Sartorial Alacrity

I operate only in the shadows.

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

Are you serious? So your solution is to "compensate" existing holders who saw their positions shrink 90+% against that depressed valuation and then launch a new token that recaptures all that value for new holders? Why not simply do a migration to the new token if you are standing by your old holders?

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@20xxcorp 7Dqcq4iUEeHtKS8rdvuzJuG7CrJDbTxAV9ttCYY4C698

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@kashdhanda @humidifi @JupiterExchange Cool!

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@mavensbot

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@ZssBecker FeNHoyiPwSBNYMGqHNkujA6h42FDp3pt1Mo6zV3jHk3t

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

Totally agree. Very reasonable to continually reassess whether you got in for the right or wrong reasons, say in light of new developments or information. But I think ossification is a big part of what makes art a valuable proposition, even when there is an element of fortuitousness or arbitrariness to initial success tbh.

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@Saint_Pump What about this part: "The Secretaries of Treasury and Commerce are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional bitcoin, provided that those strategies have no incremental costs on American taxpayers." / Does this not allow for reallocation into more?

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@BobBodily @cbspears @blockspace Are you going to add support for runes that didn't originate on odin fun at some point

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@TaprootWizards @grok @xai about as janky as I could possibly muster!

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@69420xyz Mmmmmm, nothing like some coffud right in the morning😂

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

Yah, everyone writes the narrative to describe what's happened, but retrodictively. The entire alt market outside of the majors drew down by 80-90%, but it's runes that are the problem? If anything, that kind of untethered fud makes me think we're on to something haha

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@udiWertheimer @businessmaneth Not sure who this is, but Udi told me to block him and it was an easier than taking a stupid shower.

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@DrOrdinals @billydollarcat Amen - billy to billionSSSSS

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@MagicNetMoney @bitcoinwizardry @btcordinal @OrdinalMaxiBiz ofc

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@The0xJuan Ahem, billionS

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

@digitalartchick I actually think it's the same people making those jokes that are mad at his tweet, not because it's offensive in the same vein, but specifically because it's something else of that same ilk they would make fun of

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

I'm an eth bull too, but this is a pretty disingenuous post on the whole, in that it makes a number of dubious assumptions:

1. Price won't continue to "moon" as you put it, though all indications are that it will.
2. Though you mentioned it, you glossed over the option where fees increase; but this ignores the immense and fruitful development occurring on bitcoin right now. To wit, we already have ordinals (non fungibles) and runes (fungibles), with an entire btc defi system being built out. With OP_CAT possibly coming this year, expect this development to accelerate exponentially.
3. Ok, let's grant the assumption that quantum computing will crack bitcoin in ~10 years. Firstly, that gives plenty of time to calmly migrate to quantum resistant addresses. But, secondly, even if Satoshi's wallet is cracked, you make the assumptions that i) the people that crack it will be ill-intentioned and ii) that they will market sell it all immediately. These last two are particularly bizarre to me, when market participants en aggregate are hugely incentivized to have well-intentioned people be the ones to crack it. Not only does this leave plenty of world assignments where there is no substantial sell pressure on bitcoin due to Satoshi's wallet being cracked, but even in the worst case scenario, btc has tolerated 98% drawdowns in its history before and bounced back to make new ATHs within normal (cylical) timeframes.
4. ETH somehow "fixes" this by offering a consensus mechanism which does not substantially differ from the current traditional financial system, in that the more ETH you own and stake, the more voting power you have. Unlike with PoW, which requires specialized and extremely expensive infrastructures to participate, there are no such barriers to entry when it comes to staking. You simply buy ETH and stake. This is an affront to the entire purpose/innovation of cryptocurrency imo.

In any case, I do love ETH, but strongly side with the position that it is not in any way, shape or form a "money"; but that instead it is a utile gas whose value is a function of how much people use the platform. Positioning it as both--including marketing it as a "BTC killer"--sets unrealistic and, frankly, silly expectations that will only harm its progress imo. Anyway, just my two sats!

[Sartorial Alacrity @SartorialAlac]

You're giving one data point for this, which just so happened to occur during a cyclical bear market, so how are you determining whether the lag is being caused by endogenous factors or exogenous factors (i.e. QT/QE)? Go back to 2017, which just so happens to mirror this cycle well and is the analogous timeframe cyclically speaking: that alt mania occurred when QT was simply paused (i.e. no QE)