Deutsche Bank Celebrates ‘Dollar Day’ by Accidentally Shilling Bitcoin

When the fat-cats at Deutsche Bank instructed their social media interns to draft a tweet commemorating National Dollar Day, they probably didn’t …
deutsche bank shills bitcoindeutsche bank shills bitcoin

German financial giant Deutsche Bank has accidentally made the case for Bitcoin while commemorating National Dollar Day. | Source: Shutterstock

When the fat-cats at Deutsche Bank instructed their social media interns to draft a tweet commemorating National Dollar Day, they probably didn’t realize that they’d accidentally end up shilling Bitcoin to their more than 650,000 followers.

But while the Bitcoin isn’t directly mentioned, it’s difficult to imagine anyone writing a better advertisement for the leading cryptocurrency.

It’s #NationalDollarDay! #OTD in 1786, Congress established the US monetary system and introduced the US dollar. In today’s money, one dollar from 1791 would be equivalent to 27.60 USD.

— Deutsche Bank (@DeutscheBank) August 8, 2019

Is Deutsche Bank a closeted Bitcoin admirer?

In the tweet, Deutsche Bank observes that since the U.S. monetary system was established on this day in 1786, the dollar has lost tremendous purchasing power. The German multinational notes that the equivalent of a single dollar from 1791 now has the purchasing power of about $27.60 today.

You do not need years of exposure to Bitcoin to appreciate that Deutsche Bank has by implication turned a negative spotlight on the world’s favorite reserve currency – and by extension, the worldwide fiat currency regime. The bank inadvertently made a case for an anti-inflationary currency that is not printed at the whim of unelected government bureaucrats.

With the maximum number of Bitcoins that will ever be in circulation capped at 21 million, the cryptocurrency was designed to be free of the inflationary risks that all fiat currencies have proven to be susceptible to. This was stated unambiguously in the Bitcoin whitepaper:

“Once a predetermined number of coins have entered circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation free.”

And yet the dollar is hardly the world’s worst fiat currency…

Deutsche Bank’s celebration of a fiat currency that has lost its purchasing power dramatically over the years is all the more significant for Bitcoin since the dollar is one of the world’s strongest currencies.

As of last year’s third quarter, the U.S. dollar constituted close to 62 percent of all the foreign exchange reserves held by central banks across the world.

Bitcoin vs USD on national dollar dayBitcoin vs USD on national dollar day
U.S. dollar dominance as a reserve currency | Source: Statista

This means that if your wealth is held in the dollar and you are a little apprehensive over its declining purchasing power, you should be outright panicking if you are holding other fiat currencies.

Bitcoin offers freedom from the tyranny of fiat

So how bad can it get? Well, unchecked printing of money by central banks has in the past led to the total collapse of fiat currencies with Europe, Latin America, and Africa offering standout cases.

Germany’s Papiermark in the 1920s is a perfect example from the 20th century when yearly inflation rose to over 300 million percent in the European country. Most recently, Zimbabwe provided another example of why a hard-capped cryptocurrency is the future when inflation rose to 500 quintillion percent.

Fortunately, there is no need to repeat these same mistakes in the 21st century with Satoshi Nakamoto already having gifted us the solution: Bitcoin.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are solely those of the author and do not represent those of, nor should they be attributed to, CCN.

Bitcoin Price Could Surpass $15000 This Week: Max Keiser

Supporters have been said for years that a money system that wasn’t controlled by a central government is a much better alternative fiat currencies as …
max keiser bitcoin price predictionBitcoin Price


Matthew Hrones| Aug 04, 2019 | 01:56

Early Bitcoin investor Max Keiser tweeted today that he foresees Bitcoin price smashing through the $15,000 mark sometime this week amid troubles with centralized government and banking

The Bulls are Back in Town

The price of Bitcoin has made a noticeable comeback this summer, coming from a low of $5,500 in early May to a top of nearly $13,000 in late June. Since then, the markets have cooled off putting the price of a single Bitcoin to $10,700 at the time of writing. On top of this bullish trend, BTC dominance has also been on the climb, from bouncing around 50% to over 65% as of today.

