Wird Ethereum's DeFi genauso explodieren wie Bitcoin im ...
Wird Ethereum's DeFi genauso explodieren wie Bitcoin im ...
Bitcoin History - 2010 till 2013 Crypto-News.net
If you put $1,000 in bitcoin in 2013, here’s how much you ...
Ethereum DeFi is like Bitcoin in 2013, could it beat BTC?
Bitcoin: This is Not the Same as 2013 - CoinDesk
NEWSBTC: Bitcoin News Service
Welcome to newsBTC, founded in October 2013 with the goal of educating and informing those curious about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Our coverage has been mentioned in publications the likes of TechCrunch, CNN, Forbes, Business Insider, and others. On this subreddit, we will often host giveaways of bitcoin and other altcoins to reward our subscribers.
Founded in 2013 by former investment bankers, Gatecoin is a bitcoin and ethereum token exchange. Through our intuitive trading platform we enable individuals and institutions around the world to trade and invest in cryptocurrency and blockchain assets. Licensed as a Hong Kong MSO to govern our forex activities, we enforce strict KYC and AML compliance policies. Thanks to our international payments network we offer fiat currency transfers in HKD, EUR and USD.
[July 2013] - Is Ripple a corporate scam? - Blog post about the new Ripple Scam on P2P Foundation 7 years ago, the same forum/site where Satoshi had also announced Bitcoin whitepaper almost 12 years ago
'PayPal in Talks to Buy Crypto Firms Including BitGo', Paypal Seem to be going deeper on Crypto than first thought.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-22/paypal-said-to-be-in-talks-to-buy-crypto-firms-including-bitgo PayPal Holdings Inc. is exploring acquisitions of cryptocurrency companies including Bitcoin custodian BitGo Inc., according to people familiar with the matter, a move that would expand its embrace of digital coins. PayPal has been holding talks with BitGo, a company that helps investors store Bitcoin securely, and could reach a deal within weeks, the people said, asking not to be identified because the matter is private. Talks could still fall apart and PayPal could opt to buy other targets, the people added. It couldn’t be learned how much PayPal would pay for BitGo if it goes ahead with the deal. BitGo raised $58.5 million in 2018 at a $170 million valuation, according to PitchBook. Representatives for BitGo and PayPal declined to comment. Palo Alto, California-based BitGo was founded in 2013 by Chief Executive Officer Mike Belshe. It offers digital wallets that require multiple signatures for transactions, as well as offline vaults for storing Bitcoin and rival currencies. It was one of the first companies in the space to focus on institutional investors, according to its website. The company applied in August to New York regulators to become an independent, regulated qualified custodian under New York State Banking Law, a press release showed. Custodians like BitCoin are responsible for safekeeping digital assets using secure storage. PayPal announced on Wednesday that its customers can buy, sell and hold cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin, Ether, Bitcoin Cash and Litecoin from digital wallets, as well as use the virtual money to shop at the 26 million merchants on its network. The announcement led Bitcoin to surge past $13,000 for the first time since July 2019. PayPal said it would partner with BitGo competitor Paxos Trust Company, a regulated provider of cryptocurrency products and services for its new service. BitGo is backed by investors including Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Craft Ventures, Digital Currency Group, DRW, Galaxy Digital Ventures, Redpoint Ventures, Valor Equity Partners and Founders Fund.
03-05 01:44 - 'My husband order some new mine machines from his honest supplier in the past three days,I know he will face large risk again.he and his friends open the miner war room from 2013.buy and sell kinds of miners.I am not...' (i.redd.it) by /u/hongyanwu removed from /r/Bitcoin within 0-9min
Putting $400M of Bitcoin on your company balance sheet
Also posted on my blog as usual. Read it there if you can, there are footnotes and inlined plots. A couple of months ago, MicroStrategy (MSTR) had a spare $400M of cash which it decided to shift to Bitcoin (BTC). Today we'll discuss in excrutiating detail why this is not a good idea. When a company has a pile of spare money it doesn't know what to do with, it'll normally do buybacks or start paying dividends. That gives the money back to the shareholders, and from an economic perspective the money can get better invested in other more promising companies. If you have a huge pile of of cash, you probably should be doing other things than leave it in a bank account to gather dust. However, this statement from MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor exists to make it clear he's buying into BTC for all the wrong reasons:
“This is not a speculation, nor is it a hedge. This was a deliberate corporate strategy to adopt a bitcoin standard.”
