Bitcoin breaches 70,000!

[Quagmire]

Bit Coin is the equivalent of Beanie babies, Cabbage Patch Doll's or Pet Rock's.

It really isn't. The difference between Bitcoin and beanie babies (I wasn't aware that cabbage patch kids and pet rocks were ever speculative commodities), or I should say among the many differences, is that we're now seeing major financial institutions like Black Rock, Grayscale, and Van Eck to name a few getting involved.

I very much doubt that major financial institutions would be getting involved if there wasn't more to this than what you're suggesting.

 

[Quagmire]

Is Bitcoin chasing my post count?

I used to sell your posts on eBay and I made quite a killing at first.

Now there's so many of them I can't give them away.

 

[Quagmire]

I don't understand Bitcoin

But it seems like a scam to me

But probably good for organized crime

At this point it would be harder to use Bitcoin for illegal activities than cash.

Every transaction leaves a trail that can be followed by anybody who knows how, and law enforcement agencies are on top of it.

 

[Eddi]

Every transaction leaves a trail that can be followed by anybody who knows how, and law enforcement agencies are on top of it.

That's good to know!

 

[Eddi]

At this point it would be harder to use Bitcoin for illegal activities than cash.

Every transaction leaves a trail that can be followed by anybody who knows how, and law enforcement agencies are on top of it.

I don't get what the advantages of Bitcoin are supposed to be

 

[Unfettered]

It's not for the faint-hearted.

So true. If you can't explain it with plain language and secure an investment in it on a signed napkin, there is a high likelihood your investment is going to vanish (and you won't know how, because you didn't understand the system from the beginning).

 

[Unfettered]

that can be followed by anybody who knows how

There's the rub.

I work in technology. Those who know, navigate the tech world (they know) without fear, though still carefully. Everyone else is primed to be fleeced. I see a lot of people lose money because they get strung along into things they don't understand but are told they need. There are big companies out there making millions upon millions legally by exploiting the tech ignorance of their customers.

 

[bobhikes]

It really isn't. The difference between Bitcoin and beanie babies (I wasn't aware that cabbage patch kids and pet rocks were ever speculative commodities), or I should say among the many differences, is that we're now seeing major financial institutions like Black Rock, Grayscale, and Van Eck to name a few getting involved.

I very much doubt that major financial institutions would be getting involved if there wasn't more to this than what you're suggesting.

Sure it is the major institutions that were involved in those were retail stores. Wherever there is money to take a corporation is going to be more than willing to take it. The profits they make are not speculative. If bit coin crashes tomorrow they will just move on to the next thing. Maybe the metaverse, is that still a thing. I mean Facebook even changed their corporate name to Meta right.

Bitcoin was designed to be a replacement to currency unless it stabilizes it can never be that. So everyone is betting on chain blocking, NFT's taking off, or maybe the bit coin city but they certainly aren't looking for it to be a currency.

 

[Revoltingest]

I used to sell your posts on eBay and I made quite a killing at first.

Now there's so many of them I can't give them away.

I hear that RF has to pay a trash
company to haul them away.

 

[Quagmire]

Sure it is the major institutions that were involved in those were retail stores.

How so? I mean aside from actually selling them.

I mean, grocery stores sell products made out of soy, but I don't think I've ever seen Kroger suggesting that their customers invest in soybean futures

My point is we didn't have major financial institutions offering beanie babies as speculative commodities.

And if you're putting Walmart and Target in the same category as Black Rock or microstrategies, You're missing the point.

Yes they're all corporations, but they're corporations set up for all together different purposes.

Wherever there is money to take a corporation is going to be more than willing to take it.

The purpose of investment firms isn't just a to make money for themselves, they have to make money for the customers as well are they won't be able to stay in business.

The profits they make are not speculative.

Sorry but that sounds doesn't make any sense.

Could you clarify a bit?

If bit coin crashes tomorrow they will just move on to the next thing.

And they will suffer losses and lose customers, two things that all of these corporations try real hard to avoid.

If they didn't believe that Bitcoin will be a profitable investment in the long run they wouldn't be playing with it.

I don't know how familiar you are with how investment firms work, but it's not like they're telling their customers, "Here, buy this ETF (*snicker snicker* sucker)", and then just take your money and run. There are fly-by-night organizations that do just that, but Black Rock, Microstrategies, grayscale, Van eck, etc. Don't fall into that category.

Like I said: If their customers lose money, they lose money (and clients).

Maybe the metaverse, is that still a thing.

Uh, yeah It kind of is.

I mean Facebook even changed their corporate name to Meta right.

Bitcoin was designed to be a replacement to currency unless it stabilizes it can never be that.