Max Keiser, Founder of Heisenberg Capital, has been buying Bitcoin since the days it was worth only a dollar. Over the years he has been very vocal in his support for cryptocurrencies, encouraging others to invest and building within the space. He also is a strong believer in Bitcoin Maximalism, talking often about how the value in the cryptocurrencies space will flow into Bitcoin. Today on Twitter, he made his predictions on where he sees the price of BTC going in the short term.

I’m sensing #Bitcoin will cross $15,000 this week. Confidence in central governments, central banks, and centralized, fiat money is at a multi-decade low.

— Max Keiser, tweet poet. (@maxkeiser) August 3, 2019

While this prediction may be a bit optimistic, it is based off a major selling point of crypto-currencies over their centralized, state-backed counterparts; decentralization.

Separation of money and state

Bitcoin is unique, its the first value transfer system that wasn’t controlled by a third party actor. Supporters have been said for years that a money system that wasn’t controlled by a central government is a much better alternative fiat currencies as there would be a safe, stable supply and be immune from federal monetary policy. And in the long run, that may hold true.

Fears of a worldwide economic turn down have been spreading between economists lately, as the US-China trade war escalates and Britain heads faster and faster towards a no-deal Brexit, something that would send the region’s economy into chaos.

On top of these uncertainties affecting the market, many economists are predicting a general economic slowdown due to the explosion of several world economies over the last decade. In some countries, such as Venezuela and Zimbabwe, have experienced huge inflation rates over the last decade. Even with Bitcoins wild price swings, it can still be better than their local currencies. As economies all over the world run into more and more issues, many people may start to consider decentralized alternatives such as BTC or Bitcoin Cash to save or spend their money.

Where do you think Bitcoin’s price will be going to the next few weeks? Are worldwide economic issues good for Bitcoin? Let us know down in the comments below!

Images courtesy of Bitcoinist Media Library

Related Posts:

  • No Related Posts

Does Bitcoin Scarcity Limit Its Use Case as a Medium of Exchange?

Writing for the Motley Fool Monday, investment planner Sean Williams avers that Bitcoin’s economic architecture inherently limits its possibilities with a …

Writing for the Motley Fool Monday, investment planner Sean Williams avers that Bitcoin’s economic architecture inherently limits its possibilities with a Catch-22. He says “Bitcoin’s Catch-22 Will Keep It From Spurring a Monetary Revolution.”

He argues that the very bitcoin scarcity (which is hard-coded into the bitcoin protocol) that has made the digital asset precious, and thus driven the astounding bitcoin price increases over the last decade, will also make it impossible for bitcoin to scale to a mass global payments and banking system:

“…the supply of bitcoin is limited to 21 million tokens, with annual inflation of the existing token base, which currently stands at roughly 17.8 million tokens, of less than 4%.”

Of Satoshi Nakamoto’s design, Williams concludes:

The reason bitcoin won’t be able to lead a monetary revolution is that it’s held hostage by a Catch-22: Its ‘scarce’ token coin and its utility as a medium of payment work in opposition to one another.”

The Motley Fool commentator reasons:

The reality is that bitcoin can have either perceived scarcity or utility, but not both. With its current token count, it could never seriously challenge fiat currencies, but this relative undersupply has helped keep the price of tokens high. Meanwhile, substantially upping the token count would allow for increased utility, but the resulting inflation would kill the perception of scarcity and likely ravage bitcoin’s token price.”

Bitcoin As ‘Digital Gold’

The problem with Sean Williams’ argument against bitcoin mass adoption is he doesn’t really substantiate it. He never explains why a scarce, deflationary commodity could not be used on a global scale as a mass payments and banking system. And he makes no attempt to refute the obvious rebuttal that gold, another precious commodity of limited supply, once served as a global payment and banking utility.

