Bitcoin Looks Set for Longest Monthly Losing Streak Since 2018(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
Bitcoin Looks Set for Longest Monthly Losing Streak Since 2018
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-30/bitcoin-btc-slides-toward-longest-monthly-losing-streak-since-2018
97 comments
Whether the price goes up or down from here, one notion has been sufficiently shattered over the last couple of years - that Bitcoin is a stable ~source~ store of value that acts has a hedge against inflation and currency control by governments. While assets like gold and silver have surged in the same time period due to political and economic uncertainty, as one may expect, Bitcoin has gone in the opposite direction and has been driven more by hype cycles and a small number of whales rather than any fundamentals.
> that Bitcoin is a stable source of value
no sane person could have ever held that notion - there is no underlying value.
no sane person could have ever held that notion - there is no underlying value.
The computing cost to mine more bitcoin is hailed as the underlying value by proponents of that notion. It depends on bitcoin holders refusing to sell at a price lower than the cost of mining, which isn't a given. It's also a notion that doesn't account for potential innovations such as quantum computing, which would significantly reduce crypto mining costs.
Hindsight is 20/20. That bitcoin is a store of value has been talked about for a very long time when other blockchains overtook it in terms of functionality. People’s memories are short so I am sure it will be touted as such again in a couple years.
[deleted]
A currency has no intrinsic value except a minimal one; for BTC, we can say it was 10k BTC for two pizzas. The subsequent value didn't come from speculation but from an underlying economy. In BTC case, it was the D-Company that sold drugs for BTC and with BTC bought weapons, explosives etc for Al-Qaeda, and those who sold them accepted BTC because they could sell it for local fiat currencies to various D-Company customers. From there, it was an uphill race.
The decline came when it moved from the criminal economy, which was well-supplied and very interested in exchanging BTC, to Wall Street, interested in speculating and with capital far greater than states evading sanctions and criminal groups.
However, the decline is always relative, because in its brief existence to date, BTC is still the asset that has gained the most value over time compared to any other.
Despite many technical problems https://blog.dshr.org/2025/09/the-gaslit-asset-class.html, it has spread. Running a node costs, let's say, a BitAxe/NerdMiner+Raspberry Pi+2TB of storage and an internet connection, meaning it's within reach of many. Once you have a node, you can set up a Lightning channel with your own node to have a "wallet" for everyday payments with low fees and sufficient TPS to pay for a coffee, if the seller accepts SAT.
In other words, it truly is an asset against failed currencies, authoritarian governments, geopolitical quakes, and so on. It isn't much compared to gold only because most people don't own BTC, don't know how to use it, so in a major crisis, well, only a few would know what to do, and these few would still need other things for daily exchanges. However, these few could, for example, flee a country taking wealth with them. Something that in a major crisis isn't guaranteed to be possible otherwise.
So, it isn't much of a currency at this moment. The currency uses that gave it the bulk of its super-value during this period are reduced, while speculative ones are high. It isn't very sustainable for the miners' economy without a rising price, and this creates a very dangerous downward spiral because, to date, states and giant actors accumulate BTC here and there but don't do much mining, and the interest in keeping the network up remains to be seen how it will hold over time. But it does have value in the current context.
The problem is always that the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. The market isn't made up entirely of homines economici, but only some, and many other purely emotional subjects whose reasoning seems more constructed after the fact to justify emotional choices.
Personally, I suspend judgment. I've never really digested the definition of "store of value" nor that of digital gold, but I don't digest gold either because in itself it has minimal value; the super-value is pure psychology that can change at any time, ESPECIALLY in a major crisis where most are hungry and don't eat ingots. I just wonder in case of a major crisis what the few who have BTC can do with it, besides waiting for better times.
The decline came when it moved from the criminal economy, which was well-supplied and very interested in exchanging BTC, to Wall Street, interested in speculating and with capital far greater than states evading sanctions and criminal groups.
However, the decline is always relative, because in its brief existence to date, BTC is still the asset that has gained the most value over time compared to any other.
