/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>56559275

Have you considered alerting the darknet about your conclusions? They still seem hellbent on going Monero-only.

>>55930630
>How much daily volume does monero get on darknet?

As XMR keeps taking market share from BTC, more and more.

>>55668400

Yes, its very bullish for a so-called "privacy coin" when it ISN'T perceived as a viable threat to the State. The less of a threat it is the more effective it clearly becomes.

lol and mainstream adoption requires the State's permission. And that will never happen because govt-issued CBDCs will obviously be given priority and likely a monopoly in the mainstream economy.

Historically, every privacy-preserving technology actually worth a damn has been adopted by the darknet and ransomware sectors first e.g. Tor/I2P, PGP and now Monero. Turns out that truly viable privacy tech sells itself, it doesn't need an army of jeets shilling it on social media.

DIST isn't even a blip on the radar, nobody in the privacy/OPSEC space gives a shit about it and it will go the way of all coattail-riding scamcoins.

>>55588292
>You shilled that conveniently cropped paper constantly to demonstrate Bitcoin's price was artificially high.

The price *is* artificially high, that's entirely the point of price manipulation. BTC's price before the manipulation kicked off in 2013 was circa $150.

>The second someone actually read it showing evidence that BTC's price is artificially low, you shift goalposts, which is impressive.

lol how about you try actually reading the paper? The price manipulations specified are all UPWARD manipulation, not DOWNWARD manipulation, there's absolutely no suggestion of deliberate price suppression.

>The paper's conclusion isn't price is meaningless

it literally uses the world "meaningless"

>price analysis of bitcoin over the suspect periods is likely meaningless
>bitcoin’s price cannot be indicative of market psychology.

>Whales increasing Bitcoin's volatility in pursuit of short term gains

lol so you finally agree there is in fact rampant fraud and price manipulation occurring?


>but that price analysis takes volatility into concern since volatility increases risk

Yeah, price manipulation is harmful and inhibits rational investors, its hardly a revelation.


>The paper's conclusion is that if their shenanigans were mitigated, the price of Bitcoin would be 40% higher.

In theory. In theory, things could also go the other way, especially since fraud is involved.

>In theory at least, substantial mitigation of bitcoin price manipulation would increase bitcoin’s value by about 40%, based on a naïve Capital Asset Pricing Model.

The same would also apply to any other asset, btw.

>The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) is the most popular model of the determination of expected returns on securities and other financial assets.

And then you have to ask: 40% of what? What is the "correct" BTC price? What if the actual demand for BTC is waaaaaaaay lower than we all think? It's already losing its primary source of organic demand for the past decade.

>>53856108
>if you get a domain, can they later take it away from you and take down your site?

Yes. The only truly "unstoppable" site is a hidden service you host yourself, assuming you're not deanonymized.

>>52733219

Based.

>>52256323
Based.