There seems to be a lot of haters or people that truly don't realize the specifics as to which I wrote and why. So to Clarify:
I am far from hating Bitcoin nor Blockchain. Yes, thank you to all those who mentioned my mispelling, as I mispelled, Satoshi, and referred at times to BitCoin, and not bitcoin.... thanks for the spelling error check.
I have not lost faith in cryptocurrency, nor bitcoin.. The article was not about me, it was about rogue programmers, miners and their advantage, hackers, and the so called "scam" Mr. Dimon suggested that bitcoin was referred to.
The article was merely identifying some of the potential reasons as to what may be concerning to the general populus...I call them "the masses".
I may have made some spelling errors, and I am very involved in blockchain. I speak with people nearly daily, and this is much of the feedback I am getting. The story did not call bitcoin "fake". It's the potential of rogue programmers, hackers and tech gurus and the elite to which I am concerned.
The article is a debatable article which is only to spur interaction and readership...it was in no way intended to create or hinder the beauty of blockchain, proof of work, proof of stake, voting power, master and supernodes, forming milestones and voting powers, etc and of course more than the what is in the scope of the article.
I love everything about new methods of stimulus. I am all about that and absolutely love this space.
I'm far from a hater. My concerns are for those that lose their hard-working funds to hackers, and the possibility of dilution of finite coins, as well as authentic companies/cryptos that are not reporting or telling truths.
The article speaks also about manipulation that exists and algorithmic trades to which also exist. For the newcomers, it's also about an ever changing marketplace. There are whales, including people I know, that have positions in cryptos, and they can move markets period.
It is with absolute respect and appreciation for your feedback. Again, the point of the article is to have these questions raised.
Yes, no one may have hacked into bitcoin. I simply discuss that at the same time, there are plenty of companies that are shutting down, getting themselves into trouble, and ripping off the very hard working people looking to get or work towards bitcoin. For instance: When one can short the market without proof of stake, this is a problem, period. And it happens on some of the very platforms many people are flocking towards. It sucks. And the fact that people behind exchanges, if not careful enough and without research may pay handsomely too much for bitcoin. I just read today that in Africa, there are sellers and exchanges showing at over 7k for bitcoin, though I haven't checked and verified it's authenticity.
I am simply raising the reason as to why Dimon may have said those things, aside the Federal Reserve (or Dimon) so concerned perhaps, that Dimon felt compelled to make this announcement; and then again how people like that, in positions, such as large analysts, and large holders of a coin, can create a wave through the marketplace only for their advantage behind the scenes to which has been the case in point for decades, to say the least. Thank you for your interest and understanding, and moreover, your vote of confidence.
Thanks @lykkejay
There seems to be a lot of haters or people that truly don't realize the specifics as to which I wrote and why. So to Clarify:
I am far from hating Bitcoin nor Blockchain. Yes, thank you to all those who mentioned my mispelling, as I mispelled, Satoshi, and referred at times to BitCoin, and not bitcoin.... thanks for the spelling error check.
I have not lost faith in cryptocurrency, nor bitcoin.. The article was not about me, it was about rogue programmers, miners and their advantage, hackers, and the so called "scam" Mr. Dimon suggested that bitcoin was referred to.
The article was merely identifying some of the potential reasons as to what may be concerning to the general populus...I call them "the masses".
I may have made some spelling errors, and I am very involved in blockchain. I speak with people nearly daily, and this is much of the feedback I am getting. The story did not call bitcoin "fake". It's the potential of rogue programmers, hackers and tech gurus and the elite to which I am concerned.
The article is a debatable article which is only to spur interaction and readership...it was in no way intended to create or hinder the beauty of blockchain, proof of work, proof of stake, voting power, master and supernodes, forming milestones and voting powers, etc and of course more than the what is in the scope of the article.
I love everything about new methods of stimulus. I am all about that and absolutely love this space.
I'm far from a hater. My concerns are for those that lose their hard-working funds to hackers, and the possibility of dilution of finite coins, as well as authentic companies/cryptos that are not reporting or telling truths.
The article speaks also about manipulation that exists and algorithmic trades to which also exist. For the newcomers, it's also about an ever changing marketplace. There are whales, including people I know, that have positions in cryptos, and they can move markets period.
It is with absolute respect and appreciation for your feedback. Again, the point of the article is to have these questions raised.
Yes, no one may have hacked into bitcoin. I simply discuss that at the same time, there are plenty of companies that are shutting down, getting themselves into trouble, and ripping off the very hard working people looking to get or work towards bitcoin. For instance: When one can short the market without proof of stake, this is a problem, period. And it happens on some of the very platforms many people are flocking towards. It sucks. And the fact that people behind exchanges, if not careful enough and without research may pay handsomely too much for bitcoin. I just read today that in Africa, there are sellers and exchanges showing at over 7k for bitcoin, though I haven't checked and verified it's authenticity.
I am simply raising the reason as to why Dimon may have said those things, aside the Federal Reserve (or Dimon) so concerned perhaps, that Dimon felt compelled to make this announcement; and then again how people like that, in positions, such as large analysts, and large holders of a coin, can create a wave through the marketplace only for their advantage behind the scenes to which has been the case in point for decades, to say the least. Thank you for your interest and understanding, and moreover, your vote of confidence.