@deathcab

Evil speculator. Austrian economist. Cycle theorist. Market analysis & Systems Engineering. Bitcoin Ex Machina.

Paper St.
Joined March 2014
Yep.
103
253
70
2,432
427,474
Lesson in there.
In bear markets it's better to buy at reasonable targets then wait in hopes of ticking the bottom. Buying 70 or 80k bitcoin won't matter when price crosses 200k. Waiting for 40 or 50k and missing your entry will.
1
229
Slow motion detonation.
The landmine whose detonation will usher in an era of unprecedented printing is already planted, and it's sitting right here. Say it with me; the government cannot afford 5% yield on the 10y.
6
234
Insiders will say anything to keep this bubble inflated.
GPT-6 Astra, trained on ~100K+ NVIDIA Grace Blackwell NVLink72. From ChatGPT to o1 to Astra in 4 years. AGI has arrived. Congratulations @OpenAI team. 400K GPUs coming online next.
284
The human condition is fascinating.
247
I have a new attitude towards the housing market. Tell me what it was worth in 2019, add ~20% and that's todays fair market price. Anything more is sellers dreaming of suckers.
Currently the #1 most motivated seller in Bigfork, #3 in Montana and #112 nationwide. Peak ask: $5,875,000 Current ask: $2,450,000 Total markdown: $3,425,000 (-58%)
3
481
A perfect study in mainstream market psychology. The bottom is never THE bottom, and the top is never THE top. A great look through the window of why retail investors buy tops and sell bottoms.
Her advice to wait to buy for lower lows would have massively SCREWED YOU OVER Bitcoin at $80K She’s waiting for the $40K’s like it’s the new $12K She’s a Layah
1
486
Businesses can and will continue to raise prices as long as the S&P continues to go vertical. When the game of musical chairs stops the chaos will ensue.
Unfortunately, business has figured out that the "mass affluent" American can and will pay seemingly ANY price. They keep raising the price and sales don't decrease. It's like an experiment. The MBA's must be amazed by the ironclad nature of consumer demand.
2
339
It looks like the 10y bond landmine is in the process of detonating.
The landmine whose detonation will usher in an era of unprecedented printing is already planted, and it's sitting right here. Say it with me; the government cannot afford 5% yield on the 10y.
4
290
The 401k situation is far worse than people think. This assumes 3% inflation (real inflation is way higher). Then add in your basic .25-.75% management fee. The real value you get out after ~30 years will be a small fraction of what you put in. People better learn about inflation and hard assets before it's too late.
Americans will put $2.8 million into their 401k over a career and end up with $750,000 of actual spending power. If you max out your 401k at $23,500 per year for 30 years at 8% annual returns, you accumulate roughly $2.8 million on paper. But $2.8 million in 2055 buys what $1.1 million buys today after average inflation of 3% per year. Then the IRS takes 25% to 35% on the way out. You're after tax, inflation adjusted number lands at around $750,000. 30 years of locking up capital and zero access during your highest earning decades. A 10% penalty if you touch it before 59.5 years old. A menu of mutual funds your employer picked for you. All for $750,000 at retirement age. The 401k was designed in 1978 as a supplement to pensions and social security. Pensions are mostly gone. Social security will almost certainly pay reduced benefited for anyone under 45. For high earners, putting every available dollar into a vehicle you cannot touch for 30 years while ignoring assets that generate cash flow today is an expensive mistake and decision.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
The post's math frames pre-tax 401(k) contributions as full after-tax costs and uses a fixed annual limit, overlooking immediate tax savings from reduced taxable income and IRS annual inflation adjustments to caps. schwab.com/learn/story/40… irs.gov/newsroom/401k-…
3
502
- first it was “temporary” - then it was “net neutral” - then it became an “important tool” - eventually it’s a necessity to keep global markets solvent. Yield curve control only ends one way, and it doesn’t include a lot of control.
2
186
You can't "be your own bank" and then cry foul and demand protection every time something goes wrong. Owning your keys isn't a LARP for internet points. You better understand the nature of the risks and responsibilities that entails.
2
171
BIP-110 is a perfect example of how skewed reality can get when you live in an echo chamber. Especially one built of emotional personalities. They think with feelings rather than logic, and the resulting lack of objectivity manifests as some combination of egotism and LARPing about what Bitcoin “should be,” while actively undermining everything it currently is. They never have to admit wrong because they aren’t governed by facts. Each failure can be minimized through gaslighting and revisionist history as they plow forward, into ever-greater distortions of the truth. The hubris of this camp runs so deep that they would have you believe Bitcoin is irrevocably broken because an insignificant proposal, desired by a tiny minority of users, failed - as predicted.
