• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

bitcoins

Bitcoins founding principle of being deflationary makes it pretty much unusable as a currency. Economies don’t work when people can make money but not spending money.
 
For anyone interested, MicroStrategy will be hosting World 2022 conference next week for free. It may be over most peoples heads but it will be a good resource for those wanting to learn how to put btc on your companies balance sheet and how to navigate the legal landscape. Jack Dorsey will also be speaking. Link below.
https://www.microstrategy.com/en/world-2022
 
bpw said:
Bitcoins founding principle of being deflationary makes it pretty much unusable as a currency. Economies don’t work when people can make money but not spending money.
Click to expand...

True. Bitcoin is a store of inflation, a hedge against value.
 
panthera said:
For anyone interested, MicroStrategy will be hosting World 2022 conference next week for free. It may be over most peoples heads but it will be a good resource for those wanting to learn how to put btc on your companies balance sheet and how to navigate the legal landscape. Jack Dorsey will also be speaking. Link below.
https://www.microstrategy.com/en/world-2022
Click to expand...

Kind of ironic that a company that's in legal troubles with the SEC because of their accounting practices is teaching others about accounting practices, don't you think?

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/21/mic...-rejection-of-companys-crypto-accounting.html

A filing released Thursday showed the SEC rejecting the accounting method MicroStrategy was using for bitcoin in its earnings reporting.

“We note your response to prior comment 5 and we object to your adjustment for bitcoin impairment charges in your non-GAAP measures,” the filing said. “Please revise to remove this adjustment in future filings.”
Click to expand...
 
It's a new thing, there will be some back and forth as the "proper" way of reporting BTC-related transactions is established. It's far from "legal troubles"- like saying you're in "legal trouble" with the IRS because they told you that you owe a little more this year.

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily...ts-microstrategys-bitcoin-accounting-strategy

The enterprise software maker, which said in 2020 that buying and holding Bitcoin was one of its key business strategies, used non-GAAP measures in its Form 10-Q for the quarter that ended Sept. 30, 2021 to show investors what its income would have been if it didn’t have to impair the volatile cryptocurrency.

The Securities and Exchange Commission objected, a comment letter released Thursday shows.

U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, offer no rules for reporting the value of digital assets. Nonbinding guidance from the American Institute of CPAs says companies should classify the currency as an intangible asset, as outlined in ASC 350. This means businesses that don’t qualify as investment firms would record cryptocurrency at historical cost and then only adjust it if the value declines. Once their holdings get written down, or impaired, companies can’t revise the value back up if the price recovers.
Click to expand...

https://www.theblockcrypto.com/link...s-non-gaap-bitcoin-accounting-approach-report

Impairment charges, in accounting, show the decline in the carrying value of an asset on a balance sheet, with the carrying value referring to the cost of that asset minus any fall in the value of it. MicroStrategy has long pushed for American accounting standards to be updated to account for assets such as bitcoin, penning a letter last fall to the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) on the matter. Specifically, the company has cited the ever-shifting value of cryptocurrencies as a flaw in the existing accounting approach.

"Impairment charges, including intra-reporting period impairment charges, cannot be reversed once recorded under ASC 350," the company wrote at the time. "As a result, subsequent increases in the market price of a digital asset are not reflected in the digital asset’s reported carrying value on an entity’s balance sheet. Entities with significant digital asset holdings, such as MicroStrategy, are therefore required to report digital asset carrying values on their balance sheets that diverge significantly from their fair market value."

By using its non-GAAP disclosure approach, MicroStrategy went on to write, "provides investors with the type of 'return-on-investment' viewpoint that investors have indicated is valuable to their analysis of the financial health of our company.
Click to expand...
 
trSZwM6.jpeg
 
from HH:

Other than trying to offload "art" onto the next sucker for more than you paid for it, what's the idea?

Like a print of the Mona Lisa is not an NFT of the Mona Lisa. It's a print. The original has value because people would want to own the one and only Mona Lisa.

If you make an NFT of a digital "art", I can have an IDENTICAL copy in literally every way, digitally. It is impossible to tell the difference without the tracking feature. So who cares? Good for you owning a digital photo that I also own.

Other than the greater fool theory, why are NFTs actually having "value"?
Click to expand...

respectfully, let's aim to keep arguments regarding the viability, veracity, similarity to a scam, etc of digital assets in this thread ("bitcoin"), while we use the investment thread for investors who wish to move the conversation separate from these arguments.

I can respond in a bit; I'm sort of busy right now.
thanks for your understanding
 
Bowling4Bikes said:
from HH:



respectfully, let's aim to keep arguments regarding the viability, veracity, similarity to a scam, etc of digital assets in this thread ("bitcoin"), while we use the investment thread for investors who wish to move the conversation separate from these arguments.

I can respond in a bit; I'm sort of busy right now.
thanks for your understanding
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I posted about NFTs in a digital asset thread. This is a bitcoin thread.

Also your explanation didn't answer my question..it's just more greater fool theory.
 