Despite many technical problems https://blog.dshr.org/2025/09/the-gaslit-asset-class.html, it has spread. Running a node costs, let's say, a BitAxe/NerdMiner+Raspberry Pi+2TB of storage and an internet connection, meaning it's within reach of many. Once you have a node, you can set up a Lightning channel with your own node to have a "wallet" for everyday payments with low fees and sufficient TPS to pay for a coffee, if the seller accepts SAT.
In other words, it truly is an asset against failed currencies, authoritarian governments, geopolitical quakes, and so on. It isn't much compared to gold only because most people don't own BTC, don't know how to use it, so in a major crisis, well, only a few would know what to do, and these few would still need other things for daily exchanges. However, these few could, for example, flee a country taking wealth with them. Something that in a major crisis isn't guaranteed to be possible otherwise.
So, it isn't much of a currency at this moment. The currency uses that gave it the bulk of its super-value during this period are reduced, while speculative ones are high. It isn't very sustainable for the miners' economy without a rising price, and this creates a very dangerous downward spiral because, to date, states and giant actors accumulate BTC here and there but don't do much mining, and the interest in keeping the network up remains to be seen how it will hold over time. But it does have value in the current context.
The problem is always that the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. The market isn't made up entirely of homines economici, but only some, and many other purely emotional subjects whose reasoning seems more constructed after the fact to justify emotional choices.
Personally, I suspend judgment. I've never really digested the definition of "store of value" nor that of digital gold, but I don't digest gold either because in itself it has minimal value; the super-value is pure psychology that can change at any time, ESPECIALLY in a major crisis where most are hungry and don't eat ingots. I just wonder in case of a major crisis what the few who have BTC can do with it, besides waiting for better times.
My working hypothesis is that people are dumping Bitcoin for AI adjacent stocks because the hype around agents is growing.
There’s no way to prove this, but I’m seeing unexpected behaviors on the secondary markets for privately held AI companies.
There’s no way to prove this, but I’m seeing unexpected behaviors on the secondary markets for privately held AI companies.
At least AI produces something. Maybe not what everyone hopes for, but there is some output that people are worth paying for.
Cryptocurrency lived entirely in the hopes that people wanted to replace regular money, and it turns out not to be a big use case outside of criminals and refugees.
The AI bubble will one day collapse too. But the Bitcoin bubble could just plain vanish.
Cryptocurrency lived entirely in the hopes that people wanted to replace regular money, and it turns out not to be a big use case outside of criminals and refugees.
The AI bubble will one day collapse too. But the Bitcoin bubble could just plain vanish.
Not a big use case outside of criminals and refugees" - the refugee use case alone matters to hundreds of millions living under capital controls or currency collapse. Argentinians escaping peso devaluation aren't criminals. Ukrainians moving value during invasion aren't edge cases.
Whether Bitcoin is good at this is debatable. Whether it's a real use case isn't.
Whether Bitcoin is good at this is debatable. Whether it's a real use case isn't.
Vibes guy here. I dabbled in Bitcoin for about a year, on the notion that if the world's overall financial system got degraded, more people would view Bitcoin holdings as a safe way to preserve value. Maybe better than owning physical gold. Why not get in early before the next stampede?
But I was wrong about bitcoin > gold. It's worked the other way around. There's also persistent chatter that the supposedly uncrackable Bitcoin private keys might someday be crackable with quantum computing. Preposterous? Maybe. Maybe not. There's a mind-blowing amount of compute coming into the world, and not all of it's going to be used to create goofy memes or robo-PowerPoints. Call me timid, but I cashed out with modest Bitcoin profits last year and am fine watching the show from the sidelines from here on.
But I was wrong about bitcoin > gold. It's worked the other way around. There's also persistent chatter that the supposedly uncrackable Bitcoin private keys might someday be crackable with quantum computing. Preposterous? Maybe. Maybe not. There's a mind-blowing amount of compute coming into the world, and not all of it's going to be used to create goofy memes or robo-PowerPoints. Call me timid, but I cashed out with modest Bitcoin profits last year and am fine watching the show from the sidelines from here on.
The biggest problem with metals is the same as crypto - there's no fundamental underlying value like P/E or product announcements you can anchor the price to - so its free to fluctuate.
How much of a problem that actually is we got to find out last Friday.
How much of a problem that actually is we got to find out last Friday.
