I can imagine the great brother on brother trolling wars that must have taken place in the Keeed household.
11 Likes
I spent a fair amount of time arguing with Toothsayer in the 2p2 bitcoin thread over the past 18 months or so.
He’s a bitcoin bear and has made wildly incorrect predictions about falling prices for several years now before finally completely disappearing from that thread recently. Take that with a couple grains of salt, if you’d like 
Toothsayer’s financial acumen is topped only by his political wisdom.
1 Like
I thought it was an exciting story until I got to this part
The NYT should have found someone who was actually materially affected by a lost private key.
Roth IRA backdoor successfully completed, max contribution. Let us STONKS
6 Likes
TS is a fabulist who’s been caught lying over and over again. Who knows what he actually believes about any of this. He certainly doesn’t actually trade.
Every time I’ve bought and sold BTC (moving $ on poker sites) the fees on coinbase have been absurd. When I’m paying $25 in fees to deposit $500, how is this the FUTURE of commerce?
The thesis of almost everybody that got rich on bitcoin was wrong. But it’s better to be lucky than correct in this case.
I called them digital diamonds a few years back. I stand by that. In most ways they almost exactly resemble the diamond market from my perspective. From the shadowy insiders who own most of the supply to the actual practical users who mostly want a convenient way to move money around without being super easy to trace to the retail crowd probably lighting their money on fire.
I haven’t ever had anyone make an argument that Bitcoin isn’t another one of those. But I don’t agree with the majority of BTC true believers about economics so that explains most of our differences of opinion about crypto.
I think the underlying crypto technology is a pretty big conceptual gain too. Imagine if your ID was a blockchain application. Fraud would be MUCH harder. Being able to do regular cash transactions through the usual channels with trustless identity authentication is potentially hugely consequential. I say this as someone who gets to see the friction caused by fraud on every single transaction (all the verification and validation) above a certain size… it’s a pretty major source of drag that is just baked into the usual expense expectations.
once fiat money dies there won’t be any need to convert from $ to BTC, all of our paychecks will be in BTC
DoorDash is up 20% today and is now worth more than $LYFT and $LMND and $ETSY and $GRUB and $FSLY combined.
can’t believe that one worthless company is worth more than five other worthless companies combined.
12 Likes
This definitely seems to be a primary difference between bitcoin bulls and bears. The growth of bitcoin makes perfect sense from an Austrian standpoint, an ideology that ironically enough I developed from reading 2p2 in my teens and early 20s.
Even after taking several economics classes in college I still find the Keynesian philosophy deeply flawed. Bitcoin for me serves as a way to opt-out of this system before the cracks start to deepen. If you disagree with this philosophy it makes sense you won’t see bitcoin as being as useful as I do.
This article is old but I still found it interesting
hey Etsy makes money (i think)!
1 Like
Yeah the issue is that the Austrians had absolutely no idea what they were talking about and were wrong about absolutely everything. Like there’s nothing even slightly redeeming about their ideas and literally all of the real world data points to this. In their defense the other economic theories created in the late 19th-early 20th century are all massively flawed as well. They just didn’t know as much then as we do now.
Which is why BTC, in my view, is an expensive solution in search of a problem. The problem it ended up solving was the same one that ‘investment grade’ diamonds solved.
That being said ‘digital diamonds’ is a real product just like diamonds is. And it all but requires the shadowy insiders to even work. It’s really about trust that they’ll take your money at A and give you back the money at B. You can use anything portable and valuable in a similar way. Bitcoin is just that going online, and I don’t think that’s going to zero or anything (unless the power bill gets out of hand… in which case they’ll leave the retail people holding the bag as hard as they can before moving on to a new coin)
Yeah just want to make it clear I definitely don’t consider myself an Austrian economist–but I’m hesitant with your hyperbolic dismissal of the entire school of thought.
I think/hope that capitalism will end in the next 100 years. I find it morally repulsive and responsible for so many of the problems that face our society today. Any and all fiat gains I make from bitcoin are going towards my dreams of finding a better solution.
Of course the irony is that bitcoin is just about the most hypercapitalistic invention you could ever imagine. That’s definitely something I’ve struggled a bit with morally. I’d rather not be spending my time in this space at all but I feel I have to at the moment in order to gain the power and freedom to create positive change.
My ultimate “bull” case is that bitcoin actually accelerates the death of capitalism… becoming almost a black-hole of late-stage capitalism, sucking in all available fiat from actors simply acting rationally as price increases exponentially. Of course the end result of this scenario would likely be very dark so it’s not exactly something I hope for.
Since bitcoin’s inception over 12 years ago supply/demand models and bitcoin maximalists have been remarkably correct with their projections for growth and price action. This directly relates to its 4 year halving cycle which has a huge impact on available new supply. At what point would you consider that they might be right, and the mainstream economists wrong?
1 Like
This sounds very dotcom bubbly but I honestly have no idea what is typical.
My friend invested in a penny stock at 26 cents because of a post on an LSU fan forum and it’s now 1.25. Apparently timing the market is easy.
W/o doing any research, I would assume the number of penny stocks that amount to anything is up there with the number of NFL starters that spent significant time on the practice squad. Like 1 in 100 if that.
Did I get that about right?