The Zurich University of Applied Sciences has said it will kickstart a 16-day Bitcoin economy training course in March 2025. The short course aims to help students understand how bitcoin influences the financial system. Understanding Bitcoin’s Impact on the Financial System The Zurich University of Applied Sciences (HWZ), a Swiss institution, has said it is […]
Bitcoin News
BNB Price Crash To $5 Unlikely Despite Binance Critic’s Dire Predictions
A Binance critic, “Whale Wire,” on X, who also claims to be a crypto whale, has issued a bold prediction that BNB, the native currency of the BNB Chain and which is used to incentivize trading activity on Binance, could plunge 95% to under in the coming months.
Regarding Binance agreeing to pay billion in fines related to legal settlements with U.S. regulators, Whale Wire argued that tighter oversight will supposedly “destroy Binance’s entire business model.” He further contended bankruptcy could be imminent as the effects of the BNB lead to a contagion.
Will The BNB Price Flash Crash?
However, while increasing regulatory oversight, wind-downs, and decreased risk tolerance among traders have impacted volumes, Binance remains the world’s largest crypto exchange by client count and still facilitates the most trading globally by a wide margin as of writing on November 22.
For context and pulling data from CoinMarketCap (CMC), Binance continues to dominate spot crypto trading, generating over .7 billion in average trading volume, over 6X Coinbase, with .3 billion, and ahead by huge margins from Kraken, which draws 41.2 billion. The same trend can be observed in derivatives trading, where Binance leads ahead of OKX.
BNB also remains firmly among the top 5 cryptos in the market cap. Besides USDT, BNB is the third largest coin by market cap, leading other altcoins, including XRP, Solana (SOL), and Cardano (ADA).
Besides its dominance, Binance has been given over a year to pay assessed fines. Meanwhile, its new CEO, Richard Teng, said the exchange will continue to enact compliance overhauls. At the same time, it is assuring clients that funds remain safe.
Considering the exchange will continue operating both in the United States and globally, the transitional window offered by the DOJ could make its collapse, and that of BNB, unlikely.
Binance Under Pressure, Trading Volume Falling
Even so, factoring in dropping trading volume in 2023 and the impact of losing users, especially in areas Binance pulled out from, the resulting dip in revenue could, at the end of the day, apply downward pressures on BNB. Thus far, Binance sold its business in Russia while exiting Canada and the Netherlands.
Presently, 0 remains a critical support level for BNB. Whether this line will be retested in the months ahead remains to be seen. Changing hands at around 0, BNB is technically in an uptrend in the shorter time frame. It is up 15% from October 2023 lows. However, it is still down 65% from 2021 peaks when it soared to around 0.
Critics Alarmed as 2 Major Mining Pools Dominate Over 50% of Bitcoin Hashrate
On Wednesday, crypto analyst Chris Blec highlighted that Bitcoin’s two major mining pools now control over half of the network’s total hashrate. Blec posits this dominance could transform bitcoin mining into an industry adhering to regulatory standards, with all miners required to follow Know Your Customer (KYC) guidelines.
Control Over Bitcoin’s Hashrate Is a Nuanced Topic
Currently, Antpool leads with a 30% share of Bitcoin’s total hashrate, closely followed by Foundry USA, which holds 26%. Together, these pools exert a 56% influence over the network’s 468 exahash per second (EH/s) hashrate. Chris Blec, a noted figure in the crypto research community, voiced his concerns on the social media platform X this Wednesday. Emphasizing the gravity of the situation, Blec stated, “It’s important,” and assured that his disclosure is a reflection of reality, not FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt).
“The [two] largest bitcoin mining pools, together controlling over 50% of hashrate for over [one] year now, are regulatory-compliant and require all miners to comply with KYC,” Blec said. “The government has clear identification, visibility [and] control over more than 50% of Bitcoin’s miners (by hashrate).” The researcher added.
The government can make demands of these people/companies and they’ll be required to comply. As this trend grows, Bitcoin’s decentralization [and] game theory both get affected in a negative fashion.
A few years back, archived data paints a picture of a more diverse landscape in dominant mining pools. Following Blec’s remarks, there was a flurry of responses. Jon Black countered, “These [two] pools only have 51% of the hashrate because they are behaving (for now).” He speculated that any misbehavior would prompt a shift in hashrate to smaller, non-KYC compliant pools. Blec dismissed this idea as “completely theoretical.”
