I'm increasingly convinced this LBO idea of GBTC is legitimate and possible. 

Grayscale has other products besides bitcoin including eth, ltc, etc...

Could you raise money through a DAO to do a LBO of gbtc?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkLW4e1j7pI

GBTC is a business trust

Hedge fund can sell bitcoin futures short 

Then buy up gbtc shares at a discount- (bc lets be honest gbtc hasn't been doing great lately)

They then vote grayscale out - the fiduciary trustee- grayscale doesn't own this product- the shareholders do

They then vote to dissolve the gbtc product to get at the real bitcoin

Then dump the bitcoin

Bitcoin price falls off a cliff

Buy back the futures - profit.

What would converting to a an ETF actually do???? I have no idea, but I would love to know.

First pass review of documentary - This Machine Greens

The bitcoiners really love that volcano in El Salvador

Bitcoin miners are green energy only advocates

No time for energy freedom from the bitcoiners

PR campaign that correctly identifies why using energy in general is good for humans, but falsely claims that expenditure of energy should not be tied to the thing that it is used for -- especially when tied to 'money'-- meaning that energy spent is the focus--- even if that energy is 'wasted' meaning their is no utility to the energy spent- they don't get this concept and they don't even dare broach this topic.

Anything to get more non white people into our country--- just remember- the bitcoin people now support this--- climate as a reason to import refugees 

https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1451674795150614534

We should want justice minded objective fair regulators, not regulators that are political-- these are the people the crypto people should be very afraid of. You can start off as an objective regulator, but it also needs to make economic sense. This is why there will be a DAO that hunts or preys off the crypto industry using the courts- sort of like patent trolls- but not patents.

Crypto lobbyists do not fear political regulators- regulators who just follow the party boss and accept bribes. Who they fear are people like me, who have thought about getting a law degree and who might go become a regulator based on my personal justice minded goals

The law is just someone's opinion 

Crypto lawyers are just paid big bucks to offer creative opinions on why traditional security laws do not or should not apply to crypto- they are paid for their opinions

I talk again about the grid and bitcoin miners

Something for nothing- go read Frank Shostak on Mises

Legit lending from real savings vs illegitimate lending through out of thin air printed dollars or tether

To understand ask yourself --- how does the tether come into existence?--- just like dollars right?-- it isn't like p2p lending is it?- where you have legitimate loans and lending from savings?-- no it isn't like p2p lending. Ask yourself- who is the only one that has the privilege of creating tether out of thin air? Ask yourself- who is the only one that has the privilege of creating dollars out of thin air?

*Disclaimer-- tokens or crypto and especially 'stablecoins' aren't dollars and will never be dollars, which is why the secret service doesn't care about stablecoins. Stablecoins aren't counterfeits, they aren't pretending to be us dollars. They just are very very clever in their marketing. The only thing they might be are securities and they might be committing fraud- most definitely. Stablecoins as a word should never be taken seriously and shouldn't be used by lawyers or law makers or regulators. It is another example of the crypto industry trying to create their own category for certain products like NFTs or like Coinbase wanting a separate regulator just for the crypto industry, to confuse and to gain advantage, mostly regulatory advantage.

* on counterfeiting (this isn't what stablecoins do, but what the secret service focuses on)/ on creating dollars out of thin air (this is what stablecoins do)-- only a bank can do this right--- RIGHT- and that tells you exactly what stablecoins are not-- they are not dollars

Sell into the bitcoin rising price

There will not be enough real dollars when you want to sell your bitcoin

The price run up is due to tethers being printed out of thin air and lent to crypto companies like FTX, Celsius, Blockstream

Collateral for the loans of usdt do not back up or give value to the stablecoin itself 

Printing tethers is like the commercial banking being able to print dollars out of thin air and lend them out ---- John Paul Koning even asks why is this different than Paypal and different than exchanging tether for us dollars.... hopefully he can understand the difference soon.

https://twitter.com/jp_koning/status/1450452148156776464

https://twitter.com/jp_koning/status/1450452148156776464

"Say that there are two stablecoin issuers. One lends out new stablecoins for bitcoin collateral. Another issues new stablecoin for fiat, then lends that fiat out for bitcoin collateral. Is there an economic difference between the two? Aren't their ending balance sheets the same?"

