6 ms·

BTC/USD is doing just fine. Nobody who knows anything about anything made any kinds of plans involving $20,000 Bitcoin. At ~$4k, it's still 10x where it was 2 y

BTC/USD is doing just fine. Nobody who knows anything about anything made any kinds of plans involving $20,000 Bitcoin. At ~$4k, it's still 10x where it was 2 years ago. Anybody remotely involved in BTC from it's actual inception (not the bandwagon shirt-losers of 2017) is filthy stinking rich now.

smacktoward 8y ago
> Nobody who knows anything about anything made any kinds of plans involving $20,000 Bitcoin. Except for Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and Barclays (see https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-street-quietly-shelves-its-bitcoin-dreams https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-stre...)...
- pesmhey 8y ago
  What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? Could this really be as obvious in hindsight as looking at Sears in the 90s not developing an online catalog?
  - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
    How does a blockchain solution solve Goldman Sachs' business problems better, or with less resources, than existing solutions?
  - raverbashing 8y ago
    You mean a solution that has solved exactly 0% of the problems where it was applied to? https://bitcoinist.com/blockchain-study-zero-percent-success/ https://bitcoinist.com/blockchain-study-zero-percent-success...
  - hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
    > What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? What does that sentence even mean? To me this is right up there with "I'll create a GUI interface with Visual Basic and see if I can track an IP address."
    - pesmhey 8y ago
      It literally means what the words say. What stops Goldman Sachs from replacing whatever mechanism they use to process payments with some coin. I would gladly accept the answer ‘because it doesn’t make sense’. Didn’t realize I’d get so much heat for this though.
  - hannasanarion 8y ago
    What would block chain do for Goldman that a SQL database couldn't?
    - pesmhey 8y ago
      I’m literally not sure, hence the question. I don’t know much about blockchain other than its sort of an answer to the Byzantine generals problem? It was a legit question.
      - hannasanarion 8y ago
        My belief is: nothing. For one thing, there is no solution to the Byzantine generals problem, this has been proven mathematically. Cryptocurrencies sidestep it by saying "whoever is the luckiest (aka 'owns more GPUs') gets to decide the truth". Traditional banks handle the problem by not having Byzantine generals: there is one and only one trusted authority who is compelled by law to keep clean and clear books. If a bank has a Byzantine problem that needs solving, they've already done something illegal.
- nck4222 8y ago
  That article really does not support your point at all... >Squeamish from the start about pursuing profits in one of the darker corners of finance, established firms this year slowed their already halting efforts to make a business out of Bitcoin mania. So they were slow from the start, and are slowing their already slow efforts. >“The market had unrealistic expectations that Goldman or any of its peers could suddenly start a Bitcoin trading business,” said Daniel H. Gallancy, chief executive officer of New York-based SolidX Partners, which hopes to launch a Bitcoin ETF in the U.S. "That was top-of-the-market-hype thinking." So the market (not banks or other insiders) had unrealistic expectations of traditional institutions. >With regulators offering little clear guidance on how they will classify the broad universe of tokens—as commodities, securities or something else—banks and investment firms are treading cautiously. Banks continue to wait for regulations and guidance before committing fully.
- Cobord 8y ago
  I think OP is saying they don't know anything about anything. Which has a point, they claim to know what they are doing, but just have such large capital that there is no way for them to fail even if they did everything wrong. So you can't use success as a barometer for knowing anything.
- wolco 8y ago
  They are part of the getting in late group and the lower valuations are most probably signs they are leaving the market. I remember when the price started to increase I didn't think 4,000 would hold. 2500 seemed like the correct price. The fact that it hasn't fallen below that amount means there are more investors. Personally I was using it to purchase goods before the runup and the slowness and increased fees made me move to another form of payment. I'm considering going back now that the price[is dropping
  - DenisM 8y ago
    > I didn't think 4,000 would hold. 2500 seemed like the correct price How did you arrive at the 2500 figure? Is there some sort of fundamental analysis that could be done, or was it all technical?
    - tim333 8y ago
      Not sure how he got 2500 but there's a long term log graph here and if history repeats you might expect the low to be about 2500 to 1500 and occur about 6 months to a year from now https://cryptoslate.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/chart.png https://cryptoslate.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/chart.png
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- aphextron 8y ago
  >Except for Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and Barclays (see https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-stre... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-stre...)... See: bandwagon shirt-losers of 2017 Bitcoin was the largest, fastest, most successful transfer of institutional wealth into private hands we've ever seen.
harryh 8y ago
Of course if you are filthy stinking rich, it's because you participated in a distributed scam in order to defraud money from those "bandwagon shirt-losers."
- sneak 8y ago
  What precisely was the scam? Who and how was I scamming by mining coins with my GPU and some open source software I saw on slashdot that are now worth several thousand dollars each?
  - ForHackernews 8y ago
    You sold something of no value to Greater Fools.
    - rjakobsson 8y ago
      ”of no value” :) ?
  - cjhanks 8y ago
    The scam was not by all btc pioneers. In the last year, there were a lot of holders creating marketing networks filled with misinformation and half-truths. That convinced a lot of people with little financial education and little understanding of the technology, that growth was imminent. All the while, the marketeers screaming "buy buy buy" were selling their btc on exchanges at insane rates. If you're just some guy mining, nobody thinks you're the problem.
    - wpietri 8y ago
      Were they any BTC pioneers who objected strongly to the hype? If not, then I'd say they were at best complicit.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - wpietri 8y ago

smacktoward 8y ago

> Nobody who knows anything about anything made any kinds of plans involving $20,000 Bitcoin. Except for Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and Barclays (see https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-street-quietly-shelves-its-bitcoin-dreams https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-stre...)...

