Yesterday, I asked why Bitcoin’s “fundamentals” don’t seem to matter right now – and alternatively, have they changed for the worse? To that end, is the SV fork actually a threat - or just a scam, scheme, or delusional crypto crusade.
https://twitter.com/Andy_Hoffman_CG/status/1067174976145448963
- Andy_Hoffman_CG
That said, I see that SV has now offered “replay protection” for those attempting to move back and forth between the ABC and SV chains – which, without fully understanding the technical definition, means those attempting to do so (like, for instance, ABC holders attempting to claim the SV fork) won’t be at risk of losing their ABC. According to Aaron Von Wirdum, one of the crypto industry’s top analysts, this is akin SV to surrendering the Hash War…meaning, barely two weeks in, it already believes it cannot win.
https://twitter.com/Andy_Hoffman_CG/status/1067387143746514944
- Andy_Hoffman_CG
True, the cumulative value of SV and the original BCash is just $268 – compared to $415 two weeks before the fork; and the nearly $700 MORONS paid in the days immediately beforehand, when speculating that somehow a hostile fork was “good” for BCash. However, the fact remains that SV has been accepted as a part of the crypto ecosystem, with a price nearly twice the $45 low – whilst Bitcoin continues to languish around its lows.
https://cryptowat.ch/markets/bitstamp/bch/usd
https://cryptowat.ch/markets/bitfinex/bsv/usd
So, I again ask, if indeed SV is the reason for Bitcoin’s severely ill financial market condition, why didn’t it rebound on the news SV can’t even defeat the mortally wounded BCash…let alone, Bitcoin?
https://twitter.com/Andy_Hoffman_CG/status/1067387143746514944
- Andy_Hoffman_CG
I have no idea – and thus, will remain on the sidelines (with my BRhodium as insurance against a crypto turnaround), reserving judgment until I see further evidence of what exactly is going on. And no, it’s not the delay of the Bakkt physical Bitcoin launch until January, I’m sure.