BITCOIN

User232002

Malthusian said:

It would be pretty difficult for the vast majority of institutional investors to decrease allocation to cryptocurrency, given that for over 99.9% of the investment funds and pension schemes in the world, their allocation to cryptocurrency is zero, and any allocation to magic Internet money would be in violation of their fund's objective.

Which is why the image I posted, that you are referring to, contains this caption underneath; "data shown among current investors only."

Congratulations for, yet again, demonstrating your ability to post before engaging some critical thinking.

Frequentlyhere

"What evidence do you have that 'it has the reverse of any sort of traction'?"

To be honest, it seems a bit nuts to have to give any, is it not just common knowledge that crypto is a fad of the past alongside NFT's and meme stonks? 

The small slice of people who were interested have mostly been put off by the various bombs going off in the scene and the loss of their cash. This is hardly a controversial view, and even when fraud is not involved, it's also just the mathematics of a less than zero sum game.

But ok, here's some regular polling done by YouGov about investments in general. It shows that interest in crypto peaked in the UK in about April 2021, when a heady 7% of people thought it was becoming more appealing. That has now more than halved to 3%. The last date of the tracker was a few days ago, and no the price going up hasn't sparked interest.

Stateside, the story is similar and there's no "except bitcoin" caveat.

Other things - Well, Eth seems to have at least some traction in changing from PoW to PoS. Bitcoin meanwhile has been mocked by that progressive tech institution the US Government for not doing so, amongst many other attacks many of which we've described in these pages (e.g basically its use is limited to a speculative token). 

More than that, functionally it hasn't really made any progress at all. It's all but failed in El Salvador, there is no bitcoin city, there are still no particularly interesting use cases, it still can't handle being used as a currency for various reasons and lightning network doesn't help. It remains in the most charitable interpretation 'Art' . 

Re: price, I'm no longer sure what the point is. If we're just in it to make £, then it's just a day trading speculation game whatever the price. Fair enough if people do that, some can make good money. I'm sure it'll remain volatile. Dangerous waters though, and you're likely playing in a rigged casino

Any other bright future where you just hold on to it would require it to have some sort of actual use eventually, which doesn't seem to be on the horizon. It could have perhaps just about landed as digital gold maybe, but I think SBF, Do Kwon & co have blown that one  (yes I know, that's crypto not specifically bitcoin etc - still) .

As a result, the one area where it most definitely has gained traction as I'm sure you've noticed is in being progressively strangled with regulation out of any mainstream existence. How that can be good for bitcoin I'm not sure, but there's always an answer!

aaj123

Frequentlyhere said:

"What evidence do you have that 'it has the reverse of any sort of traction'?"

To be honest, it seems a bit nuts to have to give any, is it not just common knowledge that crypto is a fad of the past alongside NFT's and meme stonks? 

The small slice of people who were interested have mostly been put off by the various bombs going off in the scene and the loss of their cash. This is hardly a controversial view, and even when fraud is not involved, it's also just the mathematics of a less than zero sum game.

But ok, here's some regular polling done by YouGov about investments in general. It shows that interest in crypto peaked in the UK in about April 2021, when a heady 7% of people thought it was becoming more appealing. That has now more than halved to 3%. The last date of the tracker was a few days ago, and no the price going up hasn't sparked interest.

Stateside, the story is similar and there's no "except bitcoin" caveat.

Other things - Well, Eth seems to have at least some traction in changing from PoW to PoS. Bitcoin meanwhile has been mocked by that progressive tech institution the US Government for not doing so, amongst many other attacks many of which we've described in these pages (e.g basically its use is limited to a speculative token). 

More than that, functionally it hasn't really made any progress at all. It's all but failed in El Salvador, there is no bitcoin city, there are still no particularly interesting use cases, it still can't handle being used as a currency for various reasons and lightning network doesn't help. It remains in the most charitable interpretation 'Art' . 

Re: price, I'm no longer sure what the point is. If we're just in it to make £, then it's just a day trading speculation game whatever the price. Fair enough if people do that, some can make good money. I'm sure it'll remain volatile. Dangerous waters though, and you're likely playing in a rigged casino

Any other bright future where you just hold on to it would require it to have some sort of actual use eventually, which doesn't seem to be on the horizon. It could have perhaps just about landed as digital gold maybe, but I think SBF, Do Kwon & co have blown that one  (yes I know, that's crypto not specifically bitcoin etc - still) .