Harry Beckwith then addressed Blec, saying, “I can definitely appreciate this but you are making mining pools sound monolithic as though they are single players and that is not true,” Beckwith said. “They basically function like a co-op and individual miners can do whatever they want if they don’t like the direction of the co-op.”
Beckwith’s argument has become a significant talking point in this ongoing debate, considering the complex nature of hashrate control. Under Stratum mining software version one (v1), pool operators handle the pool’s infrastructure and decide on the transactions for mining blocks. Individual miners, while contributing their computational power, don’t directly influence how this collective power is utilized. They mainly provide the necessary resources. Yet, their potential to migrate to other pools if dissatisfied does play a role in the co-op dynamics.
The introduction of Stratum version two (v2) brought a notable change. It features “Job Negotiation,” empowering individual miners to select transactions for their block templates, lessening the pool operator’s influence on block contents. However, most pools today use Stratum v1, with Stratum v2 alternatives like Stratum-mining and BraiinsOS/BraiinsOS+ available.
A 2022 Galaxy.com report notes that miners prefer v1 for its ease of adoption, while a comprehensive Stratum full feature set is still under development. The report highlights a critical industry divide: the differing desires of ASIC manufacturers and developers. “The rigmarole of getting ASIC manufacturers to include Stratum v2 into their firmware highlights an interesting underlying dynamic at play: the mining industry is very divided between what the manufacturers want and what the developers want,” Galaxy’s researchers detail.
This division underscores the validity of concerns about mining centralization. Galaxy researchers further underscore that Stratum v1 “is not designed for the high hashrate levels we experience today.” In the meantime, while bitcoin mining pools maintain their current conduct, critics like Chris Blec argue that this alone is insufficient.
What do you think about Chris Blec’s argument concerning mining centralization? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Amid Rising Bitcoin ETF Hopes, Critics Warn of Vulnerability and Echoes of Precious Metal Manipulation
In recent months, the buzz around a potential bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) has surged, echoing in its climbing price. But the enthusiasm isn’t universal. Some fear a spot bitcoin ETF could make BTC vulnerable, much like the gold and silver markets. The approval might open doors to manipulative practices reminiscent of those alleged in precious metals.
With a Physically-Settled Bitcoin ETF on the Horizon, Skeptics Foresee Gold-Like Manipulation Risks
A tangible bitcoin ETF might seem like a boon for crypto growth and valuation. However, there are concerns it could mirror gold and silver ETFs, using fictional BTC supplies as leverage for futures. Rapid price hikes could be countered by releasing this made-up supply. Instead of acquiring real bitcoin, buying into a bitcoin ETF wouldn’t diminish the actual supply. Operators of the ETF might leverage positions far exceeding their verifiable assets, swaying prices.
On October 16, 2023, Josef Tětek, a BTC analyst at Trezor, remarked that an “ETF is fiatization of bitcoin.” Tětek opines that long-term, an ETF might not benefit BTC. He asserted, “[A] bitcoin ETF is one of the worst things that can happen to bitcoin adoption. It is an attack on self-custody, substituting actual usage (whether as a MoE or SoV) for dumb price speculation.”
Tětek elaborated further:
ETFs are much worse than exchanges, as we can at least incite bank runs on exchanges and test their solvency – and if they prove to be running a paper bitcoin ponzi scheme, they collapse before they grow too large (FTX, Blockfi, etc.).
The first gold exchange-traded product (ETP) debuted in 1961 as a closed-end fund. By 1983, it opened its doors to a wider investor base. In 1986, after two decades on the Toronto Stock Exchange, it found its place on the U.S. Stock Exchange. March 2003 saw the listing of the first physical gold ETF, “Gold Bullion Securities.” Since these introductions, many have pointed fingers at ETFs and financial powerhouses for allegedly rigging precious metal prices.
This suspicion extends to a bitcoin ETF, where an ETF’s 100,000 BTC might be overshadowed by unchecked paper. Such an ETF could conveniently leverage fictitious supplies, assisting corporations in hedging vast derivatives bets. When prices balloon suddenly, this illusory supply might be released to curb the surge. Gold has allegedly been a victim of such practices. For example, two ex-JPMorgan metals traders faced fraud convictions last year for a gold market ploy, along with other precious metals.
