OT: Dogecoin

[MrSparkle]

You have shown no counterarguments, shown no understanding of the product, haven't even given a description as to why you think it is valuable.

Your opinion on the topic has absolutely no merit whatsoever so far based on what you have stated to date, which is absolutely nothing of substance.

Maybe I am wrong about blockchain and it will be a killer tech, but I have at least shown reasons that demonstrate I actually know what a blockchain is, how it works, what problem it is meant to solve, the implementation costs, and operating costs in comparison to viable alternatives. I can do so, because I worked on a project considering whether my firm should implement blockchain.

So far, my speculative guess is you know absolutely nothing whatsoever about blockchain, because that is what you have demonstrated thus far in your posts.

Ignoring whether blockchain is good/bad useful technology, you also haven't given any evidence as to why you think cryptocurrency built on block chain is going to derive benefit from it? Do you think it will ultimately offer cost savings? It's literally orders of magnitude slower and more expensive today than other alternatives. Why do you think that will change? Do you understand that distributing a ledger is inherently more expensive for transactions than having a centralized ledger because it by necessity requires considerably more updates / communication to be made?



Not sure if you fail to comprehend what I wrote or are just deliberately side stepping it.

A product is not more valuable because the components the product is built on have value in other ways. The product is valuable for the product itself. There is no value to bitcoin being on blockchain fundamentally vs any other platform that ensured the ledger was trusted.

It's more valuable bc it's a decentralized medium of exchange in which trust has been lost in traditional finance and in our society. It's true that the traditional ways of doing things are better in term of speed and cost at the moment. Given your argument, should we have ignored the Internet in the 90s? Cryptos aren't being valued for current productions, but rather the potential for the technology. Some better futures that I can think of for blockchain include:

1. A decentralized application for exchange that's better than traditional exchanges like Robinhood, which disguises itself as a medium to screw the mass and enrich the mass. Uniswap will eventually replace traditional exchange.

2. Decentralized DeFi which allows people to get 8-16% return on their savings rather the silent thief with .2% CD rate with true inflation running at 4-6% while the CPI is rigged to underestimate the true #s

3. Like all technologies, it will follow an exponential tech development phase in which all current things that you see as roadblocks like now will eventually resolve, like cost of trx, scaling, and speed

4. Our next phase of growth will be a global economy in which consumer and producer are directly connected to each other. That step is impossible with existing institutions, policies, and deeply entrenched tech firms seeking to only profit the rich and steal from the poor. Look for further than our supposedly own unbiased Fed Reserve rigging the game from Day 1 to make bankers and people with connections richer, and worsening the economic gap over time. Thanks to the Internet, the mask has been unveiled and more and more people are seeing the value is a decentralized system without bias, even if its performance is worse than traditional system's at current time.

5. Once the infrastructure has been built to resolve the current problems that you have outlined, I see the global economy to be more connected in the future with ensured trust and exponential growth. Some of the possibilities after this will be like:
a. Producers like musicians and artists will have a mean to distribute their products directly to the consumer instead of relying on traditional institutions taking a majority of the cut without producing anyway
b. All means of investment will be tokenized, allowing the mass to put money into deals that only existed to the rich and partake in the growth and profit
c. Product requests are posted on a decentralized exchanges, allowing the best work at the best price from a contractor to be done with public evidence
d. Exchanges are governed by smart contract with low fees, with the cheaters being penalized or kicked out of the system. This can go into all means of doing business to even own delivery system, in which frauds and losses are annually claimed resulting in millions of loss to Amazon.

Right now, the war is being waged on the go to infrastructure for blockchain apps and developers. The winner of this will be the future world currency. Investing in one of these tokens is like investing in a real estate piece of the future digital world economy. Once the infrastructure is built (my estimation in 2-3 years), new ways of doing business will come out of it. For example, I already see the followings:
1. Videos made by producers can now be monetized with 95% of revenue returned back to the content producer, instead of Youtube taking a 60-70% and leaving about 20% cut back the the producer. Same thought process for audio industry.
2. Internet users can now monetize their data in term of web browsing habit, instead of companies like FB, Google, and Apple tracking your activities and selling them off for their own profit

These are just some thoughts, and I haven't done a deep dive into these areas. But, I personally believe that the future companies worth multi-trillions (>10 trillions) will come out of blockchain. For me, the most obvious one right now is TSLA with its autonomous driving tech and its adoption of BTC as a payment system.