This is an obvious counter-argument because bitcoin has so often been compared to gold, even by its critics and competitors, and referred to as “digital gold,” because it was deliberately designed to digitally simulate the salient properties of gold that made gold and national currencies backed by it the most trusted medium exchange for many years in modern history. Gold’s scarcity was among the most critical of those properties.

The Golden Age

As James Chen chronicles at Investopedia:

The classical gold standard began in England in 1819 and spread to France, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and the United States. Each government pegged its national currency to a fixed weight in gold. For example, by 1879, U.S. dollars were convertible to gold at a rate of $20.67 per ounce. These parity rates were used to price international transactions. Other countries later joined to gain access to Western trade markets.”

This gold standard era persisted, with some interruptions and gradual monetary policy defacements, but more or less intact until 1971, when Richard Nixon suspended convertibility of U.S. dollars to gold. Far from limiting economic growth because of gold scarcity, the era of the gold standard saw an explosion in economic productivity, and widespread increases in standards of living unprecedented in human history.

During the last third of the 19th Century, per capita income doubled in the United States, even as its population doubled, with millions of immigrants moving to North America to work in the gold standard economy. Unlike a fiat economy based on credit, the scarcity of the gold-backed monetary system limited the mis-allocation of resources to unproductive uses through over-consumption and mal-investment with easy money. Another hard money era inaugurated by the likes of bitcoin is not only possible, it could unleash another “golden era” of explosive economic growth.

No need to worry how to spend your bitcoin if this scenario obtains, and even the smallest division of a bitcoin (one one hundred millionth of a bitcoin– a satoshi) becomes more valuable than a cup of coffee. Second layer technologies like Lightning Network will make sub-satoshi denominations possible.

Disclaimer: The author owns a small amount of his savings in Bitcoin and Binance Coin. He holds investment positions in the coins, but does not engage in short-term or day-trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Related Posts:

  • No Related Posts

Why Does Bitcoin Have Value? What Gives BTC Its Intrinsic Value?

What is the intrinsic value of Bitcoin and why is bitcoin valuable? … the founder of the Austrian School of Economics, who redefined the way we think …

What is the intrinsic value of Bitcoin and why is bitcoin valuable?

Many have asked this question since the king of cryptocurrency market came into existence back in 2009. Throughout the years we valued it mostly through the lense of its USD price, which certainly had its ups and downs.

We saw this metric culminate at the tail end of 2017 when Bitcoin reached an all-time high at just above $20,000, after one of the most remarkable bull markets the investment world had ever seen. As we are all well familiar, the moon quickly turned red and the year of 2018 saw a strong price retraction, one that is seemingly not over yet.

As Bitcoin hovers just below $4000 the question from the start of this article remains more relevant than ever: does Bitcoin even have any value at all?


Many believe that the answer is no. Howard Marks, the man who manages $90 billion for Oaktree Capital, wrote to his investors that “digital currencies are nothing but an unfounded fad (or perhaps even a pyramid scheme), based on a willingness to ascribe value to something that has little or none beyond what people will pay for it.” Warren Buffett, outspoken Bitcoin opponent, claimed recently that “Bitcoin has no unique value at all. It doesn’t produce anything.

You can stare at it all day and no little Bitcoins come out. It’s a delusion basically.” So are these naysayers correct in their outlandish claims? Let’s look into the concept of intrinsic value before answering the question above.

Bitcoin intrinsic value

The concept was originally introduced by classical economic theorists who believed in the “Labor Theory of Value”, where a certain good was considered as valuable as the labor that was put into making it.

This theory was later on dismissed, as it is pretty clear that how hard you work on something doesn’t really determine how valuable that something is. The concept of intrinsic value was later expanded by Carl Menger, the founder of the Austrian School of Economics, who redefined the way we think about the problem by introducing the Subjective Theory of Value.

This theory tells us that the fundamental valuation of something has certain speculative and subjective elements to it. Finding the intrinsic value of an asset requires fundamental analysis of said asset.

