π¨Chamath Palihapitiya believes Bitcoin will get hacked and go to ZERO.
Chamath says if AI is aimed at crypto, the obvious target would be "Satoshi's wallet," to "drain the wallet and then go short."
What's your take?
My 2 cents on the Ledger/hardware wallet discussion.
You should always have cold storage wallets that require multisig. 3 keys ideally.
If one or two failure points occur from a hack or compromise, you are still protected.
The scariest moment of my life is when all my wildest dreams came true and I was still depressed
I was happier when dreams were still just a goal
The happiest moment of my life is when I met God
@0xmarketsurfers It's interesting because open interest is below levels that we had lower. Feels like people aren't aping/positioning long as much as we'd think here.
So perhaps a move up wouldn't let the majority of people win.
I used to think you could never be too late to Bitcoin.
I still mostly believe that. Fiat will continue trending toward zero measured in BTC. It may never be too late to cash out of other assets and into Bitcoin.
But AI adds a new dimension.
For all of human history, you could always start with nothing, sell your labor, accumulate capital, and invest that capital into productive assets.
Super Intelligence could radically alter that equation.
If SI makes labor dramatically less scarce over the next 5β10 years, earning your way into meaningful ownership of scarce assets could become much harder.
By then, nearly all 21 million bitcoin will have been mined. SI may create extraordinary abundance across intelligence, goods, and services, while Bitcoin remains perfectly scarce.
If labor becomes abundant and Bitcoin remains scarce, the divide between those who already own capital and those trying to earn it could become enormous.
You better get some Bitcoin while your labor can still buy a meaningful amount of it.
Some CFA who has 99% probably never read the white paper posts an article "Bitcoin's Days Are Numbered, And So Are Strategy's"
And then he says:
"Bitcoin also faces a future existential risk from quantum computing that has only accelerated over the last few years."
Bet he doesn't know the difference between Shor's and Grover's algorithms and that Grover is only quadratic, the worst that could happen is some blocks get mined by quantum computers many decades from now.
He has no idea that clock/gate times for QCs are very slow, and coherence times short. He ignores that classical ASICs are getting faster at SHA-256 every year.
The threat to certain addresses is real, the need for migration to post-quantum wallets is real.
That is not an existential threat to the Bitcoin ledger.
It would require many thousands of nuclear power plants powering 7.2 billion QCs much more powerful than today's machines just to unroll 100 blocks of the blockchain.
100 blocks. Of a chain that has nearly a million blocks.
Bitcoin will keep putting one block after another.