In 2020, JPMorgan settled U.S. allegations of precious metals futures price manipulation from 2008-2016. Silver is also believed to suffer similar manipulation. Large financial entities are often accused of using short positions to suppress silver prices. Such underhanded tactics against gold and silver have been highlighted in various research papers and exposés. There’s a growing apprehension that the decentralized crypto world might face the same fate.
“A spot bitcoin ETF will be bad because it will allow Blackrock to purchase and control bitcoin, bought with other people’s dollars,” explained an individual on the social media platform X. “They will get a seat at the table, they didn’t earn. I don’t think you realize how bad this will be for plebs. We don’t want Mr. Fink at our table.”
While bitcoin ETFs may democratize access, naysayers believe they mask leverage and speculative practices from oversight bodies and investors. As with precious metals ETFs, price discovery might be twisted. “Best State attack on bitcoin ever – An ETF,” explained another bitcoin enthusiast on social media this week. “The funniest part is that bitcoiners are desperate for an ETF.” Another X user echoed the sentiment, foreseeing a gloomy future for the decentralized crypto.
“The approval of the spot ETF will be good for short-term traders as price will skyrocket,” the person posted. “But it will be bad for all the small retail bitcoin investors, as we won‘t see the actual price level again. As soon as the big boys step in, bitcoin becomes political.” Yet, not all concur with this thesis. Another user on X argued that painting an ETF as a villain is ludicrous, believing that the indomitable decentralized nature of bitcoin will always prevail.
“Bitcoin ETF bad [for] bitcoin,” the person said in jest. “People who say this think bitcoin is like gold. They do not understand that you cannot control bitcoin in the long run. Let Wall Street create all the ETFs they want. They will never be able to control bitcoin.”
What do you think about the critics of a spot bitcoin ETF? Do you think they have valid fears? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Economist Peter Schiff Surprises Critics, Dives Into Bitcoin-Backed NFT Market
Economist and ardent gold advocate Peter Schiff caused a stir on Friday by announcing his participation in an upcoming art sale featuring non-fungible tokens (NFTs). These unique digital collectibles will be minted on the Bitcoin blockchain using Ordinal inscription technology. Schiff’s surprising entry into the NFT market through Bitcoin has piqued the curiosity of onlookers, prompting them to speculate whether the once vocal Bitcoin critic has experienced a change of perspective.
Schiff: ‘I’m Still Not a Member of That Club’
For a very long time, Peter Schiff has been a vocal critic of bitcoin (BTC), repeatedly asserting that the cryptocurrency’s value would eventually plummet to zero. He has engaged in numerous debates where he consistently highlighted BTC’s perceived lack of intrinsic value as one of its fundamental vulnerabilities. However, despite his longstanding stance, Schiff is now venturing into the realm of non-fungible tokens (NFTs), conducting a sale that will utilize the very blockchain technology he has criticized over the years.
“I’m pleased to announce an art project with one of my favorite artists, Market Price,” Schiff stated on Twitter. “This collaboration features the original painting “Golden Triumph” as well as a series of prints and Ordinals inscribed on the Bitcoin blockchain,” the economist added. Schiff also shared a website showcasing the NFT collection created by Market Price.
Derived from a painting called “Golden Triumph,” the collaborative artwork has given rise to a limited edition of 50 prints, each with the signatures of Schiff and the artist. Every print will possess its own exclusive Ordinal inscription on the Bitcoin blockchain, adding a touch of digital uniqueness. The collection will be unveiled through a two-part auction, set to commence on June 2, with the conclusion on June 9. Schiff and the artist will be present in person at the event taking place in the city of New York.
Udi Wertheimer, a prominent advocate of Ordinals and Taproot Wizard, expressed immense satisfaction at the successful influence of Ordinals supporters in swaying Schiff towards embracing the Bitcoin movement. After Schiff’s announcement, Wertheimer declared, “Breaking — Ordinals enjoyers manage to on-board Peter Schiff to Bitcoin in 3 months; laser-eyes seething after failing to get him to join for 10 years.”
Notably, Bitcoin proponent Layah Heilpern seized the opportunity to respond to Schiff’s tweet about his NFT collection. With conviction, Heilpern tweeted, “You’ve always loved Bitcoin; you pretend otherwise for clout.” Unable to resist the conversation, Schiff took the opportunity to address Heilpern’s tweet directly. He stated:
This is art, and it’s a tribute to gold. But there is something here for Bitcoiners as well. But I’m still not a member of that club.