As a result, the one area where it most definitely has gained traction as I'm sure you've noticed is in being progressively strangled with regulation out of any mainstream existence. How that can be good for bitcoin I'm not sure, but there's always an answer!

The whole idea of bitcoin being strangled by regulation is borne out of lazy journalism that jumps to conclusions that they wanted to make and were predisposed to. The real situation is that the crypto ecosystem is on the path to sensible regulation which will make the asset class more attractive. Most Joe public just can't tell the difference between crypto ecosystem and crypto and one ought to ask why you would call a driver to greater transparency of the ecosystem to be called 'strangling of bitcoin'.

All above said, I will only reiterate that periods when such misconceptions gain traction are the ones where the astute make entries and later get called 'lucky' to have bought the cycle bottoms. Such luck... 

Frequentlyhere

"and one ought to ask why you would call a driver to greater transparency of the ecosystem to be called 'strangling of bitcoin'."

Because 'transparency' is one of the euphemisms that Brian Armstrong & co choose to use for trying to avoid having the securities they deal in treated and regulated as securities.

They'd like the existing rules that actually are perfectly clear 'clarified' for them in a way that makes them kind of 'go away'. A battle they are clearly losing with the recent Wells notice.

Now, this sort of thing isn't a problem for bitcoin in theory, but it is in practice because anything that makes it less simple to onboard more fresh meat to buy bitcoin is a problem for bitcoin.  

aaj123

Frequentlyhere said:

"and one ought to ask why you would call a driver to greater transparency of the ecosystem to be called 'strangling of bitcoin'."

Because 'transparency' is one of the euphemisms that Brian Armstrong & co choose to use for trying to avoid having the securities they deal in treated and regulated as securities.

They'd like the existing rules that actually are perfectly clear 'clarified' for them in a way that makes them kind of 'go away'. A battle they are clearly losing with the recent Wells notice.

Now, this sort of thing isn't a problem for bitcoin in theory, but it is in practice because anything that makes it less simple to onboard more fresh meat to buy bitcoin is a problem for bitcoin.  

Now as you correctly point out, several hints have been provided by the SEC that Bitcoin is not considered as a security so the debate around securities regulation pertains to other coins that are not the topic for this thread. Secondly, regardless of SEC's stance, it is a well subscribed to view that the coins likely to be deemed securities are because there is a big element of investors depending on work carried out by certain influential parties to their benefit (Howey test) and its this reason why already many such coins are called 'shitcoins' because they embody nothing of the decentralisation that something like Bitcoin calls its USP.

So considering this thread is dedicated to Bitcoin, I don't see how you extrapolate the current regulatory tussle to conclude bearishness for Bitcoin. If at all you think that 'new meat' is getting confused by the goings on and staying away from Bitcoin, then you ought to be bullish since as an informed investor, you get it at a time of irrational [pessimism for Bitcoin.

User232002

Frequentlyhere said:

"What evidence do you have that 'it has the reverse of any sort of traction'?"

To be honest, it seems a bit nuts to have to give any, is it not just common knowledge that crypto is a fad of the past alongside NFT's and meme stonks? 

The small slice of people who were interested have mostly been put off by the various bombs going off in the scene and the loss of their cash. This is hardly a controversial view, and even when fraud is not involved, it's also just the mathematics of a less than zero sum game.

But ok, here's some regular polling done by YouGov about investments in general. It shows that interest in crypto peaked in the UK in about April 2021, when a heady 7% of people thought it was becoming more appealing. That has now more than halved to 3%. The last date of the tracker was a few days ago, and no the price going up hasn't sparked interest.

Stateside, the story is similar and there's no "except bitcoin" caveat.

Haha.

Imagine something being 'so obvious,' and 'hardly controversial,' that the best evidence you can provide in support of it is a flipping YouGov poll (that actually shows an increase of 50% over the sample quoted anyway). You must be living in a clown world.

FYI, (1) YouGov also has another poll on its website showing that 10% of Brits bought cryptocurrency (and like all the other metrics I posted, its only been trending up over the sample), and (2) Bitcoin is an open network and its usage data is readily available, so why (aside from the fact it doesnt fit your narrative) would you not look at the actual data pertaining to the network itself?