> there's no fundamental underlying value [...] its free to fluctuate
I don't understand this argument since that's how literally all markets work: the consensus is the current price. If we're talking about fundamentals then crypto isn't comparable to gold at all since 1) it's a physical, tangible, durable thing, and 2) has been used for centuries as a store of value.
Gold is easy to understand from a human perspective and doesn't require knowledge of a blockchain or anything tech related. You store it, secure it, and transport it like any other physical asset. Whereas something like Bitcoin involves seed phrases, blockchains, irreversible transactions, a public ledger, and it's all virtual. If your store of value is one mistake away from being lost to the void then it's not very good. I'll just finish with this: there is a reason that central banks have been loading up on gold recently in light of uncertainty and not crypto.
I don't understand this argument since that's how literally all markets work: the consensus is the current price. If we're talking about fundamentals then crypto isn't comparable to gold at all since 1) it's a physical, tangible, durable thing, and 2) has been used for centuries as a store of value.
Gold is easy to understand from a human perspective and doesn't require knowledge of a blockchain or anything tech related. You store it, secure it, and transport it like any other physical asset. Whereas something like Bitcoin involves seed phrases, blockchains, irreversible transactions, a public ledger, and it's all virtual. If your store of value is one mistake away from being lost to the void then it's not very good. I'll just finish with this: there is a reason that central banks have been loading up on gold recently in light of uncertainty and not crypto.
A large fraction of gold mined every year is used for its material properties in industrial and electronic applications. That presents a very real floor on price. If good was suddenly worth 1/10th as much we would use it in far more industrial applications thus driving up the price. Similarly mining would slow down from the current ~3,000 tons annually again driving the price up.
Gold is currently priced way above that level, but just like the stock market were dividends allow people to buy more stock when the price is low there is a very tangible feedback loop propping up the price which eventually kicks in.
Counterintuitively this means using gold as an investment vehicle makes the world a worse place because we fall back to less efficient methods in industry, and efficiency is ultimately the engine of progress.
Gold is currently priced way above that level, but just like the stock market were dividends allow people to buy more stock when the price is low there is a very tangible feedback loop propping up the price which eventually kicks in.
Counterintuitively this means using gold as an investment vehicle makes the world a worse place because we fall back to less efficient methods in industry, and efficiency is ultimately the engine of progress.
Gold is also one of the best heat conductors so if it got really cheap it could be used a lot in industry and electronics. Anything from cookware to heat sinks!
> A large fraction of gold mined every year is used for its material properties in industrial and electronic applications.
I thought that was less than 10%. That's a very low floor! (That said, gold is sound money)
I thought that was less than 10%. That's a very low floor! (That said, gold is sound money)
Hence why I said at 1/10th the price we would use a lot more of it.
There’s easily decades worth of industrial use in vaults so the instantaneous floor is quite low. However feedback occurs well before you hit the actual limits here.
There’s easily decades worth of industrial use in vaults so the instantaneous floor is quite low. However feedback occurs well before you hit the actual limits here.
I read 7% of 2024 demand is industrial. Gold ended 2024 at $2600.
Recycling jewelry to make more jewelry is quite common, which kind of distorts how much the gold supply vs reserve is. If demand to manufacture jewelry ends then the supply of recycled jewelry also dries up.
~3,300 tons where mined in 2024
“Industrial and tech demand accounted for 83 tons of gold in the third quarter” of 2024. 83 * 4 = 332 so ~10% which is fairly typical.
~3,300 tons where mined in 2024
“Industrial and tech demand accounted for 83 tons of gold in the third quarter” of 2024. 83 * 4 = 332 so ~10% which is fairly typical.
Whats your baseline for volatility? 0%? Outliers aside, metals are still the most stable store of value thats widely used
And the P/E and product announcements your touting as inherent value are for generating value, not storing it. If your purpose was to store and transfer value, it would be stupid to use stocks over currency or gold
And the P/E and product announcements your touting as inherent value are for generating value, not storing it. If your purpose was to store and transfer value, it would be stupid to use stocks over currency or gold
Gold and silver, besides industrial uses, have been used both as currency and jewelry for a long time.
> Gold and silver, besides industrial uses, have been used both as currency […]
So has credit, with documented uses earlier (Ur III, 3000BC) than gold (Lydians, 600BC).