I feel like the trend the past 20 years has been for visionary ideas to come out and go on side-tangents into ... life-changing technologies, that ultimately leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth, even though they did for the most part make life better, depending on your definition of 'better.' I.E. eBay, Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter. Uber and AirBnB were supposed to put power in people's hands. It was pretty exciting being able to earn good cash any time you felt like it, with an exciting community of users. And then it became more regulated, and then too many people started relying on it, and now are they really any different than cabs and hotels? I've actually moved back towards the latter to save money and spare logistical headaches - like a traditional bank, traditional hotels are much easier to resolve disputes, deal with fraud or unexpected problems. Basically, there is a hierarchy of human accountability - whereas tech-based services, you are expected to resolve your word against their word, and your dispute is basically evaluated by a bot.

But even further, I just don't see why they decentralized exchanges will (A) remain decentralized in the IMF world and (B) won't raise transaction and trading fees. I except them to drastically go up; or if they don't, they'll hit you some other way other the years, just like every other tech. Funny that 15 years later, YouTube is now the Producer's enemy, despite basically launching every successful teenage artist the past 12 years.

I have no idea what will happen, but I just know that whatever does happen, we are entering some interesting times where there is a whole futures market for decentralized crypto. Global gambling basically. If that's what brings the citizens of Russia, Turkey, China, the US and EU together, so be it. I'm a little shocked that gambling was basically fully legalized before marijuana, but it seems like fully legalizing drugs everywhere would be the simplest way of taking the cartel/mafia money out of crypto. My point is, I'm personally all for deregulations in some sectors, but I don't see the US standing by. I just honestly don't think the current and prior administrations bothered thinking about it.

I'm unsure where autonomous driving goes. I was very high on the idea but when you consider adoption on the mass American market, I just think of 50% of the population being paranoid of 5G antennas and a vaccine produced in labs in Massachusetts and Germany. And to be fair, the margin of error is going to have to be preposterously low on Tesla's end to legally get away with selling fully autonomous cars with no recall blowback. And I just wonder how it would do in areas with higher traffic, worse drivers and worse weather (cough, Chicago). Of course if we're looking at a 2035-40 window, then fair enough.

[CaPiTanAK]

As for the transportation and Amazon example, you’re missing the point, and I’ll clarify the matter here. You the buyer and me the producer end in a smart contract for a transaction.

I, the producer, make the product and deliver it to your door with tracking # and evidence of delivery right at your door. My end is done. You receive the product but then you fraudulently claim that it wasn’t delivered to you. Well that’s not true. You lie and now will be penalized and kicked out of the digital economy. I guess that you’re not seeing my point in because you’re actually assuming true lost or accidents when a portion of bad deals on the Internet is due to bad intentional practices from a party.

That is where smart contract will restore back trust to both parties and will expand the idea into other modes of the global economy. You can expand the thought process further and see the potential in monetary policies.

[CaPiTanAK]

I’m in healthcare. Autonomous driving will be game changing and clearly will improve the quality of lives of seniors who lack transportation access.

[CaPiTanAK]

Sorry, distributed ledger is not about the price of btc. It’s about storing evidence and information that’s secure and immutable. That is a step in establishing trust in a global digital economy that will bring everyone together.

[dougthonus]

I'm unsure where autonomous driving goes. I was very high on the idea but when you consider adoption on the mass American market, I just think of 50% of the population being paranoid of 5G antennas and a vaccine produced in labs in Massachusetts and Germany. And to be fair, the margin of error is going to have to be preposterously low on Tesla's end to legally get away with selling fully autonomous cars with no recall blowback. And I just wonder how it would do in areas with higher traffic, worse drivers and worse weather (cough, Chicago). Of course if we're looking at a 2035-40 window, then fair enough.

I think we'll probably be close than 2035-2040 for the first fully autonomous cars, but it is hard to predict. The problem is mostly solved already, but it's like the last 1% is going to be really hard to close/prove. Another interesting question is would you use autonomous driving if it were 10% slower than driving yourself?

I look forward to when this exists though. Imagine how the car industry would change when you don't need to drive. You'd probably have cars decked out like living rooms with the ability to face each other as common or other totally different features because they woudln't be built around keeping the driver comfortable. You'd also probably stop selling cars to individuals at some point. I buy a service and anytime I need a car, a close by autonomous car comes and gets me. You'd need way fewer cars and could start using your garage for totally different things (and likely stop building garages).