What are your thoughts on Peter Schiff’s unexpected leap into the NFT market? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Microstrategy Founder Michael Saylor to Argentines: ‘You Need Bitcoin’ — Critics Insist BTC Is Too Volatile
Micheal Saylor, the founder of Microstrategy, has told people living in inflation-stricken Argentina that they now “need bitcoin.” While many bitcoiners have welcomed Saylor’s suggestion, a few critics have said the top crypto asset’s volatility makes it an unsuitable alternative for the faltering local currency.
The Dollarization Option
As the Argentinian currency — the peso — continued with the slide that has seen it depreciate by more than 40% over the past twelve months, Micheal Saylor, the founder of Microstrategy, has chimed in by tweeting that people living in the South American country now “need bitcoin.” In a subsequent tweet, Saylor, a bitcoin critic turned advocate, also shared news about the South American country’s inflation rate after it topped 7.58% per day.
If you live in Argentina🇦🇷 right now, you need #bitcoin.
— Michael Saylor⚡️ (@saylor) April 22, 2023
The tweets by Saylor, whose firm is one of the largest corporate holders of BTC, came as reports suggested that some Argentinian politicians favor replacing the peso with the U.S. dollar. As reported by Bitcoin.com News, the Argentinian presidential aspirant Javier Milei has said dollarization can put the brakes on inflation, which officially stood at 103.4% in March.
Milei, who is seen as a frontrunner in presidential elections set to be held on Oct. 22, said he plans to shut down the central bank before starting the dollarization process. Steve Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University, has similarly suggested the South American country can only escape its present predicament by dollarizing.
Argentina has turned into an over-indebted IMF deadbeat. By my measure, the Argentinian peso has depreciated against the USD by 52% since Jan 1, 2022. ARG must dump the peso and dollarize NOW. Argentina, THE WORLD’S BIGGEST DEADBEAT. pic.twitter.com/4HyFei1WzO
— Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) April 25, 2023
Yet, despite the apparent widespread support for dollarization in Argentina, critics of the U.S. dollar, including Saylor’s followers on Twitter, have voiced their support for his call on residents to choose bitcoin instead.
Policy Brief: Argentina’s Fiscal Imbalances Will Not Go Away After Dollarization
However, some of Saylor’s followers on Twitter like Manu Ferrari B, a self-proclaimed “liberty maximalist,” have said BTC is too volatile and therefore it cannot be a viable alternative to the falling peso just yet. The user suggested that while it is possible for a bitcoin-backed stablecoin to become the solution, more still needs to be done. He added:
But the whole tech is not ready, yet. Most bitcoiners not living in Argentina, Líbano, Venezuela will not understand this. Most bitcoiners talking about Argentina don’t know what they are talking about. Completely centralized stablecoins running on fiat legacy rails are also not a solution.
In addition to being an expensive undertaking, dollarizing the Argentinian economy would result in the country’s central bank becoming subservient to the policies of the U.S. Federal Reserve. Dollarizing would also see the country’s central bank losing seigniorage — the profit earned from printing currency.
A policy brief published by the Policy Center for the New South on April 28, 2022, described the calls for dollarizing the economy as the “revival of a zombie idea.” Denouncing the Argentinian Congress’ proposal to retain the greenback as the country’s primary currency, the brief warned that the country’s “fiscal imbalances will not be eliminated by dollarization.” The brief also said dollarization would further require “a selective default of domestic currency liabilities, a brutal devaluation, and/or a unilateral conversion of public deposits.”
What are your thoughts on this story? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.
CBDC Debate Heats Up: BIS Project Sparks Controversy Among Critics; Lynette Zang Warns of Dangers of CBDCs
During the weekend, discussions about central bank digital currencies, or CBDCs, trended on social media as many people believe the idea will result in increased financial surveillance and a totalitarian monetary system. In a recent interview, Lynette Zang, the chief market analyst at ITM Trading, warned that CBDCs will “take the world into a full surveillance economy that can be controlled directly by the central bank.”
‘Convincing You to Support a Controlled CBDC Has Begun’
In the past week, discussions about CBDCs have trended on social media, and commentary shows that people are highly skeptical about central bank cryptocurrency assets. Opposition has come from well-known influencers and politicians worldwide. Former Congress member and 2020 U.S. presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard recently criticized the idea in the United States.
“[The] Biden [administration] aims to implement a central bank digital currency (CBDC) to bring about a cashless society, allowing them to track everything we purchase [and] control our money,” Gabbard opined. “[The] gov’s ‘Fednow’ system is needed [as the] first step to achieve their dream of [a] cashless society. This needs to be stopped at its inception, or it will be too late,” she added.
