Good luck in getting the account back!
On #nostr though it’s simple - not your keys, not your account.
Super excited about this! Ordered. #bookstr
Poison is not a very helpful category. Oxygen is poison too. Sugar is not, but it’s killing you.
Just looking at these graphs makes me think that they’re going to find themselves between a rock and a hard place in not too distant future! 
I think there’s bound to be some action some time after halving either way. E.g., a self fulfilling prophecy.
But we do need to keep the macro view in mind, as that determines where the equilibrium of reduced-supply bitcoin would be.
So.. it’s prime time to stack sats, given that the Fed and ECB are likely to eventually go back to cutting the rates come ‘unknown and variable lag’ hits the fan?
Very interesting. I recently interviewed Mauricio Di Bartolomeo of Ledn, and he brought up another interesting point about "black markets" for dollars. He said that they technically provide the real market rate for dollars, which is maybe another reason the powers that be don't like them. He discusses this in the "Overview of Crisis in Venezuela" section... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCWI1VjaEHE
That’s actually very well known. In countries that manipulate exchange rates only the (black) market has the actual rates. Case in point - the discrepancy between official and (black) market exchange rates of roubles in the Soviet Union.
So how long do we need to wait to be able to turn that page? 😃😬
Super hyped about the book!
Btw, based on your thread I ordered the Fourth Turning is Here yesterday!
If you need to put it in an investment account, GBTC is currently the only option, I think. Until and if one of the ETFs get approved. There should be clarity about that in a few months.
However…
Not your keys, not your coins. Paper Bitcoin is still paper, I’m buying the real deal.
You do know why wet bulb temperature of 35 becomes dangerous, right?
Because sweating stops working as a heat management mechanism due to physics.
Regarding CO2 and climate. It so happens that I’ve spent a part of my career working directly with climate related data. Think glacier extent, sea ice extent, sea surface temperature, etc. To me anthropogenic climate change is just a fact.
Plants will be fine, but humans and especially human civilisation are finicky things. Healthy humans start dropping like flies in wet bulb temperature of 35 Celsius. Currently that’s pretty rare, but it’s going to become more and more prevalent during this century.
On top of that add water stress, drought, and rising sea level, and you easily get to around a quarter of humanity living in areas that are going to become increasingly inhospitable. This won’t be a huge problem for, say, the United States. Americans can just move more inland and more north. Also, rich societies can find technological solutions to keep living in inhospitable environments.
The rest? The rest will try to move. This will lead to conflict and the fall of any semblance of international order. Because the places where these people will move to will become increasingly hostile to the newcomers as their numbers soar.
Regarding the laptop. I realise full well how the supply chain produces CO2, but that’s exactly the point I’m trying to make. In my opinion it’s not the use of energy that’s the problem. Energy generation might be, depending on mode of generation.
Concrete buildings are not the problem, coal being burned in kilns is the problem. I find this distinction really important. By focusing on the wrong thing we’re going to come up with the wrong solutions. Such as banning concrete. Or banning Bitcoin mining.
Do you think the central banks could achieve a similar effect by having a negative inflation target? So, keeping the rates high enough to have inflation at say -2%?
That should also discourage superfluous crediting and encourage saving.
Thanks a lot! I appreciate you engaging! 😃
Just to clarify, I’m very much pro-Bitcoin. Party because I don’t think that’s how it’s actually going to play out, and I find freedom to transact a basic human right that’s being encroached on more and more!
Why do you assume that anyone will be rich enough to buy enough violence? Bitcoin is not free in the monetary sense. Someone will always have more money than someone else, even if all money is Bitcoin. And then, obviously, people who have more money will be able to buy more violence than other people.
And then other people will have to pay the ones who have enough money to buy enough violence for ‘protection’.
And that’s taxation.
No of course. Just because they’d be stronger within their domain. A peasant in the Middle Ages could stab a knight with a pitchfork, the other knights would come after him, kill him, rape his wife, and sell his kids.
That’s how it always plays out when you have armed groups of people around. Someone always ends up holding the monopoly on violence within some area/domain.
Thanks for elaborating! Yes, and these private armies will then establish spheres of influence, and proceed with taxation in their spheres of influence where they will have monopoly on violence.
We’ve been there, it’s called feudalism.