Mmmmm, did you miss my point?
No one will be there representing BTC because no one represents BTC.
The rest though are representing their own self-interest.
Last edited:
XRP bull run
- Thread starter willrocks
- Start date
-
- Tags
- capital gains ripple tax xrp
Mmmmm, did you miss my point?
No one will be there representing BTC because no one represents BTC.
The rest though are representing their own self-interest.
What it looks like to be exit liquidity when the US President engineers a rug-pull:
Mmmmm, did you miss my point?
No one will be there representing BTC because no one represents BTC.
The rest though are representing their own self-interest.
I know what you mean.
My point is the fact that there is no one to represent BTC means banks and financial institutions will never use it internally as a technology, even if it could handle a much faster TPS (which it cannot). Having worked in banks and financial institutions I've seen how they simply do not deal with vendors unless there's someone to hold their hand every step of the way. It wouldn't get past a very simply risk analysis.
That being the case, it would be wise to see which crypto technologies WILL be utilized by banks and financial institutions. And I'll bet money it will be a crypto that has a company to represent it, with a CEO and a product line that they can easily integrate. It will also have technical support available.
Yep agree, BTC's use case on a daily transactional basis for small exchanges of value is limited due to speed when compared to other tokens or the NPP etc. But a high degree of utility doesn't qualify a token as a strategic asset when anyone can make their own Sol, ADA or XRP and render the incumbent token worthless eg witness Eth's slow decay to $0.
Further, the alternatives are nothing like BTC as they're all centralised in private hands. So banks may as well adopt a CBDC type of arrangement.
Further, the alternatives are nothing like BTC as they're all centralised in private hands. So banks may as well adopt a CBDC type of arrangement.
I agree, utility on its own wouldn't qualify a crypto to be nation's strategic reserve.
At this stage of crypto's technology lifecycle almost any crypto including BTC is still very speculative. BTC could easily become an obsolete technology, despite its first mover advantage. Just like most people no longer use land-line phones with dials on them, smart phones are a better technology.
A good high transactional crypto should exhibit these characteristics: low latency, high throughput, low fees, scalability, finality, security (strong cryptographic protection), decentralization, energy efficiency, interoperability with other financial systems (e.g. ISO20022). This is why XRP, SOL, ADA were chosen as they fit all these criteria. In addition they have a network effect with their relationships with banks and other financial institutions. So, no, it's not possible for someone to 'make their own Sol, ADA or XRP' any more than it's possible for someone to make their own Google, Amazon or Facebook.
If you think BTC is more 'decentralized' than say XRP, then you may be misinformed. In terms of distribution of tokens ETFs, governments, and MicroStrategy together hold 31% of all bitcoin and that number is growing daily. In terms of mining, just four bitcoin miners control approximately 80% of the hash power.
I'll just ask, if you want to fork a blockchain who do you have to convince in the BTC sphere? And who do you have to seek permission from in the ETH, SOL, XRP or ADA crypto platforms?
That's the metric for determining how decentralized one is from another. Everything else is just noise.
That's the metric for determining how decentralized one is from another. Everything else is just noise.
What is it that concerns you the most about a fork?
For a hard-fork:
Bitcoin needs at least 51% of total hash power.
Ripple XRPL needs at least 80% of validators and a new UNL.
For a soft-fork:
Bitcoin needs 90-95% miner approval.
Ripple XRPL needs at least 80% validator approval for 2 weeks.
pmbug
Well-Known Member
Read his full tweet carefully. He's not stating a change of his own opinion. He's is framing a question on alt coins based upon the common argument/proposition ascribed to Bitcoin (which he explicitly states that he does not agree with). People see what they want to see.
We'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one.
Even if it's only a thought experiment, which he does not agree with, he's still making a clear distinction between Bitcoin and other coins. Something I haven't seen him do before.
Michael Saylor and Cathie Wood will be representing BTC at the White House Crypto Summit.
They don't represent BTC, nobody represents BTC. They represent their respective companies in the same way Samani or Garlinghouse are representing their companies. The major difference is that Samani and Garlinghouse are selling their product, Ark and Saylor are selling an idea.
And that idea is BTC. They're not promoting their own company shares into the US crypto reserve. They're the closest you'll get to having someone represent BTC at one of these events.
Polar.bear.Stacker
Well-Known Member
The issue really is stablecoins.
Tether and USDC are stablecoins backed by funds in the banking system that allows minting and burning of tokens for USD.
If a hard fork were to occur, every address on both forks have coins and tokens and NFTs on both. The collateral for stablecoins remains unchanged.
While anyone can hard fork BTC, the nodes have to accept it for any transactions to have meaning.
A soft fork of BTC just means a stricter rule set compared to the original rule set. It is always backwards compatible and there is no duplication of coins because of a chain split
Which is exactly what Garlinghouse et al are going to be doing there.
Not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting XRP shares are Ripple company shares?
pmbug
Well-Known Member
It sounds like Trump is just reacting to this
https://www.forbes.com/sites/digita...eportedly-reveals-massive-trump-reserve-plan/
The Howey Test:
1. An investment of money
2. In a common enterprise
3. With the expectation of profit
4. To be derived from the efforts of others
Most altcoins are securities IMO.
The US SEC has already litigated whether XRP is a security (SEC v Ripple). The court ruled that Ripple and its coin, XRP, did not pass the Howey Test. This case would set a legal precedent for other cryptocurrencies.