Let's unpack it and jump into the economics Bitcoin:
Is Bitcoin money?
No. Or rather BTC doesn't act as money and there's no serious future path for BTC to become a form of money. Let's go back to basics. There are 3 main economic problems money solves: 1. Medium of Exchange. Before money we had to barter, which led to the double coincidence of wants problem. When everyone accepts the same money you can buy something from someone even if they don't like the stuff you own. As a medium of exchange, BTC is not good. There are significant transaction fees and transaction waiting times built-in to BTC and these worsen the more popular BTC get. You can test BTC's usefulness as a medium of exchange for yourself right now: try to order a pizza or to buy a random item with BTC. How many additional hurdles do you have to go through? How many fewer options do you have than if you used a regular currency? How much overhead (time, fees) is there? 2. Unit of Account. A unit of account is what you compare the value of objects against. We denominate BTC in terms of how many USD they're worth, so BTC is a unit of account presently. We can say it's because of lack of adoption, but really it's also because the market value of BTC is so volatile. If I buy a $1000 table today or in 2017, it's roughly a $1000 table. We can't say that a 0.4BTC table was a 0.4BTC table in 2017. We'll expand on this in the next point: 3. Store of Value. When you create economic value, you don't want to be forced to use up the value you created right away. For instance, if I fix your washing machine and you pay me in avocados, I'd be annoyed. I'd have to consume my payment before it becomes brown, squishy and disgusting. Avocado fruit is not good money because avocadoes loses value very fast. On the other hand, well-run currencies like the USD, GBP, CAD, EUR, etc. all lose their value at a low and most importantly fairly predictible rate. Let's look at the chart of the USD against BTC While the dollar loses value at a predictible rate, BTC is all over the place, which is bad. One important use money is to write loan contracts. Loans are great. They let people spend now against their future potential earnings, so they can buy houses or start businesses without first saving up for a decade. Loans are good for the economy. If you want to sign something that says "I owe you this much for that much time" then you need to be able to roughly predict the value of the debt in at the point in time where it's due. Otherwise you'll have a hard time pricing the risk of the loan effectively. This means that you need to charge higher interests. The risk of making a loan in BTC needs to be priced into the interest of a BTC-denominated loan, which means much higher interest rates. High interests on loans are bad, because buying houses and starting businesses are good things.
BTC has a fixed supply, so these problems are built in
Some people think that going back to a standard where our money was denominated by a stock of gold (the Gold Standard) would solve economic problems. This is nonsense. Having control over supply of your currency is a good thing, as long as it's well run. See here Remember that what is desirable is low variance in the value, not the value itself. When there are wild fluctuations in value, it's hard for money to do its job well. Since the 1970s, the USD has been a fiat money with no intrinsic value. This means we control the supply of money. Let's look at a classic poorly drawn econ101 graph The market price for USD is where supply meets demand. The problem with a currency based on an item whose supply is fixed is that the price will necessarily fluctuate in response to changes in demand. Imagine, if you will, that a pandemic strikes and that the demand for currency takes a sharp drop. The US imports less, people don't buy anything anymore, etc. If you can't print money, you get deflation, which is worsens everything. On the other hand, if you can make the money printers go brrrr you can stabilize the price Having your currency be based on a fixed supply isn't just bad because in/deflation is hard to control. It's also a national security risk... The story of the guy who crashed gold prices in North Africa In the 1200s, Mansa Munsa, the emperor of the Mali, was rich and a devout Muslim and wanted everyone to know it. So he embarked on a pilgrimage to make it rain all the way to Mecca. He in fact made it rain so hard he increased the overall supply of gold and unintentionally crashed gold prices in Cairo by 20%, wreaking an economic havoc in North Africa that lasted a decade. This story is fun, the larger point that having your inflation be at the mercy of foreign nations is an undesirable attribute in any currency. The US likes to call some countries currency manipulators, but this problem would be serious under a gold standard.
