The Catalyst That Could 'Standardize' Bitcoin \ stacker news ~bitcoin

The Catalyst That Could 'Standardize' Bitcoin www.zerohedge.com/crypto/catalyst-could-standardize-bitcoin

1997 sats \ 21 comments \ @siggy47 4 Mar bitcoin

Quoth The Raven is at it again. After years of berating bitcoin, he can't stop talking about it. I still have a little long time bitterness towards him, but he is producing some good content.

A big benefit is that his popular audience reaches a denographic that needs bitcoin education- old rich guys.

Also, he's got the vision to see how adoption can come about:

Unlike with GameStop, Bitcoin actually does have the chance to affect major change because the network's success is tethered to how large it grows. This means that with every single person who decides to own, or educate themselves about, Bitcoin, they become part of a self-fulfilling prophecy of the network's success. And, of course, the ideology behind the success of the network is firmly rooted in empowering people just like them: the people who are tired of having what little they earn silently whisked away from them by the dark inflationary financial machinery of the night.

view all related items

525 sats \ 8 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

Okay, just read the post. Here's my question:

For the people, like QTR in this article, whose argument is basically "Btc is an opportunity to get our revenge on The Man, and politicians, and other rich assholes who have ruined the world", how will they feel about the fact that the distribution of btc is even more skewed toward the The Man, the politicians, and rich assholes than the distribution of fiat was?

I am really asking this question. While there's some obvious upheaval in who is btc rich vs who is rich, just as happens in every revolution, on net the btc rich are the very people who have a bunch of extra income to invest on a lark, also as happens in every revolution.

Do people not know that? Or do they not care, for some reason? Or am I wrong, for some reason?

248 sats \ 6 replies \ @siggy47 OP 4 Mar

I'm glad you raised this. Your point is really what depresses the hell out of me about Kreuger. This dismissive "grow up, the big boys are in charge now" , while Anita Posch is working each day to help the global south play catch up. The ETFs have exacerbated all this obviously.

270 sats \ 1 reply \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

If I were to rebut myself, I would say something like:

The distribution of the future system will be drastically skewed toward the people who are winning in the current system, just as always; but, once the new system starts, that skewed distribution will smooth out, and no state manipulation can keep it from smoothing out, and that's better than we've ever had before.

Which I believe. But it's a more nuanced point than I am accustomed to hearing, which really gives me pause. What will the backlash be, when rich assholes continue to parade around being rich assholes, except they've got massive gainz from btc? Does the whole maxi community implode? Or are they cool, bc now their god-kings are amongst the elite?

And the angry guy who works at a gas station, who made a little money with btc, but is still at the bottom, what's his story going forward?

87 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 4 Mar

No easy answers, but these are important questions we should think about now.

167 sats \ 3 replies \ @arrivederci 4 Mar

Did you see Krueger's crass, attention seeking attack on Lyn Alden yesterday ?

https://twitter.com/dotkrueger/status/1764479379500097974

Lyn responded with her usual grace, but also smacked him down (and brought the receipts).

https://twitter.com/LynAldenContact/status/1764577518726635898

27 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 OP 4 Mar

I did not see this. The tweet would have been fine without that gratuitous Woody Allen crack at the end. The term smug douchebag comes to mind.

76 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

That's also the term that came to mind for me.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

Man, Lyn is impressive. I can't offhand think of another person who, each time there's a dustup, I come away thinking of more highly. Quite a role model.

27 sats \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby 4 Mar

You probably aren't wrong. Maybe it's human nature.

But I think one element to add here may be that changing the financial system introduces a bit of chaos into things. Like shaking a snow globe. Some of the establishment fall and some new people become a part of the establishment.

86 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 4 Mar

Doomberg made a comment on Pete's pod that he could create a gold and a bitcoin newsletter and get tons of subscribers pretty easily. I think the Raven just realized that he got exponentially more popular when he started "liking" bitcoin and he is milking it for all he can.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 4 Mar

Honestly, I liked him better before he liked bitcoin and before I knew he was an Eagles fan.

86 sats \ 6 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

I'd never heard of the guy, but he did a podcast w/ Pete McCormack where PM asked a question and QTR literally monologued for 45 minutes. Then he made a joke about how much he talked, and I was like: okay, he's self-aware at least. Then PM asked another question and he did it again.

Remarkable, the people that show up in this space.

218 sats \ 4 replies \ @chairman_pretense 4 Mar

It's really interesting to compare the occasional technical interviews with devs vs guru interviews. The gurus are the ones who ramble on without a pause for breath, whilst it's only the technical guys who will give clear answers and hold their hands up when they're on a topic they don't precisely understand.

I know who I would rather listen to.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

Same. Do you have any recommendations for good interviews, or interviewees? I'm always on the lookout.

200 sats \ 0 replies \ @chairman_pretense 4 Mar

The Chaincode & Blockstream podcasts are infrequent but often good.

NVK's Bitcoin Review is always a nice jumping off point, even if they don't go deep on the topics it usually leads you down a rabbit hole to an interesting new project.

What Bitcoin Did tends to go a bit macro for me these days, but I really enjoyed the episode last year with Calle talking about Cashu and they've had Shinobi back on recently which is a welcome return. Also the recent episode with Carla Kirk-Cohen was nice and probably what I had in mind as the counter point to the QTR one you mentioned.

64 sats \ 1 reply \ @arrivederci 4 Mar

I'm not the person you asked for a suggestion but just going to mention Preston Pysh's name, in case you are not already listening to him. Great as an interviewer (and occasional interviewee).

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 4 Mar

Good suggestion -- I do listen to him already, but it's good to be explicit. I thought his moderation of the Atlantis panel w/ Saylor, Lyn, and ... that other guy was really good. Just a very adept media dude.

27 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 4 Mar

I know. That's what stuck out with me during the interview. In fact I think I mentioned it yesterday. I suspect we'll be seeing more of these conventional investment gurus show up soon.

76 sats \ 0 replies \ @positronic_bot 4 Mar

"I just grokked bitcoin. Let me philosophize it to you". He's a clown. Fake humility mixed with selective memory. An Influencoor with all the right (wrong) attributes.

76 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 4 Mar

Just to draw attention to this part of the article, and also to point you to another one I shared yesterday (Bitcoin will not kill the U.S. dollar... The government deficit will.).

During the next major financial crisis, which, in my opinion, isn’t that far away, the same group of pissed-off “have nots” will hopefully direct more of the blame where it belongs: monetary policy. After all, inflation is a brutal tax on the people who can’t afford it and is all but meaningless for the super-rich. And, the super-rich get super richer as a result of quantitative easing and money printing, which directs a disproportionate amount of relief to the stock, bonds and housing market: assets that rich people have that lower-income people do not have.

I would often ask during the Fed money printing over Covid, that if the Fed wanted to print $5 trillion, why wouldn’t they just divide it up evenly amongst all people in the United States and cut us all a check? After all, $5 trillion divided by 300 million people is about $16,500 per person. Putting systemic reasoning aside, this is a fairly simple straightforward question. If you want to stimulate the economy by spraying money all over the place, why not do it equally amongst all of its citizens, instead of playing favorites?

51 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 4 Mar

Yes! I could have quoted the whole article:) I missed your post. I'll check it out now.