Will be wild to see how long it takes to get there. It's also interesting because it's a skill that a human can do very well and when AI is good enough to do it, it probably also means that AI may start seriously encroaching on other areas. There's going to be a massive job collapse if AI gets powerful enough at some point to take all the intellectual skilled jobs which will require unbelievably large changes in how our society operates. I'm hoping to have retired by then.

[CaPiTanAK]

Finally, the reason why the system is rigged bc not of just tax and spending policies. Our system is rigged bc we are rewarding massively for risk taking activities that result in private profit and socializing losses. Look no further than 0 FED rate that causes skyrocketing valuation on trash companies like Wework Nikola etc... and rewarding untalented people millions. Meanwhile, when the system does crash, we enact bailout policies with 0 Fed rate and paycheck protection plans to protect real estate and stonks, when the 1% owns these asset. At the same time, we rigged the CPI to underestimate true inflation. These policies are nothing more than stealing from the middle class savers through stealth inflation and enriching the already 1%. This is not a conspiracy theory. My thought process is developed from someone who is deeply well versed in economic policies with a practical view of the world and current institutions in place.

[CaPiTanAK]

I'm unsure where autonomous driving goes. I was very high on the idea but when you consider adoption on the mass American market, I just think of 50% of the population being paranoid of 5G antennas and a vaccine produced in labs in Massachusetts and Germany. And to be fair, the margin of error is going to have to be preposterously low on Tesla's end to legally get away with selling fully autonomous cars with no recall blowback. And I just wonder how it would do in areas with higher traffic, worse drivers and worse weather (cough, Chicago). Of course if we're looking at a 2035-40 window, then fair enough.

I think we'll probably be close than 2035-2040 for the first fully autonomous cars, but it is hard to predict. The problem is mostly solved already, but it's like the last 1% is going to be really hard to close/prove. Another interesting question is would you use autonomous driving if it were 10% slower than driving yourself?

I look forward to when this exists though. Imagine how the car industry would change when you don't need to drive. You'd probably have cars decked out like living rooms with the ability to face each other as common or other totally different features because they woudln't be built around keeping the driver comfortable. You'd also probably stop selling cars to individuals at some point. I buy a service and anytime I need a car, a close by autonomous car comes and gets me. You'd need way fewer cars and could start using your garage for totally different things (and likely stop building garages).

Will be wild to see how long it takes to get there. It's also interesting because it's a skill that a human can do very well and when AI is good enough to do it, it probably also means that AI may start seriously encroaching on other areas. There's going to be a massive job collapse if AI gets powerful enough at some point to take all the intellectual skilled jobs which will require unbelievably large changes in how our society operates. I'm hoping to have retired by then.

Think of all the waste space for parking now that can be used for parks, schools, hospitals, and land for housing development. It’s will be a life changer and be 10x the impact of iPhone.

[CaPiTanAK]

Lastly, blockchain is part of AI movement, something that you wouldn’t understand until you go back to the fundamental reason in which Ethereum was created in the first place. Its core concept was to be a world computer powered by additional computer power drawn from multiple computers in the world with decentralized security and immutable evidence stored on a public ledger.

[ImSlower]

Will be wild to see how long it takes to get there. It's also interesting because it's a skill that a human can do very well and when AI is good enough to do it, it probably also means that AI may start seriously encroaching on other areas. There's going to be a massive job collapse if AI gets powerful enough at some point to take all the intellectual skilled jobs which will require unbelievably large changes in how our society operates. I'm hoping to have retired by then.

This is the way.

[CaPiTanAK]

I'm unsure where autonomous driving goes. I was very high on the idea but when you consider adoption on the mass American market, I just think of 50% of the population being paranoid of 5G antennas and a vaccine produced in labs in Massachusetts and Germany. And to be fair, the margin of error is going to have to be preposterously low on Tesla's end to legally get away with selling fully autonomous cars with no recall blowback. And I just wonder how it would do in areas with higher traffic, worse drivers and worse weather (cough, Chicago). Of course if we're looking at a 2035-40 window, then fair enough.

I think we'll probably be close than 2035-2040 for the first fully autonomous cars, but it is hard to predict. The problem is mostly solved already, but it's like the last 1% is going to be really hard to close/prove. Another interesting question is would you use autonomous driving if it were 10% slower than driving yourself?