We analyze the labor and resources that were put into creating it, the asset’s utility, scarcity and market demand for it, and many other relevant fundamental factors. With this analysis it’s important to note that different people can potentially have different valuations for the same fundamental, which will inevitably lead to them having different valuations of the good itself.

Take a loaf of bread as an example. The labor and resourcesrequired to make one loaf of bread objectively aren’t that valuable. However,its value will be heavily influenced by subjective details like how scarcebread/food in general is. Someone who just ate might not value a loaf of breadvery highly, but someone who hasn’t eaten in days might be willing to pay quitea hefty price for that same piece of bread.

What gives bitcoin its value? How is bitcoin valued?

How does this translate to the world of cryptocurrency, andnamely Bitcoin? Looking at it from a distance, Bitcoin is nothing more than anoverhyped hodge-podge of various technologies from the 90’s that some nerds areusing to trick young and naïve individuals out of their value. But have youever stopped to wonder how “real” your money actually is and what is theintrinsic value of your average fiat currency?

In the olden days when the concept of money was implemented to improve the way people exchanged goods, it certainly had intrinsic value. Before money existed, people relied on goods-for-goods exchange, where one side would provide a certain good and in return would receive the good they wanted.

Let’s just say that if you were a potato grower who wanted to enrich his palette with some tomatoes, you had to find a tomato producer who was willing to accept your potatoes in exchange for his goods. Introducing money, the ultimate universal good, into the mix, made commerce/trade quicker, more practical and ultimately led to creation of the economy as we know it today.

This intrinsic value of fiat money seems to be lost today, as the thing seems to more often than not stand in the path of creating a truly global, free economy of the future. Every country has its own national currency, currency which is often times backed by nothing other than the government forcing it as the state’s legal tender.

Earliest implementations of fiat were such that the money was partially backed by gold, silver and valuables; today’s money is basically fiduciary, aka backed by faith in the government that issues it. The supply of this money isn’t limited, meaning that the country can create additional units of the currency at its own behest to control the value. Ultimately, what you have with fiat is a piece of paper/a coin that is as valuable as you are ready to be forced into believing it is.


One stick that is often used to beat fiat money with is the fact that financial institutions are woefully slow when transferring it, even on a local level. International transfers are a story of their own; it’s sometimes faster to physically transfer the actual product that you want to buy from another country than it is to deliver the payment for said product to the merchant you bought the product from.

Some experiments (like the Euro) have attempted to create bridge currencies that would create a more united world market, but the issues and the friction still remain. Ultimately, having a global economy with a wide palette of means of exchange can significantly slow down commerce.

We all know these issues exist, as we are faced with them on a daily basis. We are aware that we labor 40 hours a week to receive a piece of paper whose value proposition is backed only by our trust that the government knows what it’s doing.

Thing is, most of the times it doesn’t. Additionally, we also know how long it takes to send money to someone abroad, how much it costs, and how banks don’t work on weekends. If we are to use the analogy from above in the article, fiat money can be seen as nothing more than a paper printing scheme used by bankers to trick naïve investors out of their value.

Bitcoin’s intrinsic value stems exactly from offering an alternative to the current financial system, an alternative that can potentially solve all of the problems listed above. It can one day become the distributed payment network of the entire planet, a decentralized, limited-supply reserve currency that will be available to anyone, anywhere, anytime.

Bitcoin looks to support and ultimately dethrone national fiat currencies and global financial institutions of today with its ability to provide global seamless, cheap, nearly instant and anonymous commerce and value storage.

