No.
Bitcoin might have... but "cryptocurrencies? uhh-huu
Mr. Stafford has been pretty good recently (#1011075), with some really respectable articles in the FT. Here's the latest, discussing whether "cryptos" are really here.
"There is a buzz around bitcoin"
Its increase of 20 per cent-plus since his tariff “liberation day” has outperformed gold and US stocks. Even war in the Middle East has failed to knock it off its perch above $100,000, which it surpassed in December.
Despite being criticised as volatile and unpredictable, the biggest cryptocurrency is now in the third year of an impressive rally, leading to growing acceptance among investors, regulators and politicians that at least some digital currencies offer a route to long-term wealth and savings, with some saying it should be considered a mainstream asset.
we are the captain now.
That's why we're here... ready to educate the plebs, ready to show them the ways
We can ridicule this all day long... but it's the first few hesitant steps to becoming a maxi. We've all been there; certainly me.
Also, this FUD is a little annoying... but, like, two googles for Lightning and you'd be above it:
The bitcoin blockchain, the digital ledger that holds a record of all the transactions involving the token, was originally conceived in the 2008 financial crisis as a way to make payments without going through a financial institution such as a bank.
However, it had too many flaws to be used widely for payments and has instead become “digital gold” — an asset that rises and falls in value and can be used as an alternative store of value, but with no dividends or yields.
first two readers' comments were fantastic:
Yeah, that's the range right there.
Archive link: https://archive.md/otgmr