Spotted in London by a member of the team.
We say no #CBDC because we want our financial privacy. pic.twitter.com/nn8nOKq0ya
— Coin Bureau (@coinbureau) April 16, 2023
The U.S. central bank’s Fednow program has sparked much debate in recent times, and just recently, the Federal Reserve asserted that the project was not a digital currency, CBDC, or cash replacement. Other discussions have centered around the Bank for International Settlements’ (BIS) CBDC pilot, Project Icebreaker. BIS recently released a video about the project, and people have commented on the organization’s statements. “Convincing you to support a controlled Central Bank Digital Currency has begun,” tweeted podcaster James Miller.
Why CBDC are a totalitarian dream pic.twitter.com/KsbZ6cFxLF
— Jon Najarian (@jonnajarian) April 16, 2023
Natalie Smolenski, senior fellow at the nonpartisan, nonprofit organization the Bitcoin Policy Institute, also criticized the Project Icebreaker video. “Literally all of the benefits of this CBDC interoperability project (BIS ‘Project Icebreaker’) can already be realized by the bitcoin Lightning Network,” Smolenski wrote. “CBDCs are completely unnecessary. There is no problem that they solve. They’re just re-inserting Central Banks into functions where they’ve already been made obsolete.” According to the Atlantic Council’s CBDC Tracker, 114 countries are working on CBDCs, and 11 countries have fully launched implementations.
Your property and privacy depend on the total rejection of all CBDC schemes.
— Libertarian Party (@LPNational) April 7, 2023
CBDCs Will Usher in a ‘Full Surveillance Economy,’ Says Market Analyst Lynette Zang
Lynette Zang, the chief market analyst at ITM Trading, has warned about the dangers of CBDCs in a recent video with Michelle Makori, the lead anchor at Kitco News. This is not the first time Zang has been critical of CBDCs; she spoke to Makori about the subject in a video published last February. In her most recent discussion, Zang talked about the collapse of Silvergate Bank, Silicon Valley Bank, and Signature Bank and claimed that the failures were “by design.” Zang believes that a CBDC will usher in a totalitarian monetary system that will become the economy’s new norm.
US TREASURY SECRETARY YELLEN: THERE ARE IMPORTANT ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES TO A CBDC THAT MUST BE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BEFORE MOVING, BUT IT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT IS IN THE FUTURE FOR AMERICANS.
— Breaking Market News (@financialjuice) April 15, 2023
“They need a big enough crisis so that people will agree to this next iteration, the CBDCs,” Zang explained to Makori in her latest interview. “It also takes the world into a full surveillance economy that can be controlled directly by the central bank, if all of your wealth is held inside the system.” Zang believes with CBDCs negative rates will be imposed on people’s bank accounts and individuals’ principal will be threatened. “Central bank digital currencies are really about control, and also about the ability to take away principal,” Zang said. “Negative rates attack your principal… When they come out with a CBDC, it doesn’t mean that this crisis is over. It’s just the next phase of it.”
Not everyone opposes the concept of CBDCs, and in a recent opinion editorial, the Keynesian economist Paul Krugman criticized Florida governor Ron DeSantis’s recent opposition to a central bank digital currency. Krugman referred to the hostility as resistance against “woke money” and claimed that DeSantis may be motivated by “general paranoia.” On Twitter, Krugman also opined that the dissent toward CBDCs may be “tied in with a broader push by monetary conspiracy theory types” and claimed the theories have been a “right-wing thing for a while.”
What are your thoughts on the rise of CBDCs and the potential for a cashless society? Do you agree with the criticisms leveled by some individuals? Share your views in the comments section below.
Extreme Market Turbulence: Critics Call Warren’s Silvergate Take ‘Terribly Misinformed,’ SVB Collapses, Vitalik’s Token Sell-Off Moves Markets, and More — Week in Review
It’s been a turbulent week in finance with the so-called crypto-friendly Silvergate Bank announcing its liquidation, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren blaming the event on “crypto risk,” and individuals on social media pointing out that Warren is “terribly misinformed.” Additionally, U.S. Regulators closed Silicon Valley Bank after reports of a bank run and other troubles. In other developments, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin’s address allegedly sold trillions of airdropped ERC20 tokens, causing negative price moves, and India-Russia oil deals could be challenging U.S. dollar dominance. All this and more, just below, in the Bitcoin.com News Week in Review.