In its ultimate form, Bitcoin exhibits all the features oneuniversal exchange good needs to have. Perfect Bitcoin is:

  • Fungible – Each Bitcoin is the same as the nextone and are perfectly interchangeable.
  • Non-Consumable – Cannot be consumed.
  • Extremely portable – You can hold/transport Bitcoinon almost any device that can access the internet; there were stories of peoplestoring their Bitcoin on smart washing machines.
  • Durable – Cannot be destroyed.
  • Highly Divisible – Can be split into lowerincrements (satoshis).
  • Secure – Cannot be counterfeited.
  • Easily transactable – Transactions with Bitcoin usuallytake several seconds to complete; this does depend on network congestion.
  • Scarce – A total supply of 21 million.
  • Not issued by a single entity – Isn’t sovereign(government issued) like fiat.
  • Decentralized – Depends on a network of decentralizednodes.
  • Smart – Can have additional features added toit.

Such a good has the potential to disrupt the way our economyworks and maybe even usher in a new step in its overall evolution.

There is also some “real world” value behind it, as there seems to be a heavy correlation with the price of Bitcoin and the marginal cost of mining it. Satoshi Nakamoto, the father of Bitcoin, introduced the concept of “mining” into his creation in a brilliant ploy to slowly increase the cryptocurrency’s supply and motivate network validators to keep doing their job.

Bitcoin mining is essentially a process during which Bitcoin nodes construct blocks out of Bitcoin transactions and then solve complicated cryptographic problems in order to add these blocks to the Bitcoin blockchain.

Mining is an extremely resource-intensive activity; it requires heavy infrastructural investment (getting the proper hardware) and also spends a lot of electricity. All of this costs money; some sources suggest that the current marginal cost of mining a single Bitcoin sits at around $4,300. If we look at the current Bitcoin price, we can see that we are pretty close to these levels. Many fundamental analysts believe that Bitcoin’s price will never fall much below the marginal cost of its mining; if we were to believe them, we might even come to a conclusion that the bottom of the current bear market is actually in.

One additional source of real world value Bitcoin’s itsadoption. Even with the technology being in early, painful stages ofdevelopment, people are more and more willing to use it for transfers,purchases and even value storage. The value of one good is determined by the peoplewho want to use it; with Bitcoin, the number of these people seems to be growingby the day.

In conclusion

Most of Bitcoin’s value is currently tied to its potentialand there are some real issues that it needs to address before fulfilling saidpotential. Problems with network scalability, coin fungibility, anonymity,abstract problems like Bitcoin’s ties to illegal markets are among most oftenmentioned problems of the existing Bitcoin infrastructure. Even with Bitcoin insuch a state, more and more people seem to realize that decentralizedblockchains represent a significant upgrade from the “normie” financialinfrastructure and classical banking, both of which haven’t evolved much (if atall) during the past 100 years.

All of this brings us back to the initial question: What IS Bitcoin’sintrinsic value? It’s difficult to give an exact answer to this question as valueis overall subjective. What things come down to is how much people really need Bitcoin;in a world where centralization and century-old financial practices seem toslow us down at every step of the way, this need might be greater than most ofus realize. Only time will tell when (and if) this need will be recognized.

Ads by Cointraffic

Join Our Telegram Channelor Follow @CaptainAltcoin

CaptainAltcoin’s writers and guest post authors may or may not have a vested interest in any of the mentioned projects and businesses. None of the content on CaptainAltcoin is investment advice nor is it a replacement for advice from a certified financial planner.The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of

Related Posts:

  • No Related Posts

Giacomo Zucco Talks Bitcoin, Privacy and Why He Hates Coinbase

I don’t like the term “crypto” very much anymore, since today it mostly refer to …. In order to truly understand how bitcoin works, Mahmudov, a financial …

Giacomo Zucco

Giacomo Zucco is a Bitcoin consultant and educator. With a background in theoretical physics, his attentions have turned increasingly to Bitcoin since 2012, and his commentary, insights and humour have made him one of the must-follow figures on Crypto Twitter.

I asked Giacomo a few questions on Bitcoin, privacy, ETFs, and why he dislikes Coinbase. 

How did you get into crypto?

I don’t like the term “crypto” very much anymore, since today it mostly refer to things I don’t follow or promote in any way.