So has credit, with documented uses earlier (Ur III, 3000BC) than gold (Lydians, 600BC).
And why are/were they used as currency?
They’re durable, resistant to corruption, relatively rare, pretty… Titanium or gems would’ve been equally used if they were equally convenient. Not to mention that coinage could be minted or mixed with, say, copper. Gold makes good alloys and can be recovered later.
Currency as jewelry is a good way to secure and carry your wealth as well as display it as a status symbol (or hide it).
A ring is just a coin you wear on your finger.
A ring is just a coin you wear on your finger.
> And why are/were they used as currency?
Because there was no useful alternative and/or we didn't know better.
Because there was no useful alternative and/or we didn't know better.
The fundamental underlying value on stocks also depends on fluctuating prices for the goods and services that firms buy and sell, just like commodities.
Don't even need quantum to worry: Satoshi's wallet could be a massive rug pull by the CIA/FBA/NSA when the time comes.
No one thinks the FBI is competent enough for it to be them.
The way bitcoin works is that addresses are hashes of a public key.
This technically allows for an emergency measure in case ECC is broken by a quantum computer:
The [unknown] public key becomes the private key. The signature becomes a ZKP of this key. I believe this has been proposed before as well.
The signature sizes are going to be a big problem is this scenario however, consensus may actually do something up to alleviate this in extremis. And also the people who have coins in addresses for which the public keys are known will be screwed, but then that's how everyone will know there is a problem - it's unlikely early cryptoraphically-relevant quantum computers (CRQC) will be able to front-run bitcoin transactions.
This technically allows for an emergency measure in case ECC is broken by a quantum computer:
The [unknown] public key becomes the private key. The signature becomes a ZKP of this key. I believe this has been proposed before as well.
The signature sizes are going to be a big problem is this scenario however, consensus may actually do something up to alleviate this in extremis. And also the people who have coins in addresses for which the public keys are known will be screwed, but then that's how everyone will know there is a problem - it's unlikely early cryptoraphically-relevant quantum computers (CRQC) will be able to front-run bitcoin transactions.
Quantum computing is interesting to think about in the context of bitcoin. It would be technically feasible to upgrade the protocol to be quantum-secure (e.g. allow wallets to make an on-chain declaration of a new PQ pubkey, and after that point all transactions must be signed with the PQ keypair) - but getting everyone to coordinate on something like that would be challenging.
[deleted]
Quantum computing isn't a serious threat. Would require a concentrated effort from the community to migrate to a quantum-proof hashing algorithm but there's no greater motivation than potentially losing it all.
You can easily trade gold today. You can easily trade gold if ww3 starts to the goons pressganging people into dying in the trenches so they take your bitcoin hoarding neighbor instead. You can easily trade gold after a nuclear apocalypse to your local warlord so you get access to non-irradiated food.
Gold is a pretty, shiny rock and rich people like pretty, shiny things so they can display their superiority to no-gold-having proles. Just about everybody on the planet knows gold is highly valuable. It is fundamentally a superior store of value than bitcoin if you’re talking about notable global disruptions, even without going into the actual tech.
Gold is a pretty, shiny rock and rich people like pretty, shiny things so they can display their superiority to no-gold-having proles. Just about everybody on the planet knows gold is highly valuable. It is fundamentally a superior store of value than bitcoin if you’re talking about notable global disruptions, even without going into the actual tech.
This can’t be a serious comment. If ww3 starts the respective countries central banks will keep the gold for themselves. You are so naieve if you think any government is going to honour the fact that you have a piece of paper that saya you own some gold in their vault.
It is not like they haven't done lot to collect it off the population in such scenarios during previous crises. My guess is that if WW3 breaks out. For duration your gold will have rather little use. At best you get price set by government. At worst it will be confiscated. And black market will probably be only place to use it.
And post WW3. If there is economy left. It will be while before people lock back on gold.
And post WW3. If there is economy left. It will be while before people lock back on gold.
> You can easily trade gold if ww3 starts
If you want something you can trade post ww3 also stockpile alcohol, tobacco, coffee, etc. . Small luxuries everyone will be willing to trade for in a post war country.
If you want something you can trade post ww3 also stockpile alcohol, tobacco, coffee, etc. . Small luxuries everyone will be willing to trade for in a post war country.