Elizabeth Warren Blames ‘Crypto Risk’ for Silvergate Bank’s Liquidation, Critics Dismiss Senator’s Claims as ‘Terribly Misinformed’
After Silvergate Bank announced its voluntary liquidation, U.S. senator Elizabeth Warren is attributing the financial institution’s downfall to “crypto risk.” According to Warren, she had previously warned about Silvergate. However, some critics are dismissing Warren’s opinion as “terribly misinformed” and claim that she is “tossing out egregious accusations.”
US Regulators Close Silicon Valley Bank in One of the Largest Bank Failures Since Washington Mutual
After Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) experienced financial turmoil, the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation closed the financial institution. Insured depositors can withdraw their funds on Monday after the FDIC took over the failed bank.
Ethereum Co-Founder Vitalik Buterin’s Address Sells Trillions of Airdropped Tokens, Causes Illiquid Coin Prices to Plummet
On March 7, onchain observers noticed that Vitalik Buterin, the co-founder of Ethereum, had allegedly sold billions and trillions of airdropped ERC20 tokens, resulting in a gain of an estimated 0,000 in value. The market liquidity of the airdropped tokens was shallow, and the relatively unknown ERC20 tokens plummeted in value after Buterin reportedly sold the funds.
India-Russia Oil Deals Chip Away at Dollar Dominance in International Trade
On Wednesday, Reuters reported that Western sanctions on Russia and oil trading between Moscow and India have started to erode the dollar’s decades-old dominance of international oil trade. The oil deals between India and Russia have been settled in other currencies, putting the U.S. dollar’s dominance in the oil trade under pressure.
What are your thoughts on this week’s stories? Be sure to let us know in the comments section below.
Elizabeth Warren Blames ‘Crypto Risk’ for Silvergate Bank’s Liquidation, Critics Dismiss Senator’s Claims as ‘Terribly Misinformed’
After Silvergate Bank announced its voluntary liquidation, U.S. senator Elizabeth Warren is attributing the financial institution’s downfall to “crypto risk.” According to Warren, she had previously warned about Silvergate. However, some critics are dismissing Warren’s opinion as “terribly misinformed” and claim that she is “tossing out egregious accusations.”
Crypto Proponents Offer Different Perspectives on Silvergate Bank’s Downfall After Elizabeth Warren Blasts So-Called ‘Crypto Risk’
Hours after Silvergate Bank announced its liquidation, U.S. senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) tweeted about the financial institution’s demise. Warren once again referred to cryptocurrencies as risky and expressed disappointment about Silvergate’s failure, which she deemed “predictable.”
On March 9, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren tweeted, “I warned of Silvergate’s risky, if not illegal, activity—and identified severe due diligence failures. Now, customers must be made whole & regulators should step up against crypto risk.” The Massachusetts senator’s statement was met with criticism almost immediately after its publication. “You caused a bank run with spurious accusations and are now claiming you predicted it—Olympic-level mental gymnastics,” one individual responded to Warren’s tweet.
The individual’s comment about Warren starting the Silvergate bank run stems from the letter that Senator Warren, along with Senators Roger Marshall (R-KS) and John Kennedy (R-LA), wrote. The bipartisan letter contained numerous accusations as it requested information on a “massive crypto scandal.” In response to Warren’s tweet on Thursday, one person asked the politician if she had ever managed to “not be terribly misinformed while tossing out egregious accusations?”
Some critics argue that Warren is employing the age-old propaganda that blames objects rather than individuals and businesses for failure. This approach is akin to inanimate weapons causing violence on their own, a pencil writing a hateful letter autonomously, or cryptocurrencies causing harm to investors rather than the crypto business operators. Many critics on Twitter disagreed with senator Warren’s views on the matter. In response to her allegations, crypto CFA Ram Ahluwalia offered a different perspective on the Silvergate situation.
“Silvergate, the first crypto bank, faced a bank run that led to its downfall,” Ahluwalia wrote. “Despite facing allegations around AML, it was not these issues that ultimately caused the demise of [Silvergate Bank]. The responsibility for bank supervision lies with the Executive Branch, but this process was cut short. A senator’s letter, amplified by social media, undermined public trust in Silvergate, ultimately leading to a crisis of confidence.”