I got into Bitcoin initially in late 2012, when I started to learn about it from very different angle: as “dark web money” in the agorist and pro-privacy groups I was following, as the “new gold standard” in the Austrian and anti-central-banking groups I was following, as a new interesting technology among co-workers (I was working in legacy payment systems back then). I was impressed by the way Bitcoin was linking so many very different aspect of my life and interests. My wife suggested me to quit my regular job and to go full time into Bitcoin in May 2013. I did it.

How would you describe what you would do?

I consult big incumbent companies about Bitcoin (both in terms of economics and in a technical capacity), I teach some Bitcoin classes in universities and private academies, I collect and funnel donations from incumbents to Bitcoin non-profit FLOSS development.

What do you see as the most important property of Bitcoin: Store of Value? Medium of exchange? Not being able to confiscate it? Something else?

All of the above descriptions are valid, important and somehow correlated. I think that “state-resistant ideal money” would probably sum everything up. Of course some functions of money will be evident chronologically before others: for example today the “store of value” function is more important and general than the “medium of exchange” one, which is mostly relegated to some very specific niches. But they are connected in a deep way, at the end of the day. Bitcoin is “hard money” (difficult to create, inflate, manipulate) and “dark money” (difficult to track, confiscate, censor), enforced by technological means in a world where hard and dark money have been banned politically.

What would you say to critics who think proof-of-work is too energy intensive and damaging to the environment?

Huge energy consumption in Bitcoin is a requirement, not a bug. It’s by design, not by accident. The only way to make something hard to produce, is to make it expensive to produce. There’s no other way around. The “waste” argument is often used to spread flawed arguments about Bitcoin being “environmentally-unfriendly.”

This is not the case, for several reasons.

First, energy in PoW is not any more “wasted” than in any other production process for any other (physical or intellectual) good: it’s actually used, not wasted. Second, the consumption of energy is likely going to remain lower than historical alternatives (we are talking orders of magnitude less than the energy consumption for gold extraction during the gold standard, for example). Third, entrepreneurs generating PoW in to get bitcoins aren’t incentivised to consume more energy: if anything, ceteris paribus, they are incentivised to consume less energy for the same computation (for them energy is a cost, not a revenue), increasing optimization and efficiency with new technological breakthroughs or with generation choices that can have a waterfall effect on other energy-consuming industries.

Are you excited about Lightning?

Yes, of course. I was always concerned for the fungibility problems created by the blockchain design (less so for the scalability ones, but those are relevant too). Lightning Network is a very elegant solution to increase fungibility and privacy in Bitcoin. It will also enable in a very trust-minimized and pretty censorship-resistant way many use cases that would have had otherwise relegated to trust-based and censorship-prone alternatives. It’s also a layer where you can experiment more, with less concerns for security or consensus-critical design choice and more focus on UX.

Do you think improved privacy will damage Bitcoin’s reputation and possibly slow mainstream adoption?

Not at all, actually the other way around. There isn’t a single reason in the world Bitcoin should be adopted if it seriously lacks privacy. If you want to use monetary systems where you get spied upon, tracked, censored, robbed, you already have plenty of legacy options, which are already widespread and supported everywhere.

Do you think an ETF will be good for Bitcoin?

There will be pros and cons, but I tend to lean toward a “yes,” mostly. Real Bitcoin users will still have to use Bitcoin for real, but Bitcoin “speculators”, who don’t need Bitcoin directly for its own property, but who just (reasonably enough) want to be exposed to “Bitcoin-flavored risk”, for sound reasons of portfolio un-correlation, will need these kind of legacy tools. And in the end I think they will help the real Bitcoin indirectly. Of course there are some risks of centralization, manipulation, fractional reserve…but they should stay mostly limited on the legacy market, leaving the real Bitcoin network mostly unaffected, at least in the long run.

Do you believe in any projects other than bitcoin? If you had to pick 3, what would they be?