pesmhey 8y ago
What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? Could this really be as obvious in hindsight as looking at Sears in the 90s not developing an online catalog?
- fucking_tragedy 8y ago
  How does a blockchain solution solve Goldman Sachs' business problems better, or with less resources, than existing solutions?
- raverbashing 8y ago
  You mean a solution that has solved exactly 0% of the problems where it was applied to? https://bitcoinist.com/blockchain-study-zero-percent-success/ https://bitcoinist.com/blockchain-study-zero-percent-success...
- hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
  > What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? What does that sentence even mean? To me this is right up there with "I'll create a GUI interface with Visual Basic and see if I can track an IP address."
  - pesmhey 8y ago
    It literally means what the words say. What stops Goldman Sachs from replacing whatever mechanism they use to process payments with some coin. I would gladly accept the answer ‘because it doesn’t make sense’. Didn’t realize I’d get so much heat for this though.
- hannasanarion 8y ago
  What would block chain do for Goldman that a SQL database couldn't?
  - pesmhey 8y ago
    I’m literally not sure, hence the question. I don’t know much about blockchain other than its sort of an answer to the Byzantine generals problem? It was a legit question.
    - hannasanarion 8y ago
      My belief is: nothing. For one thing, there is no solution to the Byzantine generals problem, this has been proven mathematically. Cryptocurrencies sidestep it by saying "whoever is the luckiest (aka 'owns more GPUs') gets to decide the truth". Traditional banks handle the problem by not having Byzantine generals: there is one and only one trusted authority who is compelled by law to keep clean and clear books. If a bank has a Byzantine problem that needs solving, they've already done something illegal.
nck4222 8y ago
That article really does not support your point at all... >Squeamish from the start about pursuing profits in one of the darker corners of finance, established firms this year slowed their already halting efforts to make a business out of Bitcoin mania. So they were slow from the start, and are slowing their already slow efforts. >“The market had unrealistic expectations that Goldman or any of its peers could suddenly start a Bitcoin trading business,” said Daniel H. Gallancy, chief executive officer of New York-based SolidX Partners, which hopes to launch a Bitcoin ETF in the U.S. "That was top-of-the-market-hype thinking." So the market (not banks or other insiders) had unrealistic expectations of traditional institutions. >With regulators offering little clear guidance on how they will classify the broad universe of tokens—as commodities, securities or something else—banks and investment firms are treading cautiously. Banks continue to wait for regulations and guidance before committing fully.
Cobord 8y ago
I think OP is saying they don't know anything about anything. Which has a point, they claim to know what they are doing, but just have such large capital that there is no way for them to fail even if they did everything wrong. So you can't use success as a barometer for knowing anything.
wolco 8y ago
They are part of the getting in late group and the lower valuations are most probably signs they are leaving the market. I remember when the price started to increase I didn't think 4,000 would hold. 2500 seemed like the correct price. The fact that it hasn't fallen below that amount means there are more investors. Personally I was using it to purchase goods before the runup and the slowness and increased fees made me move to another form of payment. I'm considering going back now that the price[is dropping
- DenisM 8y ago
  > I didn't think 4,000 would hold. 2500 seemed like the correct price How did you arrive at the 2500 figure? Is there some sort of fundamental analysis that could be done, or was it all technical?
  - tim333 8y ago
    Not sure how he got 2500 but there's a long term log graph here and if history repeats you might expect the low to be about 2500 to 1500 and occur about 6 months to a year from now https://cryptoslate.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/chart.png https://cryptoslate.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/chart.png
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
aphextron 8y ago
>Except for Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup and Barclays (see https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-stre... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/wall-stre...)... See: bandwagon shirt-losers of 2017 Bitcoin was the largest, fastest, most successful transfer of institutional wealth into private hands we've ever seen.

harryh 8y ago

Of course if you are filthy stinking rich, it's because you participated in a distributed scam in order to defraud money from those "bandwagon shirt-losers."

sneak 8y ago
What precisely was the scam? Who and how was I scamming by mining coins with my GPU and some open source software I saw on slashdot that are now worth several thousand dollars each?
- ForHackernews 8y ago
  You sold something of no value to Greater Fools.
  - rjakobsson 8y ago
    ”of no value” :) ?
- cjhanks 8y ago
  The scam was not by all btc pioneers. In the last year, there were a lot of holders creating marketing networks filled with misinformation and half-truths. That convinced a lot of people with little financial education and little understanding of the technology, that growth was imminent. All the while, the marketeers screaming "buy buy buy" were selling their btc on exchanges at insane rates. If you're just some guy mining, nobody thinks you're the problem.
  - wpietri 8y ago
    Were they any BTC pioneers who objected strongly to the hype? If not, then I'd say they were at best complicit.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wpietri 8y ago