Currencies are based on trust
Since the USD is based on nothing except the US government's word, how can we trust USD not to be mismanaged? The answer is that you can probably trust the fed until political stooges get put in place. Currently, the US's central bank managing the USD, the Federal Reserve (the Fed for friends & family), has administrative authority. The fed can say "no" to dumb requests from the president. People who have no idea what the fed does like to chant "audit the fed", but the fed is already one of the best audited US federal entities. The transcripts of all their meetings are out in the open. As is their balance sheet, what they plan to do and why. If the US should audit anything it's the Department of Defense which operates without any accounting at all. It's easy to see when a central bank will go rogue: it's when political yes-men are elected to the board. For example, before printing themselves into hyperinflation, the Venezuelan president appointed a sociologist who publicly stated “Inflation does not exist in real life” and instead is a made up capitalist lie. Note what happened mere months after his gaining control over the Venezuelan currency This is a key policy. One paper I really like, Sargent (1984) "The end of 4 big inflations" states:
The essential measures that ended hyperinflation in each of Germany,Austria, Hungary, and Poland were, first, the creation of an independentcentral bank that was legally committed to refuse the government'sdemand or additional unsecured credit and, second, a simultaneousalteration in the fiscal policy regime.
In english: *hyperinflation stops when the central bank can say "no" to the government." The US Fed, like other well good central banks, is run by a bunch of nerds. When it prints money, even as aggressively as it has it does so for good reasons. You can see why they started printing on March 15th as the COVID lockdowns started:
The Federal Reserve is prepared to use its full range of tools to support the flow of credit to households and businesses and thereby promote its maximum employment and price stability goals.
In english: We're going to keep printing and lowering rates until jobs are back and inflation is under control. If we print until the sun is blotted out, we'll print in the shade.
BTC is not gold
Gold is a good asset for doomsday-preppers. If society crashes, gold will still have value. How do we know that? Gold has held value throughout multiple historic catastrophes over thousands of years. It had value before and after the Bronze Age Collapse, the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and Gengis Khan being Gengis Khan. Even if you erased humanity and started over, the new humans would still find gold to be economically valuable. When Europeans d̶i̶s̶c̶o̶v̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ c̶o̶n̶q̶u̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ g̶e̶n̶o̶c̶i̶d̶e̶d̶ went to America, they found gold to be an important item over there too. This is about equivalent to finding humans on Alpha-Centauri and learning that they think gold is a good store of value as well. Some people are puzzled at this: we don't even use gold for much! But it has great properties: First, gold is hard to fake and impossible to manufacture. This makes it good to ascertain payment. Second, gold doesnt react to oxygen, so it doesn't rust or tarnish. So it keeps value over time unlike most other materials. Last, gold is pretty. This might sound frivolous, and you may not like it, but jewelry has actual value to humans. It's no coincidence if you look at a list of the wealthiest families, a large number of them trade in luxury goods. To paraphrase Veblen humans have a profound desire to signal social status, for the same reason peacocks have unwieldy tails. Gold is a great way to achieve that. On the other hand, BTC lacks all these attributes. Its value is largely based on common perception of value. There are a few fundamental drivers of demand:
Means of Exchange: if people seriously start using BTC to buy pizzas, then this creates a real demand for the currency to accomplish the short-term exchanges. As we saw previously, I'm not personally sold on this one and it's currently a negligible fraction of overall demand.
Criminal uses: Probably the largest inbuilt advantage of BTC is that it's anonymous, and so a great way to launder money. Hacker gangs use BTC to demand ransom on cryptolocker type attacks because it's a shared way for an honest company to pay and for the criminals to receive money without going to jail.
Apart from these, it's hard to argue that BTC will retain value throughout some sort of economic catastrophe.
BTC is really risky
One last statement from Michael Saylor I take offense to is this:
“We feel pretty confident that Bitcoin is less risky than holding cash, less risky than holding gold,” MicroStrategy CEO said in an interview
"BTC is less risky than holding cash or gold long term" is nonsense. We saw before that BTC is more volatile on face value, and that as long as the Fed isn't run by spider monkeys stacked in a trench coat, the inflation is likely to be within reasonable bounds. But on top of this, BTC has Abrupt downside risks that normal currencies don't. Let's imagine a few:
A critical software vulnerability is found in the BTC codebase, leading to a possible exploitation.
Xi Jinping decides he's had enough of rich people in China hiding their assets from him and bans BTC.
Some form of bank run takes hold for whatever reason. Because BTC wallets are uninsured, unlike regular banks, this compounds into a Black Tuesday style crash.