"Tether's terms of service explicitly prevents it from creating new USDT stablecoin units for bitcoin: "only money will be accepted upon issuance." So why is Tether lending USDT to Celsius in return for bitcoin/ethereum collateral?"

https://twitter.com/tphillips/status/1450459111209017354

Critics of tether like the Fed money printing, they just don't want crypto people to do it

Bitcoin maxis who like tether don't like the Fed money printing but are perfectly okay with crypto doing it-- bc it benefits them

Dan Awry gets it

https://twitter.com/DanAwrey/status/1450463260134813706

"Also, if lending USDT directly involves creating new USDT out of thin air, then I would think transaction 1 poses different risks to *other holders* of USDT given the now diluted backing for their claims."

"Ah, I misinterpreted your hypo JP. In that case the transactions themselves are identical - the real difference, as I think Todd is suggesting, is that the creation of new Tethers in transaction 1 without any consideration has the effect of diluting the claims of USDT holders."

To understand ask yourself --- how does the tether come into existence?--- just like dollars right?-- it isn't like p2p lending is it?- where you have legitimate loans and lending from savings?-- no it isn't like p2p lending. Ask yourself- who is the only one that has the privilege of creating tether out of thin air? Ask yourself- who is the only one that has the privilege of creating dollars out of thin air?

*Disclaimer-- tokens or crypto and especially 'stablecoins' aren't dollars and will never be dollars, which is why the secret service doesn't care about stablecoins. Stablecoins aren't counterfeits, they aren't pretending to be us dollars. They just are very very clever in their marketing. The only thing they might be are securities and they might be committing fraud- most definitely. Stablecoins as a word should never be taken seriously and shouldn't be used by lawyers or law makers or regulators. It is another example of the crypto industry trying to create their own category for certain products like NFTs or like Coinbase wanting a separate regulator just for the crypto industry, to confuse and to gain advantage, mostly regulatory advantage.

* on counterfeiting on creating dollars out of thin air-- only a bank can do this right--- RIGHT- and that tells you exactly what stablecoins are not-- they are not dollars

https://rekt.news/indexed-finance-rekt/

Defi protocol gets 'hacked' and the dev who created it cries to the internet when things do not go their way

Live by code is law, die by code is law

Hackers should be protected, if they are hacking only on the blockchain

Now if this guy was a general partner, the hacker, then there is a way to get your money back- but that involves suing them as a general partner

Having your cake and eating it too

All this is a deflection from the known dev that admitted it was his fault - his code--- sue him if you want, you know is name

Call their bluff, because they are bluffing

What exactly can the hacker be charged with? Like precisely?

Incentivizing new POW cryptos with green energy bitcoin miner policies

A rebirth in new POW tokens?

Trading energy on the grid more profitable than the tokens themselves?

What's a future

Lots of fees

Wall street's job is to securitize

rolling over contracts 

front running

SEC approved why== reference price instead of real bitcoin? How is that still not manipulation?

Think of it as a tool- a trading tool 

buyer beware

Inflation means getting something for nothing--- this would be the beneficiaries of inflation or the money printing-- if you aren't benefiting from the money printing you are being harmed if you are holding the currency being inflated

many assets that could serve as inflation hedges including commodities but also companies that produce things we need- key phrase is things we need

the best inflation hedges are probably real things that you need in the real economy 

who needs bitcoin ? that is a good question to ask yourself when you compare that to who needs a place to live, food, etc

start to try to deeply understand what inflation means and then you can better understand how to respond

make up your own mind what is your best inflation hedge based on your own economic situation because there is no right answer