But policy rules are not related to governance. The policy rules are subjective rules that are implemented by developers of Bitcoin Core. They can change them up and down at will. Consensus rules is where you need governance to make changes. Why should random people get to have an opinion on engineering changes that don't affect consensus? What makes them think they can have an opinion on it?
You might be correct in theory, yet guys likely will get upset if they feel snubbed, and since bitcoin is open source software normies feel entitles to participate and to be able to have input in regards to substance and/or procedures.
So, yeah there are substantive arguments and there are procedural arguments, and surely folks are not always going to be competent in terms of arguments that they are making whether they are arguing about process or arguing about substance.
You might also be correct that core can do whatever they like, and then people can choose or choose not to run the software and/or to create counter implementations, since it is all open source the code can be seen, to the extent it is understood or that others might have trust to run the software if it were an implementation that was not the same as core's implementation.
Do you know that they change many other numbers all the time? The only difference here is that this group has a name policy rules.. most users have no idea all the changes that are happening all the time in Bitcoin Core. I think it is wrong to feel entitled about contributing to open source software with opinions. If a person is not financing it or doing actual contributing as in writing code or doing research then they are not really doing anything. They just think they are contributing but they are mostly causing problems and causing time to be lost.
Open source is messy - and even participating in non-censored forums is messy, and sometimes bad actors will take advantage of the openness and engage in disingenuine discussions. Disingenuiness is usually considered to be on purpose, yet sometimes attempts at participation might not necessarily be with bad intent, yet sometimes have bad results in terms of wasting time - yet since no one is in charge, it can be difficult to know where to draw the line.. or if someone has the authority to draw the line or maybe sometimes the more honest participants might get driven out by the trolls.
People react differently, and surely so far our current correction has ONLY gotten as low as 13% from the top, so it surely does not seem to be a BIG deal, yet LFC seems to be getting caught up upon a timeline, like bitcoin has to do a certain level of performance at a certain time, as if bitcoin is on a schedule, and surely it worked out somewhat for him when he was saying those same things in the last cycle (2021), and he even went through a similar dynamic in 2017.. and it can even be seen on the chart, so yeah, he seems to be getting it stuck in his head that the cycles are guaranteed to be within a certain kind of time parameter.
I think every single thing about this market is as different as possible from the last one. Expecting identical performance and timeline is not good.. we just confirmed at least 2 more interest rate cuts until this year is over. Things will improve.
Every time is different.
In other words, we still have a pattern, even if the pattern might not be exact and/or we might not realize that we are within an acceptable place within the pattern until at some later point when the price reverts to the mean... so we go back to where we would have had been - wether there is a stair step up or a stair step down or maybe a sideways, after the fact we might be able to say, that it all worked itself out.. yet while we are within it, we might come to conclusions that the pattern had broken, when it largely might not have had broken.
Lot's of negativity even from seasoned people, not too worried to be honest, expect to see higher prices soon(ish)
My thoughts are the same. We are at most 2 good weeks away from $150k unless people consider a 5% increase in 7 days a good week.
You are on a schedule too?
No I never said it has to be the next weeks or any particular weeks. I'm merely showing how close we are yet people think it is far.
Fair enough. Do you think $150k by the end of the year is bettable?
I think that odds are pretty good (maybe close to 40%), yet I have a hard time considering it bettable such as above 50% - even though I would bet some of the downside numbers are not going to happen (such as sub $80k or some other numbers that guys are throwing around - or implying to be within the cards.
Oh, I did say that I would be willing to bet $127k before the end of the year or at least by no later than the 1st quarter of 2026... and some of these could go either way.. so i am not that enthusiastic to enter into a bet even if we have decently good odds of overshooting some of the lower UP numbers, too.
@Jay. The last 5 years shows Bitcoins performance vs gold has been lackluster compared to the 5 years prior to that. There is still an uptrend from the BTC lows vs gold, but that is much less than previous years
BTC v Gold Last 5 years
2021 high to 2025 high = 8%
2021 high to today = -25%
2022 low to 2025 high = 440%
BTC v Gold 5 years prior
2017 high to 2021 high = 260%
2019 low to 2021 high = 1400%
Yes, if you compare to the ever devaluing USD we are up, but, compared to gold (the traditional hedge to monetary debasement) we are seeing greatly diminished growth.
Seems like a BIG So What to me.
I hate to make this personal, but you have frequently argued over the years that bitcoin is not performing enough for your satisfaction, and to me, bitcoin seems amongst the best, if not the best risk-adjusted place to put value that is (and has been) available to everyone and anyone with a discretionary income.
You can pick out various periods in which gold is keeping up r even outperforming bitcoin, yet I doubt bitcoin is a very good place to be, including considering the various ways that bitcoin can be held.. and yeah, sure there may be some folks who are able to safeguard their gold.. but bitcoin is way better (and has been way better) than gold. And, if you want to invest in more than 10% the size of your bitcoin holdings into gold (do you even own the reall thing?) then that is your choice.
Yes bitcoin is all the things you mentioned, and yes it should be taking market share from gold, but for the last 5 years, it at worst hasnt, and at best its ability is diminishing. This I find disappointing, because IMO Bitcoin is without a doubt superior to gold.
Why is there a need to whine about it?
We cannot know how long these matters take to play out. The greatest transfer of wealth known to mankind from no coiners to coiners can take a whole hell of a lot of time, including that it could take 50 to 200 years for bitcoin to reach 1,000x the valuation of gold (referring to something approximating fair market value - in the future).
Ideally what Id like to see is a break through that 5 year BTCGLD resistance level around 40 ounces
I don't see any meaningful resistance.. or at least it does not matter to me.. since I am not even weighing holding any of that inferior investment.
, and at least a doubling after that, however I think it is wise to also allocate a portion of investments in case that doesnt happen anytime soon. Going off previous runs it should have happened by now.
You are in for disappointment if you proclaim that bitcoin is on any kind of schedule, and I recall having similar kinds of arguments (debates/discussions) with you about your then disappointments in bitcoin's price performance during the 2021 bull run.