Frequentlyhere said:

Other things - Well, Eth seems to have at least some traction in changing from PoW to PoS. Bitcoin meanwhile has been mocked by that progressive tech institution the US Government for not doing so, amongst many other attacks many of which we've described in these pages (e.g basically its use is limited to a speculative token). 

The Bitcoin POS fork already exists. Down 99%+. Rejected by the market.




Bitcoins energy usage is not a problem; https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-energy/ 

Frequentlyhere said:

there are still no particularly interesting use cases

Decentralised, bearer asset with an uncorruptible money supply and permissionless use. Seems pretty appropriate given that our governments can't control their debt burdens (see earlier graphs).

Frequentlyhere said:

it still can't handle being used as a currency for various reasons

My god.

Frequentlyhere said:

Re: price, I'm no longer sure what the point is. If we're just in it to make £, then it's just a day trading speculation game whatever the price. Fair enough if people do that, some can make good money. I'm sure it'll remain volatile. Dangerous waters though, and you're likely playing in a rigged casino

Price up 40% in a fortnight where banks are failing and being bailed out and you think these are unrelated events? Laughable.

When price goes up, you argue its just random. When price goes down, you think its meaningful. That's confirmation bias. You declared it dead and irrelevant at $16k; one would assume that the price doubling might make a reasonable person reconsider their opinion.

Frequentlyhere said:

Any other bright future where you just hold on to it would require it to have some sort of actual use eventually, which doesn't seem to be on the horizon. It could have perhaps just about landed as digital gold maybe, but I think SBF, Do Kwon & co have blown that one  (yes I know, that's crypto not specifically bitcoin etc - still) .

It has a use case right now. 

Frequentlyhere said:

As a result, the one area where it most definitely has gained traction as I'm sure you've noticed is in being progressively strangled with regulation out of any mainstream existence. How that can be good for bitcoin I'm not sure, but there's always an answer!

Great success! Banning Bitcoin has historically been excellent for the price of Bitcoin. 

silvercue

"a fad"  

Best performing asset class in last 10 years.  And this year... only up 60% already with another halving next year.   How are the non crypto markets doing?  Not as well.  Which is usually pretty standard.  

aaj123

For the 'no traction' folk - see below for the trend in number of BTC and ETH addresses that hold >1 unit of each (do note that 1 unit comprises different proportions of the supply of each coin - BTC supply is around 19 million while ETH is around 120 million so the lines are not comparable with each other):

https://charts.coinmetrics.io/crypto-data/?config=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

A chart that can be compared between BTC and ETH is one that plots number of addresses in each chain that have balance greater than a billionth of their respective total supplies:

https://charts.coinmetrics.io/crypto-data/?config=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

Malthusian

darren232002 said:

Malthusian said:

It would be pretty difficult for the vast majority of institutional investors to decrease allocation to cryptocurrency, given that for over 99.9% of the investment funds and pension schemes in the world, their allocation to cryptocurrency is zero, and any allocation to magic Internet money would be in violation of their fund's objective.

Which is why the image I posted, that you are referring to, contains this caption underneath; "data shown among current investors only."

So this survey purporting to show "institutional use increasing" consisted 100% of bros who have already bought in.
The real dead giveaway was actually that 71% of "institutional investors" believe number will go up, while 29% "neither agree nor disagree" that number go up. The percentage of "institutional investors" who believed number could go down was... zero. In opinion polling this is known as "doing a Mugabe".

darren232002 said:

Great success! Banning Bitcoin has historically been excellent for the price of Bitcoin. 

In much the same way as banning nitrous oxide is widely expected to be excellent for the price of NOS canisters. (Although not so great for anyone trying to use them to get high, who will now be at the mercy of the black market.) Time to go bullish on nitrox and ride that whipped cream to the moon. 1 NOS canister = 1 NOS canister. Few understand.

HHarry

darren232002 said:

Price up 40% in a fortnight where banks are failing and being bailed out and you think these are unrelated events? Laughable.

 Two banks, dealing in a niche area, have failed.  And one, with a history of problems, has been taken over.  That’s only 3 banks globally.

 If that’s enough to get people flocking to BTC then good luck to them.