Sugar and salt are non-perishable if stored in right conditions. Later one does not get too much use. But first one can be turned to drugs and those are always popular.
> goons pressganging people into dying in the trenches so they take your bitcoin hoarding neighbor instead
Wouldn't they just take your gold and pressgang you? Double win for them.
Wouldn't they just take your gold and pressgang you? Double win for them.
Yeah, that angle never worked out for me. If we imagine instead the world became hyper-capitalistic (even more than today), then I could see that digital and untracable (not Bitcoin) decentralized money might have a big influence, but in the opposite scenarios, I don't think there is a lot of need for cryptocurrencies.
Where is your gold? Buried in your garden? Or is it an accounting entry at some commodities trading firm?
You can easily trade gold until someone can force it from you.
The amount of gold you can realistically conceal is less than a year of your salary.
The amount of gold you can realistically conceal is less than a year of your salary.
A year of my salary is between 1lbs to 2lbs of gold at current prices. Hiding a few pounds of something isn't very difficult, I do it every Christmas.
It might be worth considering why drug deals are always portrayed as a high stakes, dangerous event (it's because to do the sale, the physical products have to all be in one well known place where everybody knows both the place and time).
Fur future readers: I was making a joke about Christmas dinner if that wasn't clear.
> Gold is a pretty, shiny rock and rich people like pretty, shiny things so they can display their superiority to no-gold-having proles. Just about everybody on the planet knows gold is highly valuable.
But isn't this all based on belief? What if you break the spell? During the Dutch Tulip Mania you could've replaced "gold" with "tulip" and changed a few adjectives and it was the same until the spell broke... I don't see the difference to Bitcoin, GME, or TSLA, "I'm going to hoard this because tomorrow (for an infinite amount of tomorrows) someone else will want to buy it at a higher price!".
Yeah yeah yeah, gold can also be used for technology (e.g. as a non-reactive metal), but copper is useful in technology too...
Sheep is probably a better thing to own. You can eat it, or you can take its wool to make clothes to keep yourself warm. You can't eat gold.
But isn't this all based on belief? What if you break the spell? During the Dutch Tulip Mania you could've replaced "gold" with "tulip" and changed a few adjectives and it was the same until the spell broke... I don't see the difference to Bitcoin, GME, or TSLA, "I'm going to hoard this because tomorrow (for an infinite amount of tomorrows) someone else will want to buy it at a higher price!".
Yeah yeah yeah, gold can also be used for technology (e.g. as a non-reactive metal), but copper is useful in technology too...
Sheep is probably a better thing to own. You can eat it, or you can take its wool to make clothes to keep yourself warm. You can't eat gold.
Gold has been used as a store of value for bascially all of recorded human civilization.
Sheep get sick and die, and you have to feed them.
Sheep get sick and die, and you have to feed them.
Civilization has had a habitable planet for the entirity of its run. When food and water are scarce, what good will metal do?
Yeah, when food and water are scarce, rearing sheep will be hard too.
Yeah, when food and water are scarce, rearing sheep will be hard too.
And it will continue.
Bitcoin treasury companies [0] have equity values lower then their Bitcoin holdings, so it is the financially correct move to sell BTC at market price and use the proceeds to buy back their stock at the market price.
This will lead to additional downward pressure on BTC.
[0] https://bitbo.io/treasuries/
Bitcoin treasury companies [0] have equity values lower then their Bitcoin holdings, so it is the financially correct move to sell BTC at market price and use the proceeds to buy back their stock at the market price.
This will lead to additional downward pressure on BTC.
[0] https://bitbo.io/treasuries/
I'm not a fan of Bitcoin but from a purely financial perspective it's natural for treasury companies to trade at a discount to the underlying assets. Obviously the executives are going to find some way to steal most of the value and leave the minority shareholders (suckers) holding the bag.
How long does it have to drop for it to never recover?
I think I read 11,000 is when Saylor is completely broken, again.
BTC failed to live up to it's own prophecy by not doubling from the last height of ca. 69420 to at least 140k in 2025. There was a last chance in October of last year, where it seemed to get close but ultimately it just didn't find enough buyers. Now with the narrative broken (bitcoin always goes up over the long term) one sell off will lead to the next as more and more people lose trust.