And it probably never will. People are pretty much given up on the idea of Bitcoin ever being a usable currency.

Now it's considered a store of wealth, like gold.

And it's considered such by some people who know what they're talking about like Robert Kawasaki, Mark Cuban, Jamie Diamond andTim Draper to name a few

 

[Quagmire]

There's the rub.

I work in technology. Those who know, navigate the tech world (they know) without fear, though still carefully. Everyone else is primed to be fleeced. I see a lot of people lose money because they get strung along into things they don't understand but are told they need. There are big companies out there making millions upon millions legally by exploiting the tech ignorance of their customers.

Sorry @Unfettered but if you're not going to respond to my posts in context I'm just going to leave yours alone.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I don't understand Bitcoin

But it seems like a scam to me

But probably good for organized crime

Doesn't it take shed loads of electricity to produce?

I think it is quite popular with criminals. Not sure who else would use it as an actual currency, since it’s so volatile.

 

[Quagmire]

I don't get what the advantages of Bitcoin are supposed to be

Well, when people were still thinking about using it as a currency the advantage was the fact transactions are peer to peer, that is there's no middleman.

Supposedly Satoshi (The creator of Bitcoin) came up with Bitcoin in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis as a way for people to conduct transactions without any involvement from banks or financial institutions.

That's why it's called a 'trustless' commodity: you don't have to put your trust in anyone.

 

[Quagmire]

I think it is quite popular with criminals.

It was in the beginning (understandably so since typing a few numbers and figures on a computer is a lot quicker, easier, and safer than trying to smuggle millions of dollars across borders) but that was before governments and law enforcement agencies learned how to track it.

Ironically, just the opposite is true at this point: it's almost impossible to conduct illegal transactions with Bitcoin (there are still a few cryptocurrencies that can be used that way) because every single transaction has a record in the blockchain which can be accessed and trace to the source by anyone who knows how.

It's one of the reasons a lot of governments are coming up with their own CBDCs
(central bank digital currency) and why a lot of people are afraid that all governments will wind up adopting CBDCs as official State currency.

Once/if that happens governments will be able to track every single financial transaction we make: no more working under the table, no more cheating on your taxes, theoretically it could completely gut the illegal drug and gun trade.

The government would have complete control over everybody's financial life.

Not sure who else would use it as an actual currency, since it’s so volatile.

Like I said I think people have pretty much given up on the idea of ever using Bitcoin as a currency.

People were experimenting with it in the beginning and here's an example of how that turned out:

'On May 22, 2010 Laszlo Hanyecz paid Jeremy Sturdivant 10,000 bitcoins (BTC) for two Papa John's pizzas which were delivered to Hanyecz's home. This exchange is widely celebrated because it is viewed as the first use of bitcoin in a commercial transaction with bitcoin as the medium of exchange."

The Bitcoin pizza story - Google Search

I wonder what a $350,000,000 dollar pizza tastes like.

I hope they gave him extra cheese.

 

[Eddi]

Well, when people were still thinking about using it as a currency the advantage was the fact transactions are peer to peer, that is there's no middleman.

Supposedly Satoshi (The creator of Bitcoin) came up with Bitcoin in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis as a way for people to conduct transactions without any involvement from banks or financial institutions.

That's why it's called a 'trustless' commodity: you don't have to put your trust in anyone.

Well, I won't be investing in it......

Not that I have anything to invest!!!!

 

[Unfettered]

Sorry @Unfettered but if you're not going to respond to my posts in context I'm just going to leave yours alone.

OK. Thanks for the heads up. All good. I quoted you, but my comments were for anyone interested in them.

 

[Quagmire]

OK. Thanks for the heads up. All good. I quoted you, but my comments were for anyone interested in them.

You took my quote out of context. That makes it look like I said something that I didn't say.

You understand why that's not cool, right?

 

[Unfettered]

You took my quote out of context. That makes it look like I said something that I didn't say.

You understand why that's not cool, right?

I don't agree with your conclusion as to the effect of my post, but I appreciate that you don't want your words taken out of context. So I apologize and will be mindful of that with your posts in the future.

 

[Quagmire]

I don't agree with your conclusion as to the effect of my post,

Then I'm guessing you haven't considered it.

but I appreciate that you don't want your words taken out of context. So I apologize and will be mindful of that with your posts in the future.

Great.

 

[Unfettered]

Then I'm guessing you haven't considered it.

You don't need to guess; I already indicated that I had considered it—when I disagreed with your conclusion. Or are you saying that there can only be one outcome (the one you determine)? If so, seems I misunderstood what you were after.