I look forward to when this exists though. Imagine how the car industry would change when you don't need to drive. You'd probably have cars decked out like living rooms with the ability to face each other as common or other totally different features because they woudln't be built around keeping the driver comfortable. You'd also probably stop selling cars to individuals at some point. I buy a service and anytime I need a car, a close by autonomous car comes and gets me. You'd need way fewer cars and could start using your garage for totally different things (and likely stop building garages).

Will be wild to see how long it takes to get there. It's also interesting because it's a skill that a human can do very well and when AI is good enough to do it, it probably also means that AI may start seriously encroaching on other areas. There's going to be a massive job collapse if AI gets powerful enough at some point to take all the intellectual skilled jobs which will require unbelievably large changes in how our society operates. I'm hoping to have retired by then.

At some point in the future, there will be the working class who works besides AI to augment efficiency and production. That’s the white collar jobs. And then there are the servicing jobs for those to maintain AI infrastructure. And then there will always be the group that owns parts of AI.

Lastly, there will be the unfortunate fews that will be on UBI. As a human being, I hope that these people will be provided adequate basic needs through a prosperous world rather than being abandoned as trash.

[dougthonus]

At some point in the future, there will be the working class who works besides AI to augment efficiency and production. That’s the white collar jobs. And then there are the servicing jobs for those to maintain AI infrastructure. And then there will always be the group that owns parts of AI.

Lastly, there will be the unfortunate fews that will be on UBI. As a human being, I hope that these people will be provided adequate basic needs through a prosperous world rather than being abandoned as trash.

It's hard to say, people definitely thought the same things would happen during the industrial revolution, but I wouldn't be surprised if that we basically all end up on UBI except the top 1% which then more or less start to own everything. That's the direction wealth is trending for the last 30 years as it is.

It will be interesting to see how many people are needed to supplement AI, and if you just cut the jobs in half then the amount you'd have to pay those people would be much less due to competition. Really though it depends how big AI becomes and how good it gets and how long it takes to get there.

There is a chance it is also a problem which is not solved in the near future though or that it is solved but teh compute power is so high that it really isn't cheaper for a long time.

[Wingy]

I'm unsure where autonomous driving goes. I was very high on the idea but when you consider adoption on the mass American market, I just think of 50% of the population being paranoid of 5G antennas and a vaccine produced in labs in Massachusetts and Germany. And to be fair, the margin of error is going to have to be preposterously low on Tesla's end to legally get away with selling fully autonomous cars with no recall blowback. And I just wonder how it would do in areas with higher traffic, worse drivers and worse weather (cough, Chicago). Of course if we're looking at a 2035-40 window, then fair enough.

I think we'll probably be close than 2035-2040 for the first fully autonomous cars, but it is hard to predict. The problem is mostly solved already, but it's like the last 1% is going to be really hard to close/prove. Another interesting question is would you use autonomous driving if it were 10% slower than driving yourself?

I look forward to when this exists though. Imagine how the car industry would change when you don't need to drive. You'd probably have cars decked out like living rooms with the ability to face each other as common or other totally different features because they woudln't be built around keeping the driver comfortable. You'd also probably stop selling cars to individuals at some point. I buy a service and anytime I need a car, a close by autonomous car comes and gets me. You'd need way fewer cars and could start using your garage for totally different things (and likely stop building garages).

Will be wild to see how long it takes to get there. It's also interesting because it's a skill that a human can do very well and when AI is good enough to do it, it probably also means that AI may start seriously encroaching on other areas. There's going to be a massive job collapse if AI gets powerful enough at some point to take all the intellectual skilled jobs which will require unbelievably large changes in how our society operates. I'm hoping to have retired by then.

Think of all the waste space for parking now that can be used for parks, schools, hospitals, and land for housing development. It’s will be a life changer and be 10x the impact of iPhone.

I like all these benefits, but what happens to this system during a pandemic?

[chefo]

First of all I'll pre-say: nothing I say below should be interpreted or is meant to be financial advice.

Ok, now with that out of the way:
* Bitcoin is a purely speculative asset--the only cashflow you can make from it is a percentage of the "borrow" hedge funds pay to short it--as such, it is only worth what somebody thinks it's worth; I've seen people trying to use Metcalfe's law to value it, but that logic has a significant misunderstanding of what Metcalfe's law actually is. I've personally talked to George Gilder who came up with it, and while he's a huge believer in distributed ledgers and crypto-based business solutions as the future, he's skeptical of the way people are using his formulation to attribute value to something that does not fit the very definition of it.