These views do not reflect the views of @ocean_mining and are mine exclusively: Saturday 8/8 saw the rejection of BIP110 by the Bitcoin industry despite broad support among the community. This shattered a long-standing belief that Bitcoin's anti-fragility and hard-monetary properties would continue thanks to its decentralized network of nodes who were run by people who understood Bitcoin and would fight to preserve it. I have been confident in Bitcoin's future and championed it as a tool for freedom. My reasons for doing so both required that it maintain and treat as a mission-critical priority the decentralization and ultimate authority of the network of nodes determining and enforcing its rules. They are no longer relevant. The degree to which this undermines Bitcoin's future cannot be overstated. Proof of Work is completely pointless if the criteria for what constitutes validity is decided by the ones doing the work. Pools have said "Our blocks are still valid, even if they violate rules we were told to respect." They did so within a small cartel of centralized pool operators clearly acting on behalf of industry players who operated behind closed doors ensuring that their public, breathtakingly arrogant, and nonsensically premature dismissal of BIP110 as a failure would not ultimately turn out any other way. They were not bluffing, they knew. By contrast, BIP110 supporters operated in public. We used neutral metrics that everyone had access to, and made the basis of our confidence publicly known. Sincere attempts were made to gauge community sentiment and engagement was public on all venues where discussion was permitted. Public engagement with influential Bitcoiners who opposed BIP110 demonstrated clearly that their opposition was not in good faith. This led to questions about their characters and intentions which were promptly corroborated by timely Epstein leaks. This meant that it was no longer frivolous dismissal of "the other side" out of pure tribal instinct as is standard within any conflict, and instead it would become laughably naive to continue assuming good faith on their part. Regardless, the spectacular, resolute dismissal of BIP110 necessarily reveals an equivalent stark and chilling reality with regard to decision-making about Bitcoin's consensus rules. No one, not even BIP110's most staunch critics can dismiss the implications of this. When Bitcoin is under attack, spontaneous defense that can withstand whatever onslaught it faces will simply be dismissed as "not economic", "a Sybil attack", "non technical", "censorship" or some other attempt to discredit and undermine it by the attackers. My expectation for the future is that for Bitcoin, reverse-Trojan horse theory continues to play out: The dollarization of the ecosystem will continue, and Bitcoin's ultimate goal - the separation of money and state, will be forgotten, while its captured players work towards the exact opposite end - its unification. Bitcoin is not the first protocol to become captured. It needed to become the exception, not the rule. The mechanism by which it did that is decentralization. Work is being done to hard fork Bitcoin with a new Proof-of-Work algorithm. I have said repeatedly in the past that in certain scenarios, should mining become captured and centralized to too great of a degree then the only defense the network would have would be to hard-fork to a new Proof-of-Work algorithm. I stand by this perspective as a truth fundamental to Bitcoin and everyone must agree with this stance if they are to believe Bitcoin is not whatever a necessarily few mining pools say it is. If you believe the miners acted on behalf of a silent community who secretly opposed BIP110 then I will respectfully disagree but agree that your conclusion about a PoW change being unwarranted must follow. You have misjudged the BIP itself and are simultaneously oblivious to the mechanisms that were abused to deny it, along with the intentions of the people working them. You also did not indicate your dislike of the BIP via discernable metrics (i.e not running a URSF and committing to its rejection) - instead you relied on a few pools to decide on your behalf. So what am I going to do? Wait with a stalled out Knots node. Another block will be along later rather than sooner, but I'll take it. That is what my entire Bitcoin stack sees as the state of the network. If a PoW change HF comes along with the next update to @BitcoinKnots that makes blocks start showing up faster I will upgrade to it and enjoy the benefit. I have no desire to attempt to call this new chain "Bitcoin" - Bitcoin is a case study in protocol capture and instead of dying, becomes a tool for the sickest of purposes. I can think of nothing more evil than centralized Bitcoin. It is whatever tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorist told you Bitcoin was. But for all my day-to-day activities, all the software I use, Bitcoin is simply stuck at block 931,633. At current hashrate the next block will take ~32 hours. I sincerely doubt that anyone wants to find another 2000 blocks at this pace so HF is the only practical option.
1
4
468
Gee I wonder how this is going to end...🤣 These people.
3
169
BIP-110ers don't understand anything about the importance of economics and consensus in bitcoin. You could spin up a million AWS nodes, have 95% of them signaling and still lose. Consensus change requires nodes, miners and economy in alignment. You can't fake it.
Replying to @saylor
I don't think you understand how this actually works, Michael. If enough nodes signal for bip 110, it will activate. That is how a USAF works. I believe we're at about 20% nodes supporting bip 110. That's about the tipping point. Plus it's still accelerating. You basically don't have a say in this. So if anybody should stand by down, it's you, and you should get back into the books and find that 2020 Saylor that we all miss.
5
440
This has to be some kind of LARP, no one is this delusional surely...
Seems like many miners still aren't getting the message that we need them to signal readiness for BIP-110 now to prevent forcing everyone to distribute CSAM So I've rebased @LukeDashjr's 2017 PoW-change hardfork code onto a recent version of Knots: github.com/bitcoinknots/bitc… I think we should have this in our back pocket in case miners decide to collude to betray bitcoin What do you guys think? @LukeDashjr @dathon_ohm @GrassFedBitcoin @kwsantiago
1
4
319
Events like this coldcard exploit are damaging in the short term but strengthening in the long term. Often times change doesn’t happen until it’s forced. You can bet all wallet providers are now using AI agents to scrutinize every aspect of their platforms.
2
5
394
Necessity breeds innovation
85
Details are emerging of coldcard users who lost coins years in advance of the recent attack. The entropy being generated by the wallet was so low that separate users were receiving the same private keys. Wild.
1
5
406
And now Coinkite is allegedly guilty of negligence.
In 2024, victims came to us with bitcoin missing from Coldcard wallets. No malware, no phishing. We traced it to weak seed entropy and filed reports with the manufacturer and multiple agencies. Two years later: $38M swept in 25 minutes. blockchainunmasked.com/post/…
1
285