I'm still trying to figure out the fate of Bitcoin...
Cryptocurrency parallels the video game industry in important ways. Early on, Atari was the hegemon (much like Bitcoin) but the company tanked and part of it was that Nolan Bushnell (Atari's founder) was a bit of an old school charlatan who had colluded to circumvent zoning restrictions on arcade game distribution. Bushnell secretly founded his competitor company which then started the zoning violations thus making Atari's infractions simply a necessary capitalist-based measure to remain competitive. Violations were then assured and Bushnell could expand his empire.
However, Nintendo took over the industry in the mid-1980s and never looked back. Part of the way that they secured their future was through certification seals for their games. The seal was mainly for show but it remedied the major mistake made by Atari, namely producing shoddy games but marketing them as high quality fare (see, E.T. game burial site).
So, is Bitcoin an Atari?
I suppose that the value of Bitcoin would never drop below 3000 USD because of the hardware infrastructure of the business itself. You could liquidate that industry and the value would probably justify a 3K pricing per Bitcoin as the currency was dismantled. Of course, that would be a planned demolition and who is to say what the value of Bitcoin would be if individual investors each took more radical means to bail out and abandon ship.
I recently read that they launched a Cryptocurrency stock exchange and I suppose that this would be the best thing to invest in provided that the cryptocurrency that wins the war of attrition doesn't reject that exchange and set up its own (like Nintendo with its certification seals).
Also, Bitcoin was always the top dog that everyone was talking about, especially laymen and curious parties. Perhaps, cryptocurrency regulation and the forging of client trust works better when there are two big daddies, much like Marvel and DC in the comic book industry. Ironically, earlier today someone mentioned this idea of duopolies to me also citing, Apple/Android (smartphone), Coke/Pepsi (soda pop), and Mack/Peterbilt (commercial trucks) as big daddies that stabilized their respective industries.
Cryptocurrency seems quite iffy and unstable right now (understatement of the new millennium). I do have a sense that Bitcoin is the Atari and that we need to wait for the Nintendo to pop up on the scene. I thought that this might have happened after David Solomon took over as CEO of Goldman Sachs. Solomon seemed like the type of eccentric rogue (a more conscientious Elon Musk type character) that could forge new avenues for crytocurrency through using his investment company as a kind of "certifier" for Bitcoin investments and trading. Admittedly, I know very little about economics and crytocurrency even more so, but Goldman Sachs hasn't made any overt overtures toward regulating cryptocurrency since Solomon assumed the chief position.
Although I know little about cryptocurrency, I do know something about the way the mining works, and at present crypto mining is a spurious enterprise to say the least. It is a system that if juxtaposed to the Gold Rush of mid-to-late 19th century. would be akin to the lowly panhandlers becoming the richest benefactors of the enterprise. But, the richest during the gold rush were those that already had capital and who could afford a large crew, supplies, explosives, etc. Individual-based panhandling along the river banks was modest earnings. At present, cryptocurrency is all panhandlers that expect to become billionaires. This fantasy thinking is unsustainable ideologically and it will make big players in banking and investment apprehensive about getting involved in the market. Why would the currently resourceful investors in the world join along with relative plebs and thus shift the balance of power while vastly increasing the distribution of wealth? What is the incentive for them - that it is the currency of the future? Not good enough.
When a new crytocurrency pops up that big players are excited about and which has reliable methods of regulation and self-regulation that effectively safeguard against charlatans and beggars from turning the economy into a lottery, then I would say invest in that crypto, but until then just hang onto your money and accept being fleeced by banks for the time being.
LowBrowsing News Blog
I lost interest in Twitter back in 2012. I tried "free speech" platforms recently but found them wanting.