Lol. Old news.

Lol. 1400 up next and my last bid at 1250. Don’t worry, I’m in it for the tech.

Keep buying tops

Need this version for Ethereum except he's homeless but also dead from coronavirus and two gun shots to the back of the head.

What's ironic is the technology has no mainstream application. It's ingenious technology for sure but solves problems that only exist on the fringes of societies.

It's immature. Like the internet in the mid 1990s, when it was angelfire pages and aol chat rooms. If it was already built out with real life use cases, the price would be mature. The bet essentially is that real life solutions will be built out eventually. The ponzis of defi, NFT, ICOs were just proof of concept that it can work. Now, from here, I'm hoping smart contracts are built out to carry more utility and less speculation. That's essentially the bet.

All the solutions would be related to replacing existing financial and contractual transactions, which have long-established and needed trusted intermediaries and rescission methods. The prime utility is taking out the trusted intermediary but nobody in society wants that except in third-world countries and technology enthusiasts.

Nobody wants that yet and that should be the point.

I'm in agreement that the Internet adoption related model isn't the best one as many variables are completely different today than were in the day of the adoption of that technology. Hardware deficiencies or inefficiencies as well as software developers inside the space to expand it were limited globally around that time.

This one also completely different in that I believes it goes against state in a way where as Internet adoption was beneficial to state and individual as a whole. It's quite easy to argue bitcoin is not in the best interest of state as it brings light to their inefficient bargain system in which they currently control and have the monopoly on.

Right now most of the world's fiat currencies are are getting rekt to the dollar. People are not only losing value in many countries do to inflation but their earning power in their countries scale system is also being lowered at the same time.

I expect more countries will go the route of El Savador in the near future and that will be the start of the sinking of current system.

Max pain in the meantime to atleast shine the light on all the inefficiencies of the current system. If people are fleeing to dollars right now fine. Eventually they will flee to something better.

This is laughably ******ed.

How do you believe a technology that's not good for the state is actually going to get adopted on a mass scale?

And so you think countries and individuals are going to turn to BTC in revolt to fiat currencies and on a mass scale?

I'm open to alternative points of view, at least those with a plausible counter-scenario.

It's not that it's anti-state as much as in the current system the state is like a referee that's also allowed to play in the game at the same time. I think it's obvious how you can see the advantages of someone that's able to call the game and play in the game at the same time.

If we move to something like bitcoin they no longer control the game or are the referee of the game. They can still play in it and they would still probably find ways to push the public narrative a certain way ,etc or whatever through the media or even win the game against the common person but they will not be able to call the fouls or whatever in the game. That makes the game fair in my opinion and is a better overall game for everybody.

But the state has no interest in allowing a competing currency to be adopted and disrupting the advantage it enjoys as the reserve currency so I'm still not seeing how it becomes adopted on a mass-scale. What do you envision happening that displaces the interests of the US government with respect to its control of the currency?

Its already happened with cable tv, retail stores, taxis etc. better things are created and replace the old interior stuff. otherwise we’d still be riding horses.

All of those improved on the products they displaced. How is ETH and its blockchain an improvement in utility or function for the average finance consumer? And by improvement I mean something the consumer would actually care about, not what ETH or DeFi enthusiasts care about.

When I deposit money into a checking account or savings account at my bank, if we are rounding, I am getting 0% interest. When they loan that money out, they are loaning it for 3-5%+. Wouldn't it be better if instead of using a bank, I could lend directly using a smart contract? I deposit 100k into the smart contract, someone else posts some sort of collateral, let's say it's 200k worth of bitcoin. The 100k goes out to the counter party, the bitcoin sits in the contract. When bitcoin value approaches, let's say 130k, the smart contract sells the bitcoin to ensure my 100k + interest is ensured, the counter party can either get liquidated or add collateral to prevent it.

Let's say I'm willing to accept 3% for this collateralized loan. The counter party is willing to pay 3%. So rather than me receiving 0% from the bank, I now get 3%. Rather than the debtor paying 5%, he pays 3%. Seems like something both parties would want to use rather tradfi.

If you've ever sold a house before, you probably know just how expensive it can be with the escrow, titles etc. Wouldn't you rather use a smart contract where the buyer deposits the necessary funds in the contract and when certain agreed upon criteria are met, let's say inspection needs to be checked off and whatever other criteria necessary, then the money is released to the seller and the deed is released to the buyer? This avoids a ton of unnecessary fees.

This is what I envision is eventually built out and used, removing unnecessary intermediaries that benefit both parties. Simple smart contracts that remove trust and expensive third parties

Who is the "someone else" pledging $200k of bitcoin as collateral? The counter-party you're lending $100k to? Or is it a third-party, and if so, what do they get for posting the collateral?

What happens if there's a dispute and both parties make claims to the escrow deposit? Is someone going to arbitrate that for free, ie no escrow fee? Btw the actual escrow fee in real estate transactions is rather small. What happens if the title of the home is challenged 10 years later? That's what title insurance is for and represents the most expensive part of administrative closing costs.

There doesn't need to be a third party, the person pledging 200k of bitcoin is someone that wants to hold bitcoin and doesn't want to sell it, but needs USD to pay for things. It's essentially what bezos/elon/random billionaires have always done. Never sell, use their assets as collaterals for loans to pay for living expenses and continue compounding indefinitely.

Oh, are you saying the person wanting to borrow the $100k in USD is the one who pledges the $200k in BTC, so a secured loan?

Yes. So there are two parties that can benefit from a trustless system governed by a smart contract. There are tons of similar ideas that can remove third parties. If I want to buy a used car from someone without ever meeting the person and inspecting it, I can put the money into a smart contract, the seller will drive the car to a agreed upon mechanic for inspection. If inspection goes well, money is released to seller, mechanic gets paid and title/keys given to buyer.

Eliminate Carvana or other used cars dealers or remove the hassle of driving over and talking to seller and inspecting etc.

Hmm, I'll have to think about that. It seems like a rather niche, self-referential scenario, basically treating BTC as an asset that is borrowed against rather than a means of exchange. In other words, a scenario retrofitted for BTC's current role. For mass adoption/scale it also assumes a world where BTC is a widely-accepted store of value but to get there it must have unique utility that is widely accepted as such, hence the self-referential (or maybe better stated, circular) nature of the scenario. Chicken and the egg...

For the car scenario, what's the unique utility vs how it's done today, ie exchanging keys/title for cleared funds? You mean where the buyer is remote?

I used BTC because that's what is currently most likely to be used. But it doesn't have to be exclusive to that, it can be stock certificates or anything else both parties agree to. My friend in Austin just sent his 5m in apple stock to a bank and borrow against it at 6%. If you or me are willing to take the place of the brokerage in a smart contract with collateralized apple stock for 4.5%, both parties would win.

In theory, it won't matter what the state wants. They'll either coexist in this brave new world or cease to exist entirely

The only question is the timeline