NYSE parent Intercontinental Exchange has begun trading Bitcoin futures from Bakkt yesterday (archived). Microsoft and Boston Consulting Group are also involved in the instrument. The contracts promise physical delivery of Bitcoins, but it remains to be seen how seriously anyone involved in this particular market is going to investigate the sincerity of the delivery claims. This new source of volatility has seen fiat/Bitcoin interfaces reporting substantial volatility with today's manifesting mostly in a downward direction.
This move opens up lessons in Bitcoin prices and inflexibility to a whole new class of trader.
Seems like the empire's plan is still to try and chip away at the exchange rate by introducing paper promisetronium into the market, as was successfully done to e.g. gold.
Re: delivery — will also be lulzy if turns out that chumps will be forced to accept settlement in forkcoin or whatever "I Can't Believe it ain't BTC!" pixie dust. (As already happened with the Goxees.)
Pretty much exactly the idea.
Hi, I would like to ask 2 questions.
I read the articles about interacting with fiat. I would like to ask:
-What happens once governments inevitably remove all physical cash and transaction fees are too high for it to be viable to pay for stuff? there would be no privacy anymore. Example: you want to pay for a nice dinner in a restaurant, you want to book 1 hour with a escort, etc etc. How do you pay if there is no physical cash, and BTC is not viable for said payments?
I did also read (I think from your logs), in regards to making your BTC safe from segwit exposure, that one has to move any funds you would have received via segwit addresses back into legacy addresses, and after block matures for a number of confirmations it becomes safe from this potential segwit miner "thieft". But anonymint is claiming in his blog thing, that this is not the case (he also predicts some huge event happening by next halving):
"Legacy Bitcoin is the Phoenix! In 2020 it will rise again catapulting to $1+ million leapfrogging above gold’s market capitalization with the imminent 7 million Bitcoin SegWit donations to miners (c.f. also) funding the acceleration in mining difficulty and thusly price.
Legacy Bitcoin isn’t BCH, BSV nor any fork of Bitcoin such as the scam BitcOn Core. Bitcoin addresses beginning with bc1 or 3 instead of 1 aren’t legacy Bitcoin and will likely be worth-less (~$0) after May. **Even if your addresses begin with 1, your hodlings might still be effectively “confiscated”**."
On there, he links to:
"Bitcoin Apocalypse likely at the May 14, 2020 halving event. Sell most (perhaps not all) and go away just before the halving. We are being kicked off of Bitcoin and there is maybe nothing we can do to stop that. I posit that Bitcoin will be only for $multi-millionaires and $billionaires who are subservient to the powers-that-be."
"-Is it already safe to just hodl one's btc on legacy (1….) addresses?
Due to recent epiphanies about involuntary income taxes on coming airdropped Core Bitcoin tokens and SegWit lineage tokens eventually frozen by miners, that’s no longer sufficient (archived).
As the above linked post explains, you now have to be concerned with involuntary income taxation due to the airdropped Core tokens at their pre-crash value and also inability to get any transaction accepted on the legacy Bitcoin chain after the fork-off, because of congestion due to the taking of the 7+ million SegWit UTXO which may go on for some considerable time (for months or years?). And by the time you get your legacy Bitcoin transaction onto to the blockchain, the price may have cratered into a cryptowinter again and/or the regulations and capital controls on converting to fiat may be impossible for us to navigate."
"In the past I did mention that those who lose their legacy Bitcoins “donated” to (i.e. taken by) the miners (which may include institutions such as Bakkt’s warehouse which ostensibly isn’t storing in legacy addresses) will also probably complain to the authorities claiming the miners are stealing (although technically this isn’t true, because the miners are just complying with the legacy protocol and they have no other alternative). So we can imagine the political support for the FATF to take action to regulate miners even if the legal basis employed by the FATF is not about the alleged taking of “anyone can spend”, but instead justified by compliance issues for Bitcoins with “gray” lineage.
We are fucked. Eventually only virgin mined BTC that had no SegWit lineage will remain fungible. Obtaining virgin mined BTC is trending increasingly to more difficult and costly."
steemit (dot) com/bitcoin/@anonymint/our-bitcoins-will-be-taken-frozen-by-the-miners-involuntary-income-tax-on-frozen-bitcoin
I was wondering what are your thoughts on this as I assumed you didn't need that the entire lineage must be segwit-free, and with some confirmations sitting on a legacy address you were good to go, but he claims you basically need freshly mined coins to be safe. Then there's the whole "Halving-apocalypse" thing. Apparently he believes CSW plays a role on this. All of his articles here:
steemit (dot) com/@anonymint
Users of TRB were, are, and will be entirely unaffected by this circus. Consider using TRB.
Hi, im aware on TRB. My point was that, given what anonymint posits, it wouldn't be enough, or at least that's what I can understand from his posts.
For instance, lets say im using a wallet with bc1 segwit support. I accept 1 BTC in a bc1 address, then I send this 1 BTC into a legacy address of my own. After a number of block confirmations according to what I've read in the blogs, if I understood it correctly, then as the blocks matured for a while and this BTC is now sitting on an address that begins with 1 it is now safe from "segwit miner thieft". Then, I send you this BTC to you (you are using TRB). According to what anonymint says (again, if im understanding what he is saying correctly), this BTC that I sent you wouldn't be safe, because it has segwit lineage. Basically he says that the coins must have 0 segwit lineage to be 100% safe, so using TRB or not wouldn't matter.
anonymint not only lacks authority, he grossly understands how things work