thebean11

Held by Circle and Coinbase in T bills I believe.

edit: more likely held by some holding company controlled by those two companies.

Or is being 0.1% below peg causing large redemptions? People buying USDT at a discount and redeeming at face value.

I think it's significant, there must be tons of full time employees who are checking tickets, selling tickets, doing maintenance on machines, administering subsidized fare programs etc. I don't think it's 25% or anything, but I wouldn't be surprised it it was in the double digits.

Aside from that, though, it's not as if the money not collected in fares is lost. That's money that people get to keep. It's a direct economic benefit to people using transit, and a smaller indirect benefit to everyone else.

> Farebox recovery ratios in Germany before Covid were around 75 %, so abolishing all fares would mean quadrupling the budget for operating subsidies

You aren't taking into account the money saved from eliminating all the infrastructure needed for collecting and enforcing the fares like OP mentioned..

Unless farebox recovery ratio already subtracts the money spent to collect fares? That's not my understanding though.

It's completely different, OP still owned the BTC, it was just collateral to a loan. The loan currency was presumably USD, so they were short USD but still long BTC.

> Sales of affordable houses under $250k are down 30% YoY

..because those houses are selling for over $250k now?

To quibble even more, it's much harder (legally) to take away unvested RSUs than it is to demote / reduce salary.

Coinbase isn't paying $380k base either..are you just quibbling over the meaning of salary?

Oh wow really? I figured they had a domain specific language to program the card interactions. Pretty cool they can parse the text directly.

EDH less so though due to the bigger deck size and 1 copy per card limitation. This means you end up with bigger groups of cards with common synergies vs specific sets of cards you need to draw in regular 60-card.

Magic the Gathering cards have pretty standard and predictable wording and keywords. Not sure it could understand everything, but there would be easy patterns that apply to hundreds or thousands of cards.

A blog post to not run afoul of SEC regulations? I don't think so..they could easily bring this up at earnings.

> the people whose economic activity currently backs the speculate value of these coins play by a different rulebook entirely

I guess this is where I don't know what you mean, specifically

How would you verify that something was sold outside of a blockchain? The receiver of the item would need to prove it's in their possession, which is pretty easy on BTC.

I guess I'm not sure how you get from that to privacy only being achievable by institutions?

> Institutional actors are transacting via backchannels.

As in, they are keeping funds on centralized exchanges? Users can do the exact same thing if they want, not sure I get your point.

Why can't non-institutional actors achieve the same level of privacy? Seems like it would be much, much easier for smaller actors since they are dealing in much smaller amounts..

Volume of ads is irrelevant. An additional tweet to attach an ad to does not generate revenue if there is nobody looking at it. On the other hand, though, an additional set of eyeballs on an existing monetized tweet does generate additional revenue.

As an extreme example, a single monetized tweet with a billion viewers generates money. A billion monetized tweet with one viewer obviously does not..

I believe bitfinex treats USDT as USD meaning if you deposit dollars via a bank account you receive USDT and vice versa

I guess people are withdrawing USDT to USD on bitfinex, so bitfinex needs to redeem USDT? Is there another obvious explanation I’m missing?

That’s surprising, watching those shows did not make me interested in going even a little bit

That doesn't make sense. The black market (being illegal) would have significantly higher risks and transaction costs, so even with arbitrage the prices could still be significantly different.

Coinbase and Circle were certainly able to pull off both steps for USDC. They require KYC to purchase USDC from them, or redeem USDC for USD. USDC can be traded on the secondary market without KYC.

Or it's just the result of a massive increase in volatility in the crypto market in general. I guess it depends what you mean by increased stress on tether.

The ETH burning is easy to quantify: https://watchtheburn.com/

Currently there are inflationary block rewards so the net may still be ETH creation (depends on the day). That will change after the merge when inflationary rewards are removed though.

To some extent it does. The person moving money is paying transaction fee in ETH creating demand for ETH. Additionally, a part of that transaction fee is burned (permanently deleted) creating a deflationary effect on all other ETH.

Yeah that's true in practice but I think a lot of new tech was in the same boat. The first cars were much worse than horses to use an old example

Sure, the point is there's a difference between:

"this system is currently costing more than it is producing"

vs

"this system, by definition, is negative sum"

The first is a comment on the current state of the thing, the second is an immutable statement about the thing's nature, which in this case is false.

I'm talking about value created for users of the network, not token holders miners or stakers.

Let's say I use the network to send $5k to a relative in another country and this transaction costs me $1. If I otherwise would have paid $5, then $4 of value is created external to the network itself.

> Second, proof-of-work currencies are negative sum

Assuming the network doesn't produce external value to the people transacting on it (for example, lower transaction fees than alternatives, lower cost to enforce contracts, lower spread trading equities or currencies etc).

People used to say this would happen at $1. Bitcoin price crashes every few years but so far it has bounced back higher.