Sure, I do. There are many project I love and follow other than Bitcoin, even just remaining in the field of FLOSS projects. If I had to pick 3, they would be: the Tor protocol, the Bittorrent protocol, the PGP protocol (even if I think the latter would need a very strong UX redesign to be used by “normal people”). The more governments around the world make the Internet impossible to use in freedom and independence, the more such projects, along with Bitcoin and others, will help to make such efforts ultimately useless.

Why do you dislike Coinbase?

For many different reasons. The first, and more general, is that I don’t like “crypto start-ups” which operate in the same exact way as traditional banks. Why I said before that I think more traditional, regulated tools like ETFs certainly have their own utility. If you need that kind of stuff I think it would be more reasonable to get it from your banks, not from newcomers that pretend to be anything new, when they are in fact just a bank. Secondly, they spread a lot of confusion by falsely promoting their own custodian (banking) service as a “wallet”, so much so that I still meet people who think they are using a Bitcoin Wallet because they have some bitcoin-denominated credit on the Coinbase bank. But these are just very mild criticisms.

Then Coinbase started to support (and in some case even ‘lead’) basically every kind of attack against Bitcoin, from the one launched by the R3CEV employee (and government contractor) Mike Hearn, to the recent so call “New York Agreement.”

When supporting said attacks, Coinbase spokespersons have promoted blatant lies and falsehoods, spreading misconceptions and confusion about Segregated Witness, BTC1 broken implementation, etc. Since my business is mostly education, I dislike people whose business is mostly active disinformation.

Then they started to support all kind of scammy clones of Bitcoin, always promoting them as “better bitcoins,” often lying about their features, risks and trade-offs, sometimes even actively manipulating their market with organized pumps (like they did with Bcash).

Again: they shut down, as a payment processor, many users for political reasons only: from Gab to Wikileaks. When they went after users for allegedly “legal” reasons, they often went way ahead of their legal obligation, by actively sharing user information with government agencies even without subpoenas.

Recently, they acquired an Italian startup focused on deanonymizing and spying upon Bitcoin users, whose members were also famous for helping dictatorships and authoritarian governments to track down and kill political dissidents and other targets.

Many people started to give a hard time to Coinbase about this last scandal, but I think this acquisition does align pretty well with the general ethical standards of that company. Also, in the PR-crisis management attempts, they revealed several other bad things, such as previous leaks and sales of private user information.

You called Craig Wright the Greatest Showman. Do you think it is a good idea for crypto media to give him coverage?

Well, at this point I am seriously conflicted.

At the beginning my answer to this question would have been a clear “no, it isn’t.” But then many people with poor understanding of our “space”, especially in the media, started to give actual credit to his hilarious claims (also under the pressure of former Bitcoin “VIPs”, like Gavin Andresen, supporting Craig’s fraud), then it probably become reasonable to start covering the topic again, at least to debunk all the fake “evidence” like forged PGP signatures, post-dated blog entries, post-dated PGP keys, fake handwritten signatures on legal documents, and so on. Then it came a phase in which I was worried again we were giving him too much coverage.

But recently, especially after his tons of daily “announcements” about new patents, new academic papers and new Bitcoin 0day exploits, after the obvious copy-cuts and plagiarism, after the wrong “hello world” programming attempt, after his hysterical tales about South American adventures with drug lords…well…I think that at this point whoever still gives him any credibility is literally beyond help. For people with any kind of grasp on reality is already pretty obvious that he is actually a con-man … as for the others, there’s nothing we can really do anymore, probably, at this point.

What in your opinion does crypto media get wrong about bitcoin and the industry in general?

Many things, unfortunately. First, the fact that Bitcoin is not mostly a technological revolution, but a monetary revolution.

Second, the (frankly incredible) fact that Bitcoin seems to work as expected (at least so far) doesn’t mean that now every extraordinary claim should be accepted (or even just necessarily investigated, when time and resources are scarce) without extraordinary evidence. Ultimately, the fact that there isn’t really any “crypto” industry: there is the Bitcoin revolution, along with thousands of projects before it and around it.

Related Posts:

  • No Related Posts