4 ms·

He's not trying to think about something real, he has bitcoin bags and is angry seeing it lose importance. He has to dump his bags on someone and he clearly bet

He's not trying to think about something real, he has bitcoin bags and is angry seeing it lose importance. He has to dump his bags on someone and he clearly bet on the wrong horse. I understand it's not obvious without context - but that's all actually happening here. Regarding what he wants - the thing he actually made is Twitter, a platform that was actively censoring news - especially the New York Post story about Hunter Biden. No law forced him to do so. Someone who so easily abused his power in the past doesn't want to 'reduce our dependence on centralized systems'.

Traster 5y ago
I’m sorry but I don’t understand this, crypto assets are incredibly correlated. Web3 and all the eth type tokens/coins actually increase the value of BTC as they gain adoption. Sure BTC might theoretically get replaced by some of these alts one day, but Dorsey can easily move his investments if he sees that coming. Right now though I just don’t see how you can claim these web3 projects are damaging BTC, they’re helping it and they’re making Dorset’s investments go up, not down.
- pcthrowaway 5y ago
  The amount of politics in the crypto space is mind-boggling. Bitcoin is "only" the #1 by market cap at this point due to first-mover advantage and network effects. In terms of technology and capability, it's massively behind (though there is an argument that its network is the most valuable due to its hash rate making it the most secure of PoW blockchains, there are also arguments for PoS, and more arguments that the security is self-fulfilling; if other PoW blockchains overtook bitcoin by market cap, the miners would switch over) But when people who hold/promote bitcoin criticize web3, one has to question whether they're doing it because they want people to continue regarding bitcoin as the "safe" crypto asset.
  - muzika 5y ago
    The biggest advantage that bitcoin has is that’s it’s the only major crypto that is completely decentralized. Every other crypto project has people or agencies that have some kind of leverage over it. Bitcoin is controlled completely by the node operators that run the network. And they have to all agree on any change to the bitcoin protocol.
    - pcthrowaway 5y ago
      First of all, the node pooling actually leads to heavy centralization. Remember in 2017 when one of the pools grew so large it became 51% of the hash rate briefly? Yeah, they ended up limiting their hashrate to stay under 50%, but if 2 node pools colluded, they could control the network (and require miners joining them to install upgrades if they wanted)
- nootropicat 5y ago
  No, they absolutely don't increase the value of btc - someone buying eth means they don't buy btc. The only remaining advantage of btc is that it has the largest capitalization. The moment that ends is when it gets repriced as an old memecoin - a competitor of doge and shiba. Complete collapse into oblivion. There's no liquidity to sell large amounts of btc. I don't know how many Dorsey has, but the only exit plan for whales is to dump bags on pension funds buying into a spot bitcoin etf. Of course that's not going to happen if bitcoin is no longer first. For this reason it would be more profitable for bitcoin whales for btc to drop 70% if that means 80% btc domination. >but Dorsey can easily move his investments if he sees that coming He's already sitting on a massive loss, and you're proposing he sells at an even bigger one like it's nothing. If he was going to ever do that it would already have happened.
mwattsun 5y ago
I'm of the school that people can make mistakes and learn from them. In fact, there's a saying out there that if you're not making mistakes then you're not trying hard enough. Ironically, Jack created a platform full of people who constantly pull up your mistakes to remind you of them and call you a hypocrite. I'm also of the school that people can change. I know some say people don't change. Jack stepping away from Twitter is bound to change him because he is a thoughtful and curious person. He sold his first Tweet as an NFT for millions. Does he regard that as a mistake now? Can he never question NFT's now that he has done so? One thing he can be sure of: Twitter will never let him forget it.

Traster 5y ago

I’m sorry but I don’t understand this, crypto assets are incredibly correlated. Web3 and all the eth type tokens/coins actually increase the value of BTC as they gain adoption. Sure BTC might theoretically get replaced by some of these alts one day, but Dorsey can easily move his investments if he sees that coming. Right now though I just don’t see how you can claim these web3 projects are damaging BTC, they’re helping it and they’re making Dorset’s investments go up, not down.

pcthrowaway 5y ago
The amount of politics in the crypto space is mind-boggling. Bitcoin is "only" the #1 by market cap at this point due to first-mover advantage and network effects. In terms of technology and capability, it's massively behind (though there is an argument that its network is the most valuable due to its hash rate making it the most secure of PoW blockchains, there are also arguments for PoS, and more arguments that the security is self-fulfilling; if other PoW blockchains overtook bitcoin by market cap, the miners would switch over) But when people who hold/promote bitcoin criticize web3, one has to question whether they're doing it because they want people to continue regarding bitcoin as the "safe" crypto asset.
- muzika 5y ago
  The biggest advantage that bitcoin has is that’s it’s the only major crypto that is completely decentralized. Every other crypto project has people or agencies that have some kind of leverage over it. Bitcoin is controlled completely by the node operators that run the network. And they have to all agree on any change to the bitcoin protocol.
  - pcthrowaway 5y ago
    First of all, the node pooling actually leads to heavy centralization. Remember in 2017 when one of the pools grew so large it became 51% of the hash rate briefly? Yeah, they ended up limiting their hashrate to stay under 50%, but if 2 node pools colluded, they could control the network (and require miners joining them to install upgrades if they wanted)
nootropicat 5y ago
No, they absolutely don't increase the value of btc - someone buying eth means they don't buy btc. The only remaining advantage of btc is that it has the largest capitalization. The moment that ends is when it gets repriced as an old memecoin - a competitor of doge and shiba. Complete collapse into oblivion. There's no liquidity to sell large amounts of btc. I don't know how many Dorsey has, but the only exit plan for whales is to dump bags on pension funds buying into a spot bitcoin etf. Of course that's not going to happen if bitcoin is no longer first. For this reason it would be more profitable for bitcoin whales for btc to drop 70% if that means 80% btc domination. >but Dorsey can easily move his investments if he sees that coming He's already sitting on a massive loss, and you're proposing he sells at an even bigger one like it's nothing. If he was going to ever do that it would already have happened.

mwattsun 5y ago

I'm of the school that people can make mistakes and learn from them. In fact, there's a saying out there that if you're not making mistakes then you're not trying hard enough. Ironically, Jack created a platform full of people who constantly pull up your mistakes to remind you of them and call you a hypocrite. I'm also of the school that people can change. I know some say people don't change. Jack stepping away from Twitter is bound to change him because he is a thoughtful and curious person. He sold his first Tweet as an NFT for millions. Does he regard that as a mistake now? Can he never question NFT's now that he has done so? One thing he can be sure of: Twitter will never let him forget it.