* I was aware of Bitcoin when it was still in double digits (not double K digits), and the joke is on me for not buying a couple of $13K rigs (how much they used to cost). I made the fundamental mistake of being overly thoughtful about something which was a pure lottery ticket (that ended up as a winning one). Why was I skeptical?

1.) To make it truly successful, they had to convince three groups of people:

The consumers:
--I did not see a major reason why they couldn't, if they could truly created a more efficient, frictionless transaction system. A decade into it, they are still a decade away from doing that, just like they were at the very beginning.

The NY Financial Industry:
--As a rule of rule of thumb, the NY bankers hate the guts of the Silicon Valley VC-types and consider them glorified pump-and-dumpers. Given that this thing was backed by said West Coast types, there was going to be some serious friction. Time was going to heal that, however, because you promise the NY and Chicago crowd enough transaction fees and AUM fees and they'll back selling anything to anybody. Which is exactly what happened. The JP Morgans of the world puked on Bitcoin until just very recently when they realized that they can make some serious cash promoting it. Voilla!

The DC Crowd:
That's the toughest crowd. Why? The biggest stick in the US Federal Government's quiver is their status as the predominant reserve currency in the world. Before them it was the Brits, and before them the French, and the Dutch. The benefit of being the reserve currency is that all international trade is priced in your currency and therefore you need to provide it to people, usually through trade deficits. The US is the only country in the world that can run both fiscal and trade deficits without being bankrupted... so long as the USD is the official reserve currency. Having that has increased the standard of living here by a lot. Last time I checked there are over $10 trillion dollars domiciled abroad. Let me explain that in a different way--over the last 5 decades, people from around the world have sent the US $10T worth of labor (services), products and raw materials and all they have gotten in return are digital tokens (the USD) saying we'll pay you back one day.

In DC, the Federal Reserve has so far tolerated Bitcoin because we're still recovering from a crisis and Bitcoin has acted as unofficial stimulus checks, but the moment they reverse course, they'll probably try to squash it. They are not going to sit still and allow a credible competitor to the USD to ever emerge, so long as they can help it. In DC you can kill things through either legislation (won't happen because the Tech lobbyists are incredibly well-funded) or through regulation (which the executive branch can do at will, de facto writing laws). The SEC currently has a couple of SV shills as directors, but if the Fed Chair wants to kill it and explains it the way I laid it our above, they can do it, if they so choose. When the Chinese tried to crack down some time ago, it drove the price down by something like 70%. If the US Federal government ever tries to go after Bitcoin like they went after gold during the Great Depression, they can kill it, should they choose to.

2.) Bitcoin works as a crypto-enhanced ledger. Going back 10 years, IBM had already built a quantum computer that crunches encryption like my dog any food dropped on the floor. The Chinese have now almost finished building theirs. How could crypto-currency survive in an age where cryptography no longer works and the only way to verify the truthfulness of any data will be examining it on the photon level? The best answer I've ever gotten came from a NY hedge fund manager--"we'll deal with it when we have to deal with it." BTW, that same guy and I had a polite conversation about Metcalfe's Law--at the end he said something to the following effect--"It doesn't matter that their math is wrong. So long as the majority believe they are right, they'll keep buying." In other words, if enough people who don't understand it buy it, the price is going higher, regardless if their reasoning is correct or not. Dude was spot on and ran a huge mining operation that made a ton of money.

3.) The hardcore environmental crowd doesn't go after it
These guys can be like locusts the moment they zero in on something they think, believe or know abuses the environment. The fact that the ledger currently eats enough energy to power a medium-sized developed European country has been masterfully swept aside for now. But, it may come back at any time to the forefront any random day. These guys have a LOT of pull in Europe, much more than in the USA.

A couple of more interesting tidbits:

--In the dawn of Bitcoin, the people transacting in it and mining it were bizarre characters and I'm being nice here. The purists who believed in its transactional superiority are by now gone because it has not materialized after a decade in operation and a major fork. The inflationist types who'd buy stuff to hedge the USD are still probably HODLERs. The best thing which happened to it is that the criminal types made its existence worthwhile at the very beginning, while some 'uuge VC tech moguls bought a ton and then started pumping it religiously and non-stop until they convinced institutional NY types of how wonderful of an idea it is. These guys, BTW, control 90% of Bitcoins and one day will dump it, and unless there is demand on the other side of the trade, they'll kill the price and they know it. In other words, even though it's been a transactional failure, they managed to sell it as a "store of value" or "digital gold" (it's not a coincidence that's the image associated with it).