That isn’t something you can categorically say for sure though. If it hits 125k next month then Bitcoin does go up over the long term. Same if it hits 125k next year.
Wrong. The problem with bitcoin is its volatility itself. If it doubled in value, that means its undergoing hyper deflation, which makes it a terrible store of value.
Bitcoin's proponents are its own biggest liability. People who see it as a speculative asset rather than a currency that needs to be a stable store of value. It, like all currency, has no ingerent value and its stupid to speculate on it
Bitcoin's proponents are its own biggest liability. People who see it as a speculative asset rather than a currency that needs to be a stable store of value. It, like all currency, has no ingerent value and its stupid to speculate on it
I still find it interesting that the pump and dump still works - it's the same cycle over and over again of building the market to dump crap onto people. I bet some folks have so much crap they've been dumping it gradually just so the market can absorb it.
Was this the final dump? I doubt it.
Was this the final dump? I doubt it.
and it has proven to not be a great hedge against inflation (lately, short term)
the digital gold narrative falls apart when non-digital gold outperforms it and nobody wants it for its digital properties (payments, blockchain, etc.)
the digital gold narrative falls apart when non-digital gold outperforms it and nobody wants it for its digital properties (payments, blockchain, etc.)
Possibly, but you don't know that and you are stating it as fact.
Somewhere in Paris, a phone laying on a glass table started vibrating and was picked up by a mysterious person who answered, with a thick French accent: "Yes?".
In all seriousness to me this is still within the bounds of "a Tuesday" in the BTC space. Stranger things have happened many times already.
In all seriousness to me this is still within the bounds of "a Tuesday" in the BTC space. Stranger things have happened many times already.
I don’t view it as any way to “preserve value”
To me it’s only true use is to anonymize payments (which requires some work to truly anonymize properly) - I see it as a system you dive in and out of. Not hold in. Simply because it’s not backed by anything it has no implied stability. At least the dollar (not backed properly anymore) has one of the largest world powers behind it keeping it floating along. There isn’t one of those for BTC…
I think most crypto is really all about another market for pump and dumps, a Wild West without much regulation…
Much like AI’s promise about letting humans enjoy a life with less labor, the idea sounds great but its reality is the majority of people just truthfully to make more money one way or another.
To me it’s only true use is to anonymize payments (which requires some work to truly anonymize properly) - I see it as a system you dive in and out of. Not hold in. Simply because it’s not backed by anything it has no implied stability. At least the dollar (not backed properly anymore) has one of the largest world powers behind it keeping it floating along. There isn’t one of those for BTC…
I think most crypto is really all about another market for pump and dumps, a Wild West without much regulation…
Much like AI’s promise about letting humans enjoy a life with less labor, the idea sounds great but its reality is the majority of people just truthfully to make more money one way or another.
> it’s only true use is to anonymize payments
The irony of this is that since every transaction and all its metadata is on chain, it has turned out to be easily traced back to the beginning of time. Fully open, the opposite of anonymized. (see: Chainalysis et. al.)
The irony of this is that since every transaction and all its metadata is on chain, it has turned out to be easily traced back to the beginning of time. Fully open, the opposite of anonymized. (see: Chainalysis et. al.)
[deleted]
Doesn't matter, there's no shortage of clowns interested in buying because the price will go up.
Nowadays even includes banks and custody companies.
Doesn't matter how much it falls.
Nowadays even includes banks and custody companies.
Doesn't matter how much it falls.
[deleted]
People dump BTC in order to buy gold.
People dump gold to buy Sandisk
They aren't buying actual gold though
People are dumping all sorts of things into gold.
I just did so with a few pounds of silver (when @ 49.5:1; now 56:1).
I just did so with a few pounds of silver (when @ 49.5:1; now 56:1).
Paywall
This is good for bitcoin /s
When silver is behaving like a shitcoin you know we're in for a fun ride. I think the fact that anyone with a phone can now download countless apps that allows them to """invest""" with leverage &co was a mistake. My bank app now advertises memecoins as a way to build "wealth"...
When silver is behaving like a shitcoin you know we're in for a fun ride. I think the fact that anyone with a phone can now download countless apps that allows them to """invest""" with leverage &co was a mistake. My bank app now advertises memecoins as a way to build "wealth"...
