Full video on my purchase of Bitcoin $50,000 strike calls. https://t.co/6atz8cNT3R
Riccardo Murena @Ricardo19291110
This is amazing stuff, I feel all giddy now. I remember you predicting BTC at 7k / 8k many months ago and being 100% spot on, the value you provide is incredible.
Thanks - one thing to note though. I did actually predict $7.5k BTC when it was at around $3000, but this is *not* a prediction of $50k. I think $50k is plausible, but I like the calls because they give me a chance to win if that happens with less risk.
This article seems to have touched a nerve on its use of the term "probabilistic finality." I don't really care about the marketing, and I didn't interpret this as a criticism of PoW or Bitcoin generally. Here's how I think about probability and consensus mechanisms generally: https://t.co/rpljPwG0a5
2/ One of the hardest things to understand for new crypto entrants is who "controls" distributed networks. Who gets to decide what Bitcoin or ETH or XRP becomes? There's no simple answer.
3/ Governance of distributed networks depends on emergent consensus. I'll throw out some buzzwords and then dive into the meat. Distributed networks are governed by a Keynesian beauty contest in which stakeholders all bet on what other stakeholders want. https://t.co/lhRMGLqjiN
Thanks for the support, Ari. 🙂
Tell me about it. I never got so much as a little verse, never mind a whole song.
I'm seeing some really bad takes on blockchain based voting, mostly based on specific possible implementations. This is like dismissing email because you don't like AOL's email client. Here's the reality -
2/ Blockchain voting could include as much or as little secrecy as desired. It could function identically to paper ballots with no information tied to the individual being recorded. Why might this be dramatically superior to paper?
3/ Because it allows voters to verify that their vote was recorded and recorded correctly, and to verify for themselves high level fairness of the election (like total votes cast by region.)