Blockchain solutions are fundamentally inefficient
Blockchain was a genius idea. I still marvel at the initial white paper which is a great mix of economics and computer science. That said, blockchain solutions make large tradeoffs in design because they assume almost no trust between parties. This leads to intentionally wasteful designs on a massive scale. The main problem is that all transactions have to be validated by expensive computational operations and double checked by multiple parties. This means waste:
BTC was estimated to use as much electricity as Belgium in 2019. It's hard to trace where the BTC mining comes from, but we can assume it has a huge carbon footprint.
A single transactions is necessarily expensive. A single transaction takes as much electricity as 800,000 VISA transactions, or watching 50,000 hours of youtube videos.
There is a large necessary tax on the transaction, since those checking the transaction extract a few BTC from it to be incentivized to do the work of checking it.
Many design problems can be mitigated by various improvements over BTC, but it remains that a simple database always works better than a blockchain if you can trust the parties to the transaction.
If you think that killing Bitcoin to push transactions off-chain to centralized hubs (banking 2.0) is a fairly new idea like Lightning, think again. Core has been trying to do this for many years. Check out this propaganda commissioned by Peter Todd in 2013.
After seven years in Bitcoin, I have never been more confident that this network is now absolutely unstoppable. Nothing short of an extinction level event can stop Bitcoin from slowly but surely growing as a global, agnostic, alternative network for storing and transferring value.
Back in 2013 when the entire market cap hit $1 Billion for the first time, it was really scary to put a considerable amount of money in BTC. You might like Bitcoin and find it interesting but doubt would still creep up in your mind about its staying power and the fact that one bug could bring it all down. Mt. Gox got hacked, 800,000 BTC stolen, it crashed from $1200 to $190 by 2015, so how do you even believe that 5 years later it would be a sustained $200+ billion market? Yet here we are. As long as the Bitcoin blockchain is churning out new blocks of unstoppable transactions, that's all that matters. Naysayers don't understand that this is all Bitcoin needs to do: Churn out new blocks every ten minutes. And with every new block, a monumental amount of energy and work is stacked on top of the previous block, and so on, and so forth, making it stronger. At 99.98% uptime for 11 years, it's sticky enough to now last much longer than that. This network will be transferring and storing trillions of dollars within this decade and beyond.
Editor’s Note: Check out Kitco’s full 2014 coverage. (Kitco News) - It has been a wild year for bitcoin and although the currency has been around for the last five years, 2013 is when most ... The above chart shows CoinDesk's Bitcoin Price Index for Dec. 1, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2013. As of Thursday, bitcoin's value was just above $16,500, according to CoinDesk.Based on that value, one ... Eine Bitcoin-Wallet kann viel sicherer als ein Bankkonto sein. Zyprer haben das auf die harte Tour gelernt, als deren Ersparnisse Anfang 2013 beschlagnahmt wurden. Dieses Ereignis war Berichten zufolge der Verursacher eines Preisanstiegs, da Sparer die relativen Risiken von Banken gegenüber Bitcoin überdacht haben.. Der nächste fallende Dominostein war Griechenland, wo 2015 strenge ... This article takes a look at the specific events that happened because of Bitcoin, between the years 2010 and 2013. It's been tough, but we're still here! It's been tough, but we're still here! We’ve looked at the situations surrounding the conception of Bitcoin in our previous article, and if you haven’t seen it. On 5th December, 2013, a short while after bitcoin broke $1,000, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) sent out a statement claiming bitcoin was “not a currency in the real meaning of the word ...
You are being LIED TO about BITCOIN 🚨DON'T BE FOOLED ...
A film by BitcoinFilm.org released in 2013. This short documentary is about Bitcoin’s impact in Argentina. In Buenos Aires, we have a conversation with Diego... Look for the price of lotto ticket you can hold bitcoins for 10 years and become a millionaire it's time you stop living in fear. If it goes to zero you lose... Sorry about the quality. The source stream was pretty bad. "Bitcoin can be counterfeited and is not scarce." - Mike Pento Best profit Bitcoin site Immediately Get him on 5 Bitcoin now easy to use Withdrawal at the same time without waiting / It works in all countries of the worl... My channel focuses on Bitcoin news and Bitcoin price. In every video I do Bitcoin technical analysis suitable even for beginners, I go through daily BTC news...