Upon reviewing Warren’s Twitter thread, there appears to be little to no support for her commentary in the post, despite the fact that the tweet has received 942 likes and was seen more than 724,000 times. Most of the responses to Warren’s tweet express disgust for her statements on the matter. As usual, criticism of the politician’s actions likened them to politicians breaking legs to sell crutches.
“This is why I hate political self-elevation at the expense of others,” one person told Warren. “Crypto [and] blockchain solves many issues. Unfortunately, it doesn’t solve posturing, self-serving interests, and fear-mongering by elected officials. Thanks for making it harder for honest, hardworking people.”
What are your thoughts on Senator Warren’s views on cryptocurrencies and their role in the downfall of Silvergate Bank? Do you believe her accusations were justified, or do you think they were misguided and harmful to the institution? Share your opinions in the comments below.
Sparks Fly as Critics Question Bitcoin Model Predicting $100,000 by 2021
The Bitcoin Stock to Flow (S2F) model created by the pseudonymous analyst “PlanB” has been a controversial subject over the past year. A majority of cryptocurrency investors on Twitter seemingly believe in the model, though it’s increasingly come under fire.
Debate about PlanB’s work has come to a head over the past few days as prominent commentators have chimed in.
What Is the Stock to Flow Model?
The S2F model is an econometric formula released by PlanB in March of 2019. The pseudonymous analyst is a Dutch institutional investor that manages a multi-billion balance sheet, though he moonlights as a Bitcoin proponent.
PlanB’s analysis suggests that the value of Bitcoin and other precious goods, namely gold and silver, can be valued by their scarcity. The image below is the model’s first iteration.
BTC S2F model (first iteration) by analyst "PlanB" (@100trillionusd on Twitter).
The model predicts that after 2020’s block reward halving, BTC will rise to a market capitalization of trillion. That corresponds with approximately ,000 per coin.
The predicted market value for bitcoin after May 2020 halving is trn, which translates in a bitcoin price of ,000. [This money will come from] silver, gold, countries with negative interest rate, countries with predatory governments, billionaires and millionaires hedging against quantitative easing (QE), [and more].”
It has since been updated with a new regression formula that suggests Bitcoin will reach 0,000 in 2020 or 2021.
PlanB’s updated iteration of the model has a high R squared value of ~95% and is purportedly “cointegrated” with BTC’s price. Statistics lingo aside, the S2F model’s proponents say that this is a confirmation that the model has credence.
Not everyone thinks that’s the case, unfortunately for BTC bulls.
Some Bitcoin Proponents Call Out Criticism
The S2F model has recently been supported by a number of Bitcoiners.
Bitcoin educator/programmer Jimmy Song wrote the following message on July 2nd, arguing that it is well too soon to “dunk” on the model:
“Why are people dunking on the s2f model just a few difficulty adjustments past the halving? The prediction was that BTC will be 0k before the end of 2021. Declaring victory now is like declaring victory 5 minutes into the game.”
Why are people dunking on the s2f model just a few difficulty adjustments past the halving?
The prediction was that BTC will be 0k before the end of 2021.
Declaring victory now is like declaring victory 5 minutes into the game.
— Jimmy Song (송재준) (@jimmysong) July 2, 2020
The Keiser Report co-host Max Keiser, one of BTC’s earliest public bulls, agreed with the sentiment put forth by Song.
He said that the arguments “‘debunking’” the S2F model “appear to be just random word-salads by attention seekers.” Keiser added that he thinks the model is a “valid and vital analysis” that gives “excellent insight” into Bitcoin.
So far, the arguments “debunking” S2F for BTC appear to be just random word-salads by attention seekers.
S2F is a valid and vital analysis of #Bitcoin price that provides excellent insight into the market. https://t.co/diqJfThIg3
— Max Keiser (@maxkeiser) July 3, 2020
Keiser’s and Song’s statements of support for the econometric model come as it has come under fire from a few angles.
Namely, Nico Cordeiro, the CIO of Strix Levithan, released a report entitled “A Chameleon Model – Why Bitcoin’s Stock-to-flow Model is Fatally Flawed.”
The investor said that gold hasn’t been correlated with its S2F ratio over the past decade. Cordeiro added that he thinks the model is illogical due to it predicting 0 million by 2045.
Featured Image from Shutterstock Price tags: xbtusd, btcusd, btcusdt Charts from TradingView.com Sparks Fly as Critics Question BTC Model Predicting 0,000 by 2021