Who is the greater fool? Someone talking shit about something they have absolutely no idea about for the last 5 years or Someone who has done their due diligence, invested and is now retired. You are the fool. Go educate yourself. Let's see how this works out in the next 5 years. Bitcoin will be exponentially higher. One bitcoin will allow you to retire in less than 10 years. Go look at some on chain analytics for christ sake. The ignorance of the nay sayers is astounding. Luckily this thread will still around in 10 years.
 
Since you did you due diligence and since ignorance is astounding, about how many tons of carbon were emitted for your profits? About how much did the rest of us have to pay?
 
Go look for yourself and come back and let us know what your research shows. FYI if you put up Xmas lights every year, you are contributing more carbon to the environment than ALL of the bitcoin mining for the year. During the month of December alone Xmas lights use more power than the entire year of btc mining.
For those interested, tonight is the bitcoin meet up in Redding. I'm also going to be finished with my building downtown and will be starting a Bitcoin Redding Citadel for bitcoiners wanting to work on bitcoin projects and bitcoin start ups. It will be ran in conjunction with the Austin Pleb Lab. I'll post up pics and a website when I'm complete for those interested.
 
Tough to find info for some of this stuff, but one site says xmas lights use about 3.5b kwh for *just the US* in the month of December. Another site says bitcoin uses about 76b kwh for the year around the world, which averages out to roughly 700kwh per transaction. I think the average home uses something like 900kwh per month.
 
byke said:
Tough to find info for some of this stuff, but one site says xmas lights use about 3.5b kwh for *just the US* in the month of December. Another site says bitcoin uses about 76b kwh for the year around the world, which averages out to roughly 700kwh per transaction. I think the average home uses something like 900kwh per month.
Click to expand...

Yeah it all depends on who wrote the article, what their motives are, and what math they used. Here is an article https://fullycrypto.com/does-bitcoin-actually-consume-less-power-than-christmas-lights

This one shows actual math. Don't skip the last paragraph either it's important. Minings all year and Xmas lights are up for a month. Look at the math and you will have no doubt what is more wasteful.
 
Depends who wrote the article and what their motives are, but you'll have no doubt about the information from fullycrypto dot com...?
 
Hey, it's great that you made money. Just own the downside.
 
The only downside as far as I'm concerned is not having bitcoin. I'm long bitcoin short the dollar. Have sold zero bitcoin for about 4 years. I accumulate more when I have cash that needs a place to be. I also want to contribute to the network. There's more to bitcoin than just the token.
 
HappyHighwayman said:
Respectfully, I posted about NFTs in a digital asset thread. This is a bitcoin thread.

Also your explanation didn't answer my question..it's just more greater fool theory.
Click to expand...

I don't really want to convince anyone of anything, which is the reason for the other thread so us who are in to this stuff can discuss without constantly being dragged back into the argument of why. Maybe I'm the one that's fooled, and that's ok. You might have noticed much more than bitcoin being discussed here. I'd welcome a conversation about which NFT you'd like to invest in, in the investment thread :thumbup

regarding NFTs as a why, this seems more the place for it IMO. with that, I'll give it a go. If you remain convinced that ALL NFTS are scams such as the greater fool theory, then so be it.

so in the context of NFTs, we need to establish what is Art? Is it:
Expressive work intended to be appreciated for its beauty or emotional power; or the process of creating such a work? Is art a scam?

some people like renting, some like owning. many are fine with cheap knockoffs of the original, be it purses or cooking pans or knives, etc. some NFTs are a code of a picture that lives on a blockchain that has been validated as to who the owner is. Is this important? to some. some NFTs are videos. some are music, which can possibly revolutionize how musicians can protect their IP.

some people buy paintings they don't like for the express intent to resell for a higher value later. some buy autos or bikes and never ride/drive them. some grow weed for the intent of selling it but never partake, and some will buy it with the intent to sell for a higher (hehe) price to someone else. does this necessitate the scam of a greater fool? masterworks.com sells shares of art pieces to the not-quite-rich like Banksies. is investing in Banksies a scam? depends I guess.

are collectibles a scam? some are, sure. but not all. baseball cards? That Britten V1000 that sits in a museum? marble statues carved from skilled hands? Expensive but uncomfortable shoes? They do absolutely nothing. They are taking up space which could have been occupied by something functional. It's up to you and your bank account to decide if you want something so frivolous. Or own a status symbol.

Generative art is a new concept brought about by NFTs. it involves the artist creating a bunch of pieces to a whole in code form, and using random number generators to make a program with certain parameters, such as the shape and color of a face or what kind of hat it's wearing, etc...using something like the bored apes for example. but it could be a stunning cityscape, or something of the De Stijl style not yet painted. Maybe the code contains a certain parameter that only shows up maybe once in a whole set, making it rare.

While bound under certain parameters set by the artist, neither the artist nor the purchaser of this non-minted NFT have no certain idea what the piece will be. it is only until the NFT is minted that both the artist and the owner know what the picture is. could look like shit, could look pretty cool (subjective). But it took an action of two to make the piece generate itself.

I find the idea of generative art fascinating! You?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top