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)
withdrawal of bitcoin out of the Bakkt Warehouse to meet the Bakkt Bitcoin (USD) settled futures. Unlike gold, there is no procedure or mechanism to transfer Bitcoin from the Bakkt Warehouse private key to a private key apart from the Bakkt Warehouse. (6/13)
The challenge outlined by Black Rock and the undeliverable cash-settled CME futures exposes the current obstacles and risks of on-and-off-ramps on all legacy platforms. @PrestonPhysh and others have recognized these risks and they are likely to have quite the opposite effect.7/13
The obstacles were recently outlined by institutional buyer @michael_saylor Because Bitcoin, the innovation, has a fixed supply and negative stock-to-flow it is unlikely Bitcoin futures will ever be made deliverable to private keys. Acquiring sound money is not easy. (8/13)
Nor should it be. If you really think Bitcoin, the innovation, is like any other asset I don't know what to tell you. However, your challenge does expose a genuine threat and challenge for Bitcoin. Confiscation exposure on all legacy platforms. (9/13) https://t.co/fzJ9JdxsdR
The March bailout is the canary in the coal mine. What can be deposited on a whim can be confiscated on a whim. Moreover, those pioneers who have genuinely contributed to sound money through non-legacy unregulated Bitcoin innovation such as @Bitmex are subject to (10/13)
Soviet-style persecution by three initial regulators with guns like the SEC, DOJ, and FBI. The difference between now and then is Bitcoin, the innovation, has allowed Bitmex to operate with full functionality even while the principle founders are under arrest or on the lam. 11/13
If the authorities could shut down #Bitcoin or #Bitmex it would be a fait accompli. The case for a relatively smooth transition to sound money, ie. the future for #Bitcoin is in the hands of HODLers with their own private keys. (12/13)
If we are to be our own banks, we must relearn The Lost Art Of Commercial Banking. (13/13)
https://t.co/czO3Tctv0I

More from Bitcoin

Another #FreeLoveFriday. So far, I’ve covered Bitcoin, Mastercoin/Omni, and last week ChainLink and the importance of decentralized oracles. Today, let’s talk about one of the most fascinating projects in crypto - @MakerDAO


In my thread about Mastercoin, I briefly touched on the vital role fiat-backed stablecoins play in crypto markets, but there’s a catch with them:

The counterparty risk of a third-party holding fiat in reserves.

Enter MakerDAO, which set out to create a decentralized, collateral-backed cryptocurrency, DAI, that would be “soft-pegged” to the U.S. Dollar using the power of algorithms. In crypto tradition, its supporters said trust game theory, not operators.

In 2017, MakerDAO published a whitepaper describing a system where anyone could create DAI by leveraging ETH as collateral to create Collateralized Debt Positions. Essentially, you take out a digital USD loan against your crypto.

The game theory of the system is structured such that DAI issuance is controlled to keep the price pegged to $1.00. In essence, it buffers the fluctuations of the underlying collateral to create a synthetic dollar bill.
Ok, so what is the significance of the @lagarde statement on bitcoin?

We were offered a very open insight (but slightly flawed analysis) into top level policy perspective behind the crack down on selfhosted wallets.

https://t.co/1LTzrxHbgs 1/32


'It is a speculative asset, by any account. If you look at the price movements... '

It starts with an economic price perspective and we can learn that ECB is closely monitoring this price movement as one of the many indicators.

So we are in the classic central bank frame 2/32

'Those who thought it would turn into a currency. Sorry, it is an asset not a currency.'

Here she summarises a classic debate on what is currency and what is needed for that. Based on the holy three: unit of account, means of payment, store of value. 3/32

The summary is classic, but too narrow and does not incorporate the wider financial history viewpoints on money, currencies and the way we pay. 4/32

ECB overlooks the de facto unit of account role of bitcoin, having been used to 200 years of having cash around whic is both the unit of account and a means of payment. 5/32
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

You May Also Like