yet. But then again, we've never been one to "peg" to anything. I came across an interesting article about 'recreating' addresses with Bgold that @bitcoincoreorg cut out since 0.13.0 - perhaps one day we can do a similar thing in future Devcoin software :)
https://t.co/cv4UqsaVAK
That being said I hold some Doge @blockio in an "A-" address myself after 0. 1. "9-" versions :). Don't believe Bitcoin Core the Coin (Utility) is the only visible value on Core chain. Color me crazy. I believe in script. And FOSS that is used to export📜
And that's just a guy @MeniRosenfeld who put his identity and ideas out in the public to build a Web of Trust back when the web was much less of a safe place. His identity at stake and the implementation of a branch in source code by another unsung hero @killerstorm reveals value
Some of those who set up our bright future quietly implemented it in a branch on the main source code before it was officially the Bitcoin Core main repository, before a "Bitcoin Core" entity existed
Just because Bitcoin Core nodes dominate and do not read "smart" colored satoshis or display them, doesn't mean they do not exist on chain. The example of recreating P2WSH-over-P2SH address from BTC https://t.co/ZWSP2MO5bY wallets in Bitcoin Core Gold I shared proves -rescan's $
https://t.co/cv4UqsaVAK
That being said I hold some Doge @blockio in an "A-" address myself after 0. 1. "9-" versions :). Don't believe Bitcoin Core the Coin (Utility) is the only visible value on Core chain. Color me crazy. I believe in script. And FOSS that is used to export📜
And that's just a guy @MeniRosenfeld who put his identity and ideas out in the public to build a Web of Trust back when the web was much less of a safe place. His identity at stake and the implementation of a branch in source code by another unsung hero @killerstorm reveals value
Some of those who set up our bright future quietly implemented it in a branch on the main source code before it was officially the Bitcoin Core main repository, before a "Bitcoin Core" entity existed
Just because Bitcoin Core nodes dominate and do not read "smart" colored satoshis or display them, doesn't mean they do not exist on chain. The example of recreating P2WSH-over-P2SH address from BTC https://t.co/ZWSP2MO5bY wallets in Bitcoin Core Gold I shared proves -rescan's $
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 -
You May Also Like
12 TRADING SETUPS which experts are using.
These setups I found from the following 4 accounts:
1. @Pathik_Trader
2. @sourabhsiso19
3. @ITRADE191
4. @DillikiBiili
Share for the benefit of everyone.
Here are the setups from @Pathik_Trader Sir first.
1. Open Drive (Intraday Setup explained)
Bactesting results of Open Drive
2. Two Price Action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as
Example of PDC/PDH Setup given
These setups I found from the following 4 accounts:
1. @Pathik_Trader
2. @sourabhsiso19
3. @ITRADE191
4. @DillikiBiili
Share for the benefit of everyone.
Here are the setups from @Pathik_Trader Sir first.
1. Open Drive (Intraday Setup explained)
#OpenDrive#intradaySetup
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) April 16, 2019
Sharing one high probability trending setup for intraday.
Few conditions needs to be met
1. Opening should be above/below previous day high/low for buy/sell setup.
2. Open=low (for buy)
Open=high (for sell)
(1/n)
Bactesting results of Open Drive
Already explained strategy of #opendrive
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) May 27, 2020
Backtested results in 30 stocks and nifty, banknifty.
Success ratio : approx 40-45%
RR average 1:2
Entry as per strategy
Stoploss = Open level
Exit 3:15 PM Or SL
39 months 14 months -ve, 25 +ve
Yearly all 4 years +ve performance. pic.twitter.com/nGqhzMKGVy
2. Two Price Action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as
So today we will discuss two more price action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) June 20, 2020
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as Support
Example of PDC/PDH Setup given
#nifty
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) June 23, 2020
This is how it created long setup by taking support at PDC.
hopefully shared setup on last weekend helped. pic.twitter.com/2mduSUpMn5
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?