--I don't know how much something like Bitcoin is worth because contrary to what people tell you, there's nothing anybody has come up with which explains it. People want it and chase it, it's worth more. People stop and it will drop. So far, it's been a truly masterful sales job because the early backers managed to sell a half-baked solution as something that it was never meant to be. And people have bought it, hook, line and sinker--which now makes it a legitimate currency instrument.

--I think the valuation of Bitcoin and other crypto is simply a symptom of the world we live in. We live in a world where gambling (the stock market; even many areas of credit markets) has been sold as "investing". Nowadays, valuations are completely detached from reality-- but the crowd buying ARKK and TSLA don't care and won't care until these trades stop working and lead to a couple of complete wipeouts. Maybe they never do, but I suspect at some point there will be a corrective event like in 2000-2002. But, if TSLA is worth $800B, then who is to say how much BTC is worth?

[R3AL1TY]

I doubt the U.S. government will squash Bitcoin since the rich + people in government are investing in it, but there definitely are reports that the government will be monitoring capital gains closely of people making withdrawals from exchanges or deposits to their banks when it comes to crypto. So the money laundering crowd better be careful. However, certain governments of other countries are straight up banning cryptocurrencies.

But the problem with money in general now has to do with the everyday man no longer producing tangible stuff for himself. This even includes cooking. We live in a world revolving mostly around customer service and abstractions with very few corporations producing tangible goods for dense environments (major cities). And everybody is moving to major cities and nearby rural cities are now part of a major city. Once these few corporations can't make money due to the ecological pyramid overturning (the many chasing the few), we are screwed. So we better enjoy the little fruits from our labor, from our business, from stocks, from crypto, etc. for now. Time is ticking.

[Michael Jackson]

I doubt the U.S. government will squash Bitcoin since the rich + people in government are investing in it, but there definitely are reports that the government will be monitoring capital gains closely of people making withdrawals from exchanges or deposits to their banks when it comes to crypto. So the money laundering crowd better be careful. However, certain governments of other countries are straight up banning cryptocurrencies.

But the problem with money in general now has to do with the everyday man no longer producing tangible stuff for himself. This even includes cooking. We live in a world revolving mostly around customer service and abstractions with very few corporations producing tangible goods for dense environments (major cities). And everybody is moving to major cities and nearby rural cities are now part of a major city. Once these few corporations can't make money due to the ecological pyramid overturning (the many chasing the few), we are screwed. So we better enjoy the little fruits from our labor, from our business, from stocks, from crypto, etc. for now. Time is ticking.

They are trying to track Crypto but they also try to track regular currency too. Crypto has more loopholes in it than other laundering services for the moment so it will be utilized. I will say that the majority of people that are real life Marty Byrd's are well aware of this and people like you and I don't have to worry too much about cleaning money (or if you do posting about it on an internet forum isn't wise lol). That being said I am sure a 100% crypto currency makes laundering of the sorts very difficult as there is always a digital trail.

On the later point we passed that tipping point a long time ago I think and the downward momentum is only growing. The bright side is maybe AI is better at governing us than we are ourselves, hey I have to find some silver lining even if I still cry myself to sleep every night thinking about it.

[CaPiTanAK]

In other news, I have been told that JPM the anti crypto bank is on a huge hiring spree right now for Ethereum developers, offering 200+K to freshly grads who are familiar with Solidity.

[MissileMike]

Seems like the push to a dollar is falling short.... at least in the short term

[Bullflip]

In other news, I have been told that JPM the anti crypto bank is on a huge hiring spree right now for Ethereum developers, offering 200+K to freshly grads who are familiar with Solidity.

Yep my friends younger cousin just got hired. Graduate from MIT. Starting salary is $230k with signing bonus of $25k. Paid housing too. Not bad for a new graduate!

[TyrusRose2425]

As expected, this thing fell back down

[TyrusRose2425]

Seems like the push to a dollar is falling short.... at least in the short term

To sell it at $1, you need people willing to buy it at $1. Why would anyone buy at $1 when they know everyone wants to sell at that point?

A stupid **** coin that will see random pumps out of nowhere for the memes but no actual value.