Trump associated currencies crashing.
Perfect time to buy
Not sure if that is the case. An insane amount of bitcoin has been dumped into the market by whales.
that's the perfect time to buy
Because the whales are dumbasses?
Let's say if I had old-school BTC, mined personally or bought back in the day for very little fiat currency and today it's an enormously larger sum, I'd say it's time to not keep all my eggs in one basket and rebalance my portfolio.
For example, I'd say it's actually been time for a while now, ever since the crypto-tax wave start to hit, to convert into fiat currency and buy land, houses, assets that, IF the state doesn't collapse and they're chosen in reasonable areas, could still preserve significant value, allow you to flee to another country (houses purchased abroad) if necessary etc.
If someone had put 0.001% of their capital or even 0.01% into old-school BTC and today finds themselves with 50% of their capital in BTC, it's high time to give some thought to diversification.
Smart contracts will become the contracts of the future and NFTs will be digital identity is pretty obvious; we don't know WHO will be used by whom for these tasks, but it's clear that this is what they'll be because they're the most functional choice we have in the trend toward rules as code. The problem is that the market can stay irrational longer than we can stay solvent, so it's a gamble, but also a logical diversification in its own right as well.
The only highly uncertain element is the miners' ability to withstand long periods of loss.
For example, I'd say it's actually been time for a while now, ever since the crypto-tax wave start to hit, to convert into fiat currency and buy land, houses, assets that, IF the state doesn't collapse and they're chosen in reasonable areas, could still preserve significant value, allow you to flee to another country (houses purchased abroad) if necessary etc.
If someone had put 0.001% of their capital or even 0.01% into old-school BTC and today finds themselves with 50% of their capital in BTC, it's high time to give some thought to diversification.
Smart contracts will become the contracts of the future and NFTs will be digital identity is pretty obvious; we don't know WHO will be used by whom for these tasks, but it's clear that this is what they'll be because they're the most functional choice we have in the trend toward rules as code. The problem is that the market can stay irrational longer than we can stay solvent, so it's a gamble, but also a logical diversification in its own right as well.
The only highly uncertain element is the miners' ability to withstand long periods of loss.
You’re right. Let’s wait for it to pump 20% before we buy. Lol what?
As far as I can tell, bitcoin, having no intrinsic value, is priced entirely by vibes. Right now the vibes are generally negative. The latest bubble of interest has faded. I would wait, the world could become interested again but it may be 2 or 3 years. The bottom will probably be around 70k.
What if all these AI companies, are going to mint coins with their idle GPUs, wouldn't that lower value of these coins massively ?
It's not as good as an ASIC, but we talk about millions of GPUs
It's not as good as an ASIC, but we talk about millions of GPUs
Bitcoin mining on GPUs is generally unprofitable due to the price of electricity.
The rate of coin mining is the same, no matter how many miners there are
The trouble with vibe-based pricing is it’s really hard to time the vibes. And hard to time the vibe dip.
Yes this is absolutely true. Difficult to impossible, I would say.. my prediction of "2 to 3 years" could very well be totally wrong.
The dominant narrative around bitcoin right now is "hodl because in the long term it always goes up." Thats the core premise that the bitcoin price is based on. If that premise were to crack, bitcoin could drop to near zero for all we know.
The dominant narrative around bitcoin right now is "hodl because in the long term it always goes up." Thats the core premise that the bitcoin price is based on. If that premise were to crack, bitcoin could drop to near zero for all we know.
Yeah, exactly.
While I’ve been watching it, it seems like the narrative of value has rotated between:
- BTC will be a global currency (this has only proven true for illicit activity)
- BTC will be a hedge against inflation like gold (this has also not been correct recently)
- BTC is a store of value??? Which is just circular reasoning… you should buy it because other people are buying it
Idk man, what do I know
While I’ve been watching it, it seems like the narrative of value has rotated between:
- BTC will be a global currency (this has only proven true for illicit activity)
- BTC will be a hedge against inflation like gold (this has also not been correct recently)
- BTC is a store of value??? Which is just circular reasoning… you should buy it because other people are buying it
Idk man, what do I know