greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
User ID: 68
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
18d ago
yeah it's true for the individual scale because that is where is is applicable. Taking more confrontational approach may work 9/10 times and the 10th time it goes badly because the other person was having a bad day. This is assuming the police are not present. it's not like you always have the luxury of time to wait for the cops to come.
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
18d ago
But this article hints at the idea that people are zooming past any of that to full lethality. It's impossible to compile the stats to determine if that's actually the case or not, but the larger point remains; in a society with plunging basic trust, you're going to see levels of interpersonal violence spike. How should state laws governing violence respond to this? Stand Your Ground is something I generally still support, but my mind could be changed if simple Bad Neigbor fights end up with more orphans.
Although I don't predict widespread unrest or civil war, there will be more incidents of random violence and lowered social trust. There is the rise of 'Joey Swoll' phenomenon . Some say he's does good, but he has set a precedent or symptomatic of a much more confrontational culture, where people take matters in their own hands to rectify some perceived problem, which can sometimes end poorly when you're talking people hot in emotion . This why I have a protocol when encountering an 'IRL' problem: de-escalate and remove-oneself from the situation. This will usually keep you safe.
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
18d ago
Are you shaking your head at my comment or the parent comment? I agree BTC cannot and was not at risk of being regulated-away. I was making a rhetorical point that it was unlikely.
In its hayday, the crypto currency industry was a total wild west. Straightforward scams, pyramid schemes, whatever FTX was, the NFT craze. The end uses are to hide assets from the government and to conduct transactions which the government does not want you to conduct.
But this was when Biden was in office. And there was hardly any crackdown. FTX only failed under its own negligence. Of course, there was an increase of KYC/AML, but this is standard banking practice. It's no surprise crypto is no exception.
So in short, the threat that most crypto businesses in the US would be regulated out of existence seemed very real to me.
I disagree. Coinbase and other exchanges boomed in 2021 again when Biden was in office. The bust was due to the price collapsing in 2022 as part of the broader stagnation and rate hikes by a hawkish fed.
I agree there is more regulatory clarity, and more favorable regulation given the counterfactual under Kamala, hence why Bitcoin went up after trump won.
But the past 6 months has seen a worsening picture as Bitcoin falls and lag the QQQ , like today, last week, week before, etc . Trump has at best signaled indifference or apathy to the Bitcoin reserve...doesn't even talk about it. And his very own Treasury Secretary ruled out purchases, basically a huge disservice to those donors.
If I were a donor I would be mad that Trump has dropped the ball . Maybe some donors got their money worth with only the regulatory aspect and the initial Bitcoin price surge, but there are still three more years, and things do not look good. I still stand by my argument it's premature saying the donors "won". Yes, in Jan 2025 it seemed that way, but not anymore.
BTC front-loaded the win, and since Jan 2025 has basically been mediocre to bad.
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
19d ago
That is a far cry or goalpost moving from his original claim of crypto being at risk of being regulated out of existence. The fact bitcoin was trading at $60k in 2021 when Biden was in power, was indicative of confidence in the future of crypto. Coinbase stock was at $300 after its IPO in 2021. 2022 was so bad for crypto due to high correlation with the nasdaq, rising interest rates, and stagflation , not regulatory concerns.
Bitcoin has basically been stuck in the $90-110k range since Jan 2025 despite the nasdaq ripping higher practically everyday and Trump in office.
But was crypto at much risk of being regulated out of existence? Bitcoin had gotten as high as $70k when Biden was in office and the 2024 election uncertain. In fact, bitcoin was as high as $60k in early 2021, when Trump was not even seen as a contender due to jan 6th, and it was assumed Biden would be reelected. In 2021, NFTs and other stuff thrived as well, only to collapse in 2022, not because of regulation, but the inherent unsustainability of paying $300k for a picture. The original bitcoin ETFs were approved under Biden no less. Those were highly controversial. Meanwhile , approval for the XRP ETFs under trump was delayed repeatedly https://www.tradingview.com/news/coinpedia:8424cad94094b:0-ripple-s-xrp-etf-misses-another-deadline-are-they-facing-rejection/.
Of course, the counterfactual would be worse under kamala, but how much is that worth when you don't get any of the other stuff, e.g. a reserve funded by purchases? This was a main selling point; in fact, donors rolled out the red carpet for Trump in 2024 on that promise https://www.wired.com/story/donald-trumps-plan-to-hoard-billions-in-bitcoin-has-economists-stumped/ So he signed an executive order for a stockpile, which is not a reserve, and it has sat unfunded as $ goes to Ai and chips, which donated nothing, and there is no evidence to suggest any additional progress will be made. This sounds like a disappointment to me.
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
19d ago
Social commentators often deplore how people are isolated or choosing to be alone, but declining social skills, not smartphones, may be to blame. Conversations are two-way, so if some percentage of the general population is severely deficient in this regard, the probability of a bad conversation converges to near 100% after only a handful of exchanges, so it's not worth socializing at all, as the downside is not worth it. Videos frequently go viral of aggressive, confrontational behavior. People are just meaner in general and I don't think it can be explained by confirmation bias of viral videos, technology, or autism.
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
19d ago
My response to Scott's post “Tech PACs Are Closing In On The Almonds”.
Scott Alexander argues that Marc Andreessen’s ‘crypto PAC’ was a success and validates his thesis that donors should donate more. But the evidence of success is lacking, and it's way premature to say he and other crypto donors succeeded.
In fact, something interesting and unexpected happened instead, which runs counter to scott's thesis and premature victory lap: those who donated the least, nothing, or originally opposed Trump and his supporters, got the most and the biggest embrace by Trump. They got actual taxpayer-funded bailouts and other initiatives, but crypto donors got little to nothing. No taxpayer-funded crypto purchases.
So what to make of this? I would say that this again shows why donors do not donate more. There is no assurance of success. Crypto donors wanted Trump to make crypto a priority, and at best it has been pushed to the backburner compared to AI, chips, quantum and other stuff.
It's more like you go to jail and then the beatings happen there. the police don't need to do it and have it